Episode Transcript
[00:00:00] Speaker A: Hi, I'm Maggie.
[00:00:01] Speaker B: And I'm Nicole. Welcome to the DAC Dyslexia and Coffee Podcast. We're so happy you could join us. We're both moms and dyslexia interventionists who want to talk about our students and children. What dyslexia is, how it affects our kids, strategies to help and topics related to other learning disabilities will all be covered in this podcast. Parents are not alone, and we want to give voice to the concerns and struggles we are all having. This is a safe place to learn more about how to help our children grow and succeed in school and in the world. Grab a cup of coffee and enjoy the conversation.
[00:00:32] Speaker A: Hi, everybody.
Welcome to episode 112 of Dyslexia and Coffee Podcast.
We're going to start today's episode like we have every single other episode of Dyslexia and Coffee. And that is what the concept of the week. So the concept of the week is our opportunity as practitioners to kind of peel back that curtain a little bit and let everybody in to an intervention session. We like to teach about things that either we would be teaching directly to our students or ones that we would teach their families and caregiver.
This is a little bit of a throwback. It's a repeater.
So today's concept of the week is systematic instruction.
Again, I think that we use this a lot, especially those of us who are actual interventionists. We talk about systematic instruction, and sometimes we forget to stop and define that.
So systematic instruction simply means that we follow a planned logical scope and sequence. We move from simple to too complex, such as right. We learn our short vowels before our long vowels, rather than just like randomly teaching rules.
We're very systematic about it. There is a plan, and one skill builds to the next.
[00:02:07] Speaker B: Correct.
So welcome to episode 112.
We're going to talk about 2026 federal legislation on reading, and we're going to disclose, Holy moly. We don't want to talk politics, but it's in there. It's out there right now. So we thought we should at least bring it to your attention.
[00:02:29] Speaker A: Yes.
One, I'm kind of happy that we get to be having this discussion at all. Let's just kind of call that out right now. Okay. There actually is some curve current federal discussion around reading.
[00:02:42] Speaker B: Correct. Okay.
[00:02:43] Speaker A: Automatically, I'm. I'm interested. Let's think about it. Yeah, I mean, for sure. I, you know, understand listeners that we're going to talk about this legislation.
We're going to give our opinions. We're not asking, you to share those opinions. We're just going to tell you kind of what's happening, what our initial thoughts are on it with the understanding that we have the right to change our minds. And so do you.
[00:03:12] Speaker B: Correct.
So the first legislation that's out is called the Science of reading act of 2026.
It is the most recent one and the most still active legislation that is out there.
So basically this bill directs federal literacy grants towards phonics based reading programs rather than approaches like three cueing method or giving context clues, sight words, picture guessing, those things. That whole word reading has, it has passed the House and it now sits in the Senate.
And for those of you outside the United States, you have to have the bill passed both the House and the Senate and then the President has to actually sign it into law before it actually becomes a law.
And so there's a song that goes with making bills I will not sing for you.
[00:04:21] Speaker A: But y' all are still singing it in your head.
[00:04:24] Speaker B: I'm sure you are.
So Schoolhouse Rack School House Rock did it. Yep.
So anyways, this is an interesting one because I think it has a lot of support on both sides, which is not usual for us to see.
And it's actually being headed by a senator that's has a son that has dyslexia. So it's kind of an interesting literacy bill, I think.
[00:05:03] Speaker A: Yes. You know, and on its face, I am happy about the content of this act, which I have not read in full. Right.
So right on its face.
Yeah, I, I am happy to have federal literacy dollars go to proven methods. Right. Phonics based instruction, structured literacy rather than approaches that continue blows my mind, but continue. Right. The three cueing method, using those context clues, memorizing a bunch of words, all of those things which not only
[00:05:59] Speaker B: do
[00:05:59] Speaker A: not work, they actually do harm.
There is enough evidence now to show that not only is that not effective instruction, it is harmful instruction to not just learners with disabilities.
Only about 5% of readers can learn to read that way properly.
So which means they're just doing it on their own. Correct.
[00:06:33] Speaker B: They're self teaching themselves.
[00:06:35] Speaker A: Exactly.
I'm.
[00:06:37] Speaker B: What I do like is it does talk about the science of reading and what the term means and that it's based on evidence based research.
And honestly, I like that it does list out that it identifies instruction when you make awareness, phonics, vocabulary, fluency, comprehension and writing.
And it also demonstrates the importance of background knowledge, oral language and the connection between reading and writing.
And it explains the different ways students can have difficulty with reading and Writing and that it does not have three cueing model.
And then it actually defines three cueing, which is good.
[00:07:29] Speaker A: Agreed.
[00:07:30] Speaker B: So, I mean, it was definitely written with some knowledge about structured literacy on it.
[00:07:37] Speaker A: Yeah, I agree. It's nice to see that in any level of legislation.
It seems to have a lot of support. I mean, it has already passed the House.
That's exciting.
[00:07:58] Speaker B: Passed the house on September 16, 2026. Yeah.
[00:08:02] Speaker A: So quite, quite recently.
Will be considered in the Senate before the end of December.
Again, has bipartisan support there.
I, I feel pretty hopeful about this.
Of course, there's always like, kind of like, oh my gosh, why is the federal government involved?
I think they should be.
And they really, they need to be kind of a leader in directing some of these states. You know, many states have adopted similar legislation. Good. This backs that up.
Good. It makes it stronger.
And those who haven't, well, guess what, this is, you know, time to.
We do actually know what works, guys. Come on.
Exactly. So I, I'm hopeful about this piece of legislation.
[00:09:02] Speaker B: Yeah. So let's move on to the next one.
The next one's called the Reid.
This is also a bipartisan bill which puts new requirements on existing federal literacy grants to support early screening of reading difficulties and evidence based reading instruction and would shift some funding towards states with lower the lowest reading scores, which seems like a good idea because if they have the lowest scores, obviously something's going.
[00:09:40] Speaker A: I agree.
I mean, historically funding has been used to like almost punish states or areas that are not doing well. It's like, well, you're not really doing well, so we're going to pull your funding.
Historically that has happened over and over. And this is not just federal. This is also in states and areas where, you know, that seems really counterproductive. Right.
Okay. If we're already not doing well, pulling all your funding isn't going to magically fix the problem. And it's not going to inspire some change either.
So I'm happy about that part. I don't have enough of the details. Like, I'm not understanding necessarily which existing grants were talking about.
[00:10:36] Speaker B: It doesn't really say.
[00:10:38] Speaker A: It doesn't really say. And so my.
I am for like the content. Right. I want earlier screening. I want better interventions, faster.
I want the ability to identify these kids soon and intervene soon so that we are rising the votes here. Right?
[00:11:02] Speaker B: Right.
[00:11:03] Speaker A: Absolutely.
Listen, I don't care what your politics are. That should be something that's important. You are a person alive in society.
Reading instruction should matter to you.
It does matter. For the health of our society.
I'm not fully understanding which federal grants we're looking at. And if that means you already have this federal grant and now we have additional stipulations, it kind of seems like I don't know. But, okay, so we've already got this grant, but now we actually have to jump through three more hoops to use it. I'm not.
I'm not fully understanding exactly where we're. What. What we're targeting here, which ones and who's getting them, who already has them.
[00:11:56] Speaker B: It also says that states must evaluate teacher preparation programs and they're required to notify parents if children are at risk for reading difficulties.
So I don't know how that they're going. The big controversy for this one is how are they going to implement it and how are they going to regulate it?
[00:12:14] Speaker A: Yes, yes.
[00:12:16] Speaker B: That's going to be very hard.
[00:12:17] Speaker A: Who's giving them the money to do that? Because this is about federal grants, so.
[00:12:21] Speaker B: Right.
[00:12:24] Speaker A: Okay. You know, again, historically, education has just had a whole lot of, you know, what's called unfunded mandates. Here you must do this, but we're not actually going to give you any money to do it.
[00:12:35] Speaker B: So.
[00:12:36] Speaker A: But we're going to hold further money from you if you don't do it.
So I don't know. I would need to know a lot more about this one to. To fully understand my position.
[00:12:49] Speaker B: I agree.
[00:12:50] Speaker A: Yeah.
[00:12:52] Speaker B: The next One is the 21st Century Dyslexia Act.
This one is not as bipartisan supported.
This would change how dyslexia is classified under federal disability law. So basically it would make it its own category rather than putting it. Right now, dyslexia is considered a specific learning disability in reading, but they're saying that we need to take dyslexia out of that and make it its own category.
It passed the Senate committee by a very narrow margin.
The reason it's. There's such a disagreement out of it is because basically it's trying to define dyslexia again.
[00:13:50] Speaker A: Yes.
In a much different way than we are currently defining dyslexia.
[00:14:00] Speaker B: Correct.
And because they're bringing in intelligence again, which research has shown that intelligence and dyslexia are not correlated.
[00:14:18] Speaker A: Exactly.
I don't feel good about this one.
I'm not.
I do not agree with carving out dyslexia as its own definition, separate and apart from specific learning disability.
And the reason why is that move back towards what's known as the discrepancy model. So what they're seeking to do is define dyslexia as an unexpected reading difficulty tied back to the person's general IQ.
We.
That is not DAC's policy on the way we define dyslexia. It is not my personal policy or I will not speak for Nicole, but it's Nicole's company. So I guess you guys can draw your own conclusions.
You know, we have really moved away from this in the field. This discrepancy model, which used to be the only way we could identify a child for special education under any category, was with a significant discrepancy between achievement and iq.
I believe this would lead to a loss of services for many students
[00:15:52] Speaker B: and maybe a delay in the diagnosis, too, because it's a very different way now.
[00:15:58] Speaker A: Well, and I mean, how many of those students at those younger ages, they are not directly showing a deficit in their reading scores in aggregate, but the scores underneath are showing it? Right? Correct. We are seeing the phonological police. And in this definitions defense, it does specifically say the primarily phonological awareness deficit.
But we also know that's not true for every student with dyslexia.
[00:16:35] Speaker B: Correct.
Remember, 175 genes, guys.
[00:16:39] Speaker A: Right.
[00:16:40] Speaker B: And that's the only ones we've found so far.
[00:16:42] Speaker A: Think about our older students who. Who. What we're finding with older students with dyslexia is that that phonological awareness piece, either we've intervened and we've made vast improvements, and so actually their standard scores go up yay.
Or they compensate so well that even though their phonological awareness was quite delayed, it ends up catching up.
[00:17:11] Speaker B: Correct.
[00:17:12] Speaker A: And so when we screen them or we do an assessment on them, their phonological awareness is actually not where our concern is.
But we still believe the student has dyslexia.
So I don't. I just don't love this. I feel like this is undoing lots of years of progress on lots of different states and federal level. I think it's undoing progress. It is having a debate that I just.
I don't think we need to have. We've already really come around the idea that dyslexia and intelligence are not correlated with each other.
[00:18:00] Speaker B: And actually there's 20 states whose policies would have to change because of this law because they've already taken out intelligence.
[00:18:08] Speaker A: Yeah. Which includes the state of Wisconsin. We cannot qualify kids under the discrepancy model anymore.
[00:18:15] Speaker B: So there's that.
[00:18:17] Speaker A: Yeah, I. I am.
Yeah, I'm worried about this one.
It also does not take into account the kind of exclusionary factors. So those things we have to look at before we say, does this student have a learning disability?
We have to look at things like socioeconomic status, English language learning, poverty, lack of education, things that could have gotten in this student's way.
That is not a disability. But can, you know, we can do things about.
We have to account for all of those factors before we're going ahead and labeling a kid with a disability.
I think it's very, very important that we always keep in mind. And as somebody who does assessments and does diagnostic assessments at that, I understand that as a pretty big responsibility.
I want those students with an actual disability to be labeled as a student with a disability so that they have the rights that they so deserve.
[00:19:31] Speaker B: Correct.
[00:19:32] Speaker A: I also want the students who do not have a disability not to be hung with that label. Because it's not correct.
[00:19:38] Speaker B: Exactly.
[00:19:39] Speaker A: And undoing that, I mean, we can cause psychological harm by not identifying a student. We can cause equally, if not more diagnostic psychological harm by over identifying as well. Correct.
So I have, I have real, I have real concerns about this movement on its face.
[00:20:02] Speaker B: And, and actually this has been reintroduced multiple times. It said it started back in 2023.
[00:20:09] Speaker A: Oh.
[00:20:10] Speaker B: So they must be trying to get it through. But hopefully they're talking to dyslexia experts. Yeah. And they hopefully can change some of the.
[00:20:27] Speaker A: Yeah, I am.
Yeah. This one worries. This one worries me. I'm not, I'm not gonna lie. I, I worry about the, the long standing implications of this kind of move.
[00:20:43] Speaker B: Right.
And honestly, we were talking in another episode about how many definitions there are out there. Right. And they're all, not all of them are the same.
[00:20:52] Speaker A: Right.
[00:20:53] Speaker B: And you know, the ICD 11 code versus the DSM 5 versus the Dyslexia International Dyslexia Association's definition, they're very different. And so you have to take all of those in consideration. You can't just make up your own. I mean, there's so many especially, I
[00:21:15] Speaker A: guess it's like what, we're trenching up an old definition that doesn't make sense.
[00:21:21] Speaker B: Right. Because we got rid of the parts
[00:21:24] Speaker A: that are in this, are in this film.
[00:21:27] Speaker B: Right.
[00:21:27] Speaker A: I mean, we have disproven the discrepancy model.
I, I don't, I don't love it. I don't. This one I don't love. I'm not gonna lie. I don't think I can be neutral on that one.
Right. I mean, this, again, this is our opinion, but it is based in professional context. And from a personal standpoint, those students that I work with Every single day who would not fit this discrepancy model. And I. They would lose services under this model.
[00:22:09] Speaker B: Exactly.
[00:22:10] Speaker A: Yeah.
[00:22:10] Speaker B: And they're already hard. It's already hard enough, right? It's already hard enough to get some intervention.
[00:22:19] Speaker A: Yeah.
[00:22:20] Speaker B: So anyways, those are the three bills that are currently out there.
I'm sure that there's a lot of states that have some too going.
We did not look into states this time. Yes, that could be overwhelming and I don't know if I could handle that today.
[00:22:37] Speaker A: Yeah, I mean, definitely agree again. I think I'm happy that we are even having a discussion about federal bills being tossed around right now. Yeah, I'm happy that reading is something our elected officials are discussing. They should be.
This topic affects every person in society.
So not in a small way either.
So I think that it is.
I'm, I'm happy things are being discussed. I truly, I'm thankful that we have this platform that we can talk openly and honestly about. These legislation moves in a way that, yeah, we're talking politics today, but it doesn't have to be.
It doesn't have to be nasty, guys.
We can talk and also disagree.
It's okay.
[00:23:44] Speaker B: It is.
[00:23:47] Speaker A: But we agree with each other.
[00:23:48] Speaker B: So.
[00:23:51] Speaker A: Surprise, surprise.
[00:23:54] Speaker B: So, Maggie, what's happening beyond dyslexia?
[00:23:58] Speaker A: Oh my gosh, Nicole.
I am really just taking a beat or trying to, trying to kind of reassess.
Just all the busyness, you know, even though we have so, so much stuff going on, I'm really, I'm trying to be more organized and intentional about what, like my family is doing, what I'm doing, all the things. I'm not sure it's going super well.
I'm not going to lie. I think I've just been having a difficult time actually making that happen.
I just feel like there's so many spinning plates and. Yeah, I don't know. I don't know. Too many things going on at the same time and not a lot of time to reflect. I am thankful though that my husband, who owns his own business and the summer has been, I mean, insanely crazy working, you know, all, all the time. Really took part of this week off with the intention of finally finishing our patio long term. Listeners will remember that back in May, May, he decided that we were going to tear up our backyard to redo our patio.
And today, October, October, he's apparently digging a bigger hole with the skits here today to.
To make the base layer for this patio, which I'm told might be happening this weekend.
[00:25:58] Speaker B: Oh, okay.
Huh.
[00:26:02] Speaker A: Notice my excitement is tempered.
Have I mentioned my husband has adhd?
Yikes.
What's going on with you, Nicole?
[00:26:16] Speaker B: Yeah, so my daughter, 13 Monday. She's shadowing at a high school.
I'm not ready.
She's really excited.
Go her.
I'm not sure I'm ready yet, though. I know it's hard.
[00:26:42] Speaker A: She is. She's gonna do so good.
[00:26:44] Speaker B: I know she will, but just the next stage of.
[00:26:50] Speaker A: Yeah, I don't
[00:26:53] Speaker B: in life.
[00:26:54] Speaker A: And I just used to not leak out of my eyeballs so much,
[00:27:01] Speaker B: and
[00:27:01] Speaker A: now I feel like I leak out of my eyeballs all the time.
Too much.
[00:27:08] Speaker B: Oh, I can't believe she's going to high school.
[00:27:13] Speaker A: Oh, she's the best. And she will be so ready. It is. It is good for her, but.
[00:27:18] Speaker B: Oh.
Yep.
[00:27:22] Speaker A: Man, it just doesn't stop.
[00:27:23] Speaker B: It doesn't. No, not at all.
[00:27:26] Speaker A: Thank you, guys. Thank you, everybody, for listening. Please follow us on social media and reach out if you have questions or you would like us to discuss a topic. If you do like our show, be sure to follow and rate our show on your favorite podcast players. This is how we reach more listeners and then we get to help our families. Thank you, everybody.
[00:27:43] Speaker B: Thank you.
