Teaching Reading Is Rocket Science; Podcast: Hard Words

article review on Teaching Reading Is Rocket Science; Podcast: Hard Words

Length: 1.5-2 pages of text (not including the works cited)

3.1 Article Analysis 1:

Analysis Focus

• The scientific consensus on how reading develops and why reading instruction must be explicit and systematic.
• The consequences of instruction that is misaligned with research, particularly for students with disabilities and those at risk.
• Implications for inclusive general education practice and instructional decision-making.

Criteria

3 Exemplary

2 Proficient

1 Developing

Understanding of Core Arguments

Accurately and thoroughly explains the articles central claims and supporting evidence, demonstrating strong understanding of reading science.

Explains main ideas accurately but with limited depth.

Misrepresents or incompletely explains key arguments.

Connection to Disability & Inclusion

Clearly explains why explicit, systematic instruction is essential for students with disabilities in general education settings.

Mentions disability implications but lacks depth or clarity.

Minimal or unclear connection to disability or inclusion.

Instructional Reflection & Application

Thoughtful reflection on instructional beliefs and a concrete, research-aligned classroom application.

Reflection or application is present but underdeveloped.

Reflection is superficial or application is vague or missing.

Use of Evidence & APA Citations

Correctly cites the assigned article and at least one additional scholarly or course source using accurate APA format.

Cites required sources with minor APA errors or limited integration.

Missing a required source, incorrect APA format, or minimal citation use.

Writing Quality & Organization

Clear, well-organized, professional academic writing.

Generally clear with minor issues.

Writing lacks clarity, organization, or contains significant errors.