How to choose a structured literacy program
Choosing a structured literacy program is one of the most important decisions a district can make. This guide helps school leaders evaluate curriculum quality, implementation support, assessments, and science of reading alignment.
A post from our Literacy learning: Science of reading blog series written by teachers, for teachers, this series provides educators with the knowledge and best practices needed to sharpen their skills and bring effective science of reading-informed strategies to the classroom.
Strong reading instruction changes the trajectory of student learning, yet many schools still struggle to provide the consistency and explicit instruction students need to thrive. Choosing the right structured literacy program is one of the most consequential decisions a district can make. With more than 40 states now passing legislation aligned to the science of reading, the urgency has never been greater.
This guide walks district leaders, literacy coaches, and curriculum coordinators through everything they need to know to make such a critical decision: what structured literacy really means, how to spot the warning signs that your current program isn’t working, what to look for when evaluating new programs, and how to set your teachers and students up for success during implementation.
What is a structured literacy program?
Structured literacy is an approach to reading instruction grounded in the science of reading. It is explicit, systematic, cumulative, and sequential. This means students learn and master foundational literacy skills in a carefully planned progression before moving into more advanced concepts.
Samantha Shepard, Implementation Specialist at 95 Percent Group, elaborates, “Anytime a child is learning a skill for the first time, explicit instruction should come first. When new skills are taught explicitly and in a logical sequence, students have the support they need to build confidence and become successful readers.”
Unlike instructional approaches that rely heavily on student discovery (i.e. balanced literacy), structured literacy provides direct instruction with clear modeling, guided practice, and repeated opportunities for independent application.
Structured literacy programs emphasize:
- Instructional design: ensuring critical literacy skills are taught in a logical sequence
- Instructional delivery: ensuring teachers follow a gradual release model of instruction: “I do (explicit modeling of skills), We do (guided practice with immediate teacher feedback), You do (independent practice at the appropriate level).”
What challenges can a strong structured literacy program solve?
When schools and districts struggle with reading outcomes, the root causes often point back to two interconnected problems: fragmented learning and foundational skill gaps eroding motivation. A well-designed structured literacy program directly addresses both.
Unifying fragmented learning across tiers and classrooms
Fragmented learning occurs when students are exposed to inconsistent instructional approaches across tiers of instruction, grade levels, or buildings. If a student moves from Tier 1 instruction to Tier 2 intervention or from one school to another in the same district, they may encounter entirely different vocabulary, routines, and expectations for literacy.
A strong structured literacy program provides an aligned framework that ensures all students are hearing the same language, practicing the same routines, and progressing through the same logical sequence of skills—designed by grade level—no matter where they are. This consistency is especially critical for closing gaps: by targeting the lowest deficit skill area first, districts can build a true continuum of learning from kindergarten through fifth grade and beyond.
Building student confidence and motivation
Structured literacy programs help readers needing more support build confidence through consistency, providing a predictable routine where students can understand, trust, and succeed. When students begin to experience consistent small wins, their confidence builds. And confidence, as any educator knows, is fuel for continued learning.
Signs your district needs to reevaluate its core literacy program
The most direct indicator that a district should look into a new core literacy program is two fold: the first sign is persistent low performance on reading assessments. It’s an immediate red flag when outcomes remain stagnant despite interventions already in place. A second red flag to pay attention to is an overwhelming need for Tier 2 support. If a great number of students need intervention support, that means the Tier 1 program isn’t effective enough. Science tells us that with the right Tier 1 structured literacy instruction, 95% of children can learn to read (Moats, 2020).
But assessment data alone isn’t always enough to prompt action. Districts should also be watching for:
- Instructional indicators: Is explicit instruction limited or inconsistent across classrooms? Are teachers relying on approaches that don’t reflect current research?
- Teacher feedback: What are teachers saying about their current curriculum? Are they able to implement it with confidence and fidelity?
- Changing state requirements: With more than 40 states now passing legislation around the science of reading, many previously adopted curricula are no longer aligned with what states require.
- Curriculum audit results: A formal review of current materials may reveal gaps in scope, sequence, or alignment to evidence-based practices.
When these signals emerge, Shedpard recommends starting with assembling the right team. “Districts should create a collaborative think tank team to set the vision and be clear on the initiative. Make sure all voices are heard, including classroom teachers and interventionists. Gauge the readiness of the district for this change, determine your goals and desired outcomes, and identify barriers and roadblocks before you commit to a shared vision.”
What to look for when evaluating structured literacy programs
Once a district decides to explore new literacy programs, the next step is carefully evaluating which solution best aligns with its instructional goals, student needs, and implementation capacity. Key considerations include:
Alignment to science of reading research
Start with the evidence base. Are there peer-reviewed research articles that support the program’s approach? Have third-party studies validated its effectiveness? A program that can’t point to a rigorous research foundation shouldn’t make the shortlist.
Scope and sequence quality
Look for a coherent progression of skills from kindergarten through fifth grade. The program should deliberately address foundational skills—phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension—in a logical order before advancing to more complex work. It should also clearly articulate when and how specific skills are introduced and revisited across grade levels.
Explicit, systematic instruction
Evaluate the lesson structure carefully. Is there a clear gradual release built into each lesson? Does the program specify what the teacher should do and say, along with what student responses are expected? Strong programs include instructional routines and language that model new skills through demonstration first, then bring students into guided practice, before asking them to perform the skill independently. When students practice, they should receive immediate corrective feedback.
Materials and resources
Assess both teacher materials and student materials. Are they well-organized and easy to use? Are they available in printable and digital formats? Does the program provide ample practice resources that give students the repeated exposure they need to build fluency?
Assessment and data use
Districts should look for programs that include tools and guidance for interpreting assessment data and connecting results to instruction. Look for comprehensive tools for universal screening, diagnostic assessment, and progress monitoring. These tools should give teachers and leaders the data they need to make informed instructional decisions, identify students who need additional support, and track growth over time.
Support of all tiers
The best programs function as a true ecosystem, supporting Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 learners within a consistent framework. The dialogue, routines, and materials should remain coherent across all tiers, so students never encounter inconsistent expectations.
Professional learning and ongoing support
Implementation is where many well-designed programs fall apart. When evaluating programs, districts should ask pointed questions: What does initial training and professional learning look like? Does the provider offer ongoing coaching support after the initial rollout? Can consultants observe lessons and provide immediate, specific feedback to teachers?
Shepard explains, “It’s not enough to just provide an initial training–districts need ongoing coaching support to sustain implementation. Teachers need the opportunity to be observed and receive immediate feedback. That’s how you ensure the program is being implemented with fidelity.”
Cultural and linguistic responsiveness
Consider how the program supports the full range of learners in your district. Does it provide differentiated support for multilingual learners, students who need enrichment, and those who are struggling? Does it offer flexibility in pacing and instructional delivery?
Questions to ask when comparing programs
Before launch, work through each of the following steps:
- Conduct a needs assessment across the district to understand where gaps exist and what resources are available.
- Complete a curriculum review of current practices and standards to confirm the new program aligns with your curriculum requirements.
- Prepare for professional development by identifying dates, allocating time, and setting expectations for teacher participation.
- Purchase and distribute materials with enough lead time that teachers have what they need before instruction begins.
- Establish a progress monitoring and feedback system to track implementation quality and student growth from day one.
How 95 Percent Group supports structured literacy implementation
95 Percent Group was built on the belief that every child can learn to read, and that belief is reflected in every product and service we offer.
All of 95 Percent Group’s programs are rooted in evidence-based practices and aligned to the science of reading. From our Tier 1 95 Phonics Core Program to our Literacy Intervention System, every resource is designed to give educators a clear, research-backed path forward.
95 Percent Group also offers comprehensive assessment tools for screening, diagnostics, and progress monitoring. The Literacy Intervention System provides a framework for making data-based decisions at every level. Our Assessment Guides, part of the 95 Phonics Core Program, helps educators understand the distinction between diagnostic screeners, universal screeners, and progress monitoring tools, and how to use each type of data to drive instruction.
95 Percent Group also recognizes that materials alone are never enough. Professional learning offerings go well beyond initial product training, providing ongoing coaching and support designed to sustain implementation over time. Consultants observe lessons, provide immediate and specific feedback, and model instructional components when needed.
FAQs for implementing structured literacy programs
It’s time to consider a program switch when student outcomes remain stagnant despite interventions already in place, when a needs assessment surfaces significant gaps in your current approach, or when state requirements have changed and your current curriculum is no longer aligned to the science of reading.
It’s time to consider a program switch when student outcomes remain stagnant despite interventions already in place, when a needs assessment surfaces significant gaps in your current approach, or when state requirements have changed and your current curriculum is no longer aligned to the science of reading.
Full implementation (and the full picture of student growth it produces) typically takes three to five years. That said, districts should see positive movement each year. If outcomes aren’t improving at all in the first year or two, that’s a signal to examine implementation quality before assuming the program itself is the problem.
Full implementation (and the full picture of student growth it produces) typically takes three to five years. That said, districts should see positive movement each year. If outcomes aren’t improving at all in the first year or two, that’s a signal to examine implementation quality before assuming the program itself is the problem.
Targeted, ongoing training is essential. Teachers need access to resources, structured coaching opportunities that allow for lesson observation, immediate feedback, and modeling of specific instructional components. The goal is to build teacher confidence and competence simultaneously, so that fidelity to the program increases over time.
Targeted, ongoing training is essential. Teachers need access to resources, structured coaching opportunities that allow for lesson observation, immediate feedback, and modeling of specific instructional components. The goal is to build teacher confidence and competence simultaneously, so that fidelity to the program increases over time.
Explicit instruction means a clear, consistent lesson format with defined routines. Strong programs suggest time allocations for each skill area, provide instructional language for introducing new skills, and include structured opportunities for guided practice and immediate corrective feedback.
Explicit instruction means a clear, consistent lesson format with defined routines. Strong programs suggest time allocations for each skill area, provide instructional language for introducing new skills, and include structured opportunities for guided practice and immediate corrective feedback.
The key is understanding that fidelity doesn’t mean rigidity—it means honoring the integrity of the program’s design while giving teachers the flexibility to respond to what they know about their students. Teachers know their students best, and a well-designed structured literacy program provides a strong framework within which that professional knowledge can and should operate.
The key is understanding that fidelity doesn’t mean rigidity—it means honoring the integrity of the program’s design while giving teachers the flexibility to respond to what they know about their students. Teachers know their students best, and a well-designed structured literacy program provides a strong framework within which that professional knowledge can and should operate.
Expert biography
Samantha Shepard is an experienced educator from Columbus, Ohio, with 19 years in the field, including five years as a district administrator. She previously served as the Director of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, where she championed inclusive practices across the district. Samantha is also a seasoned coach and consultant specializing in the Science of Reading and Structured Literacy. Currently, she serves as an Implementation Manager, bringing her deep expertise in education and leadership to drive impactful change.
Resources
- Moats, Louisa. “Teaching Reading Is Rocket Science: What Expert Teachers of Reading Should Know and Be Able to Do.” AMERICAN EDUCATOR. Vol. SUMMER 2020, season-02 2020. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1260264.pdf.
