Five Tips to Deliver PD That Supports Reading Instruction
Dr. Michael Hart explains why many teachers lack training in the science of reading and how professional development can support screening and intervention for dyslexia.
Dr. Michael Hart's five tips on science of reading professional development, with an update on state laws and the research on effective training.
In 2019, Dr. Michael Hart of True Literacy set out five tips for professional development that supports reading and dyslexia instruction. That article appears below, followed by an updated section on science of reading professional development, state laws as they stand now, and what research says about training that works.
If we know so much more than before about the diagnosis and treatment of dyslexia, which affects one in five learners, why are so many children still suffering? The answer lies in the disconnect between what the science of reading tells us and what educators are being taught in their teacher training programs. The majority of teachers are not trained to understand language development and the connection to reading proficiency. Moreover, very few teacher training programs include curricula about reading and written language instruction.
Professional Development for Screening and Intervention
So how can we expect an instructional team to implement early screening and intervention when they haven’t had the education, training and experience to do so? The short answer is, it’s not going to be easy. But school districts can make it a priority to provide thoughtful and comprehensive professional development to provide this essential training. The key is to acknowledge the substantial depth and breadth of training necessary to understand the key components of effective screening and reading intervention, and more importantly, how to put them into practice. Here are some strategies to make this training a success:
1.) Communicate district goals: At the school level, the leadership team needs to prioritize the goals of the district pertaining to dyslexia screening and intervention. It’s important that these goals are continuously communicated to the whole team and not just to the special education teachers. Clearly conveying high-level objectives will contextualize the work taking place in professional development sessions and provide a roadmap for participants.
2.) Seek input: Far too often the goals and objectives for professional development are derived from top-down decision making versus bottom-up collaboration. To counteract that trend, seek input from the teaching staff and other school team members on the areas on which they’d like to focus within the context of the district’s overarching goals. General educators as well as special education teachers, school psychologists, speech and language pathologists, learning specialists, and others should be given the opportunity to provide input.
3.) Provide continuous training: The duration of professional development must be significant and ongoing to allow time for teachers to learn new strategies and grapple with implementation. But we don’t want to overwhelm school teams. Rather, we should develop a plan for the long-term, stick to the plan and keep it doable. Keep in mind that ongoing professional development is an important strategy to compensate for the lack of in-depth education and training in teacher education programs. It will take time.
4.) Make it active: Teachers’ initial exposure to a concept should not be passive, but rather should engage teachers through varied approaches so they can participate actively in making sense of a new practice. The one-and-done professional development model simply does not work. We know from the research that it may take up to 50 hours of instruction, practice and feedback to truly master a new teaching strategy.
5.) Support the change: True change is really, really hard. It’s not enough to learn new practices at a professional development training — teachers also need adequate support during the implementation stage to address the specific challenges of changing classroom practice. The secret to making it stick is making sure all invested parties are supporting each other in their efforts to effect meaningful change. To that end, ensure school and district leaders are supporting changes in their budgeting, scheduling, team development and collaboration time.
State Laws and the Teacher Training Gap
As reading proficiency levels stagnate, more states are taking a long, hard look at current practices and revamping their entire approach to reading instruction. Thirty-three U.S. states now have updated laws that include provisions for teaching students with dyslexia, and some of the new legislation calls for dyslexia screening and teacher training specific to the needs of dyslexic students. Despite these improvements, districts must contend with the fact that hundreds of teachers are already in the classroom without the benefit of this training. Districts must fill in this gap with a serious and sustained professional development that will equip teachers not only with a working knowledge of reading science, but also best practices for screening and intervention. Nothing less than our students’ futures are at stake.
Science of reading professional development: what has changed since Dr. Michael Hart’s five tips
Dr. Michael Hart wrote above in 2019 that teachers need sustained, active professional development to support reading and dyslexia screening, and that many states were only beginning to pass laws. Science of reading professional development is now a requirement in many places, so the question for school leaders has moved from whether to provide it to how to make it work. This section looks at what has happened in state policy and what research says about training that changes classroom practice.
How state policy has moved
Hart counted 33 states with updated laws that touch dyslexia. Education Week’s running analysis, last updated in August 2026, counts 43 states and the District of Columbia that have passed laws or made new policies on evidence-based reading instruction since 2013. The analysis groups those policies into six kinds: teacher preparation, teacher certification or license renewal, professional development or coaching, assessment, materials, and instruction or intervention. It names Mississippi’s 2013 laws as the starting point, and many states have since copied parts of the Mississippi model.
For a district leader, the practical result is that training is often not optional. Education Week notes that some states require educators to complete evidence-based reading training, and some have set up instructional coaching programs. The details differ by state, so each district should check its own state’s requirements before planning.
Why early screening and training go together
Hart opens with the point that dyslexia affects one in five learners. The Yale Center for Dyslexia and Creativity, which Hart cites, says dyslexia affects 20 percent of the population and calls for early screening, early diagnosis and early evidence-based reading intervention. Its FAQ adds that signs can appear before a child starts school, such as slightly delayed speech and not recognising rhyming words, and says the Shaywitz DyslexiaScreen lets schools quickly and reliably screen all kindergarten and first-grade students. A screening programme only helps if the staff who receive the results know what to do next, which is the argument for the professional development Hart describes.
What research says about effective training
Hart says it may take up to 50 hours of instruction, practice and feedback to master a new teaching strategy. That figure is not cited in the original, so a reader should treat it with caution. A stronger base for Hart’s five tips comes from the Learning Policy Institute’s 2017 report Effective Teacher Professional Development by Darling-Hammond, Hyler and Gardner. The report reviewed 35 methodologically rigorous studies that linked professional development to changes in teaching practice and student outcomes, and it identified seven features of effective training:
- Content focus, with strategies tied to specific subject matter such as literacy.
- Active learning, where teachers design and test strategies themselves.
- Collaboration, with time to share ideas and learn together.
- Models of effective practice, such as lesson plans, sample student work, peer observation or video.
- Coaching and expert support tailored to the individual teacher.
- Feedback and reflection, with time to think about practice and adjust.
- Sustained duration, long enough to learn, practise, apply and reflect.
Each of Hart’s tips lines up with this list. Hart’s call to make training active matches the second feature, Hart’s request for continuous training matches the seventh, and Hart’s advice to support teachers during implementation matches coaching and feedback. Hart’s advice to seek teacher input fits the collaborative approach. The report is a review of earlier studies, and the authors identified features that were common across effective programmes, so it describes patterns and not a guarantee for any single school.
A practical plan for a school or district
- Start with the state requirement. List what the state asks of teachers, which assessments it uses and what it says about instructional materials.
- Plan the year, not the day. Replace a single training day with a series of sessions, each followed by classroom practice.
- Add coaching. A coach who watches lessons and gives feedback helps teachers move from knowing a strategy to using it.
- Include everyone who touches reading. General education teachers, special education teachers, school psychologists, and speech and language pathologists all need the same shared language, as Hart says.
- Check what students gain. Use the screening and progress data the state requires to see whether practice is changing outcomes, and adjust the training.
For the wider picture of what the research says about reading, see the edCircuit science of reading guide, and for planning training across a staff, the professional development guide. Hart’s companion piece, True Literacy: 3 Areas of Focus to Improve Reading Instruction, covers the instruction itself.
Related reading
More on Special Education and IEPs
