Guest Post – Education & Teacher Conferences Skip to main content
Book Review: Primary Reading Simplified, by Christopher Such
Guest Post
Guest Post

Today’s guest book review is by Kim Lockhart.


Finding a new favourite book, one that checks all the boxes, is like finding a new favourite drink. You want to devour it without putting it down, while at the same time, you want to savour it so it isn’t finished too quickly. A good book leaves you feeling thirsty for more. And most of all, like all things we love, we want to share it with everyone we know so that they, too, can enjoy it and savour it as much as we do.

Book cover for Primary Reading Simplified, by Christopher Such

Christopher Such’s first book, The Art and Science of Teaching Primary Reading, was that book for me: the book that checked all the boxes, the book I didn’t want to put down, and was disappointed when it was over.

I wanted to share Such’s book with every teacher I knew because I wanted them to feel what I felt while reading it: a sense of relief that there was finally a book that contained the answers I’d been searching for throughout my career.

It was the first comprehensive, no-nonsense book on the science of reading I had come across.

Previously, most of what I knew about the reading research I had acquired from complex articles I read while working on my Masters of Education. But these research papers were not easy to read, not written in teacher-friendly language, and didn’t always make a direct connection between the research and what it looked like in classroom practice.

But Christopher Such’s book did.

Fast forward three years, and Such has done it again. He has written another can’t-put-it-down-until-it’s-finished book titled Primary Reading Simplified: A Practical Guide to Classroom Teaching and Whole School Implementation.

While Such’s first book focused on what teachers need to teach (phonemic awareness, phonics, reading fluency, spelling, etc.), his new book focuses more on the aspect of how to teach it.

In other words: teaching all the components of the reading process is not always enough. As teachers, we have to ensure that students are learning what we’re teaching. Even the most well-intentioned of teachers does not always meet this goal!

This book tells us exactly how we can work smarter, not harder, to ensure better learning outcomes for our students – making sure they ARE learning what we’re teaching.

Such’s new book includes an important aspect of teaching that is often the missing piece in other professional books for teachers. In teacher-friendly language, he shares the research and explains the reading routines, classroom habits, and evidence-based instructional strategies that are essential for learning to happen.

Take the chapter on reading fluency, for example.

Not only does Such explain why reading fluency is important for reading comprehension. He explicitly and systematically lays out the structure of an effective fluency lesson, including:

  • how to pair students
  • how to choose the “just right text”
  • how to model reading fluency,
  • when to explain new vocabulary, and even
  • how long the fluency practice should be each day (Such suggests less than 30 minutes to allow for repeated reading of the text; too much time could result in disengagement and not be productive).

He leaves no guess-work for teachers.

But Such doesn’t stop at developing stronger, more effective classroom routines and systems for teachers. Part IV of the book is designed for anyone interested in school-wide and district-wide implementation of science-based reading instruction.

Until now, science-based instruction has been happening in specific classrooms, with a few individual teachers, in some school districts. In other words, it isn’t consistent.  Such understands that for change to be sustainable, it needs to be implemented at the district level. These changes require fidelity, teacher support, and ongoing monitoring and commitment to change.

Chapters 13, 14, and 15 carefully outline structures for systems to be sustainable across districts. He shares the 4-Phases of implementation model (Sharples et al., 2024 as cited in Such, 2025): Explore, Prepare, Deliver, and Sustain. He also makes it clear that implementation can’t happen all at once. Instead, “implementing change across a school should be seen as an ongoing process rather than a one-off event”.

In this section of the book, Such also addresses the barriers that literacy leaders may face when trying to implement system-wide change: specifically, limited human resources, and time. He also offers practical suggestions for overcoming those barriers, including:

  • very clear expectations and vision,
  • flexible adaptations,
  • and the need to put other, lower-priority changes aside to focus on one priority and sustain it.

Such eloquently concludes this section of the book by explaining, “implementation is most likely to succeed if all involved feel it is something being done with them rather than something done to them.” (Such, 2025, p. 136).

Reviewer Kim Lockhart
Reviewer Kim Lockhart

Echoing the format of Such’s first book, each chapter of his new book is short and dense with evidence-based information in manageable chunks. I love this format because it is practical for busy teachers like me. If I have only 10 minutes to read a snippet before I have to run outside for recess duty, I can easily read a few paragraphs in a chapter, learn something, and know exactly where to return when I have time again.

Likewise, each chapter of Primary Reading Simplified concludes with an “In a Nutshell” section that reviews and highlights key information from the chapter. Such also includes the section “Further Reading” for science-of-reading-nerds like me who want to learn more. He even includes a retrieval-practice quiz for each chapter. (To be honest, I am often too scared to quiz myself because I fear that I won’t be able to remember as much as I hope to, despite my greatest efforts.) Best of all, each chapter concludes with a section called “Questions for Professional Discussion.”

Because reading proficiency is not the sole responsibility of the classroom teacher, I highly recommend Primary Reading Simplified for all teachers, reading specialists, literacy coaches, and administrators. Reading instruction is our shared responsibility. As Christopher Such says himself, “Our pupils deserve no less.”


Kim Lockhart is a French Immersion classroom teacher and Special Education teacher in Kingston, Ontario. She holds a Master of Education (M.Ed) degree with a research focus on evidence-based practices to support second language learners with reading difficulties. Kim has her Orton-Gillingham Classroom Educator certificate, CERI Structured Literacy Classroom Teacher certification, and was a Structured Literacy coach for the International Dyslexia Association of Ontario for 2 years. In 2022, Kim worked for the Ontario Ministry of Education as a Content Contributor for the new science-based Language Curriculum and has also presented for the Ontario Minister of Education, Stephen Lecce and his team after the release of the OHRC’s Right to Read report. She is currently teaching part-time at Vancouver Island University’s (VIU) Faculty of Education in the Literacy, Language and Learning Graduate program. Kim is passionate about the Science of Reading and strives to empower educators, parents and caregivers to be more knowledgeable, stronger advocates for all children’s right to read across Canada.

Difference Maker: Enacting Systems Theory in Biology Teaching, by Christian Moore-Anderson
Guest Post
Guest Post

Today’s book review is by Beth Hawks.


Teaching Science is a Challenge

Science classes cover a massive amount of content knowledge, and it can feel overwhelming finding the best approach to teaching it without feeling like students are merely acquiring a set of disjointed facts.

In the introduction to his book, Difference Maker: Enacting Systems Theory in Biology Teaching, Christian Moore-Anderson sums up the challenge well, when he says, “I’m sure you’ve felt – at some point – that to grasp biology was to master an encyclopedia.”

For some time, he had taught in most of the typical ways, but he felt he was tied to creating resources and activities for students and that students still weren’t seeing the deeper connecting threads of biology.

Time for a Change

As with many things, the move to online teaching during the pandemic motivated him to make a change…because what he had been doing was no longer working.

This concern led him to the world of cybernetics and systems theory; and moved him from a sense of mass knowledge transfer to one of teaching biology from a set of unifying principles.

Book Cover for Difference Maker, by Christian Moore-Anderson

As he dug even more deeply, he found that he wasn’t just teaching about systems; he was enacting systems theory as a method of instruction.  He co-created diagrams with students and engaged them in dialogue to reveal their understanding.

By doing so, he created an interactive feedback loop that allowed him to respond flexibly to student needs.

Model Found in Cybernetics

The book begins with a few chapters of explanation of cybernetics. (Don’t let the terminology of “cybernetics” frighten you.  It is not necessary to have a deep understanding of all of these terms.)

After I set aside my mental images from Star Trek of Dr. Noonien Soong creating Data’s positronic brain (my first exposure to the word cybernetics), I was able to see his blending of two aspects of the discipline.

Conversation theory posits that – since meaning is made in the mind of the listener rather than being transmitted by the speaker – we can have a shared understanding of meaning only through dialogue. The teacher explains, but then he discovers what the student heard through conversation.

Moore-Anderson describes doing this through multiple choice questions or open-ended questions; he also acknowledges that it can be done with other methods (e.g. mini-whiteboards, written answers on paper).

The law of requisite variety – When a system is complex, it can only survive if its ability to adapt is equally complex. In other words, there must be a variety of responses to a variety of changes. If a teacher has only a small set of responses when something happens in her classroom, she won’t be able to adapt to the needs of students during a lesson.

He combines these theories into a model of instruction he calls “the recursive teaching model.”

The teacher explains, while the student interprets. Then the student explains what they understand while the teacher interprets. This cycle keeps looping back on itself until they agree on their understanding.

Moore-Anderson provides guidance by opening each section with a key idea and walking through the process of implementation in the classroom. He includes the conversations he has with his students as well as the diagrams he creates with them during those conversations.

Have Students Notice Differences by Predicting Outcomes

After setting up his foundational theory, Moore-Anderson gets to the heart of his new practice: having students perceive distinctions in the concept being taught.

He defines distinctions as “differences that make a difference to the observer.”

As teachers, we often begin with sameness – giving multiple examples of a new concept to solidify students’ recognition of the standard. This strategy, however, shows only the idea itself and not its interaction with a conceptual whole.

Having students repeat similarities in their own words might not give them a full grasp of the influence they have on the biological system overall.

Moore-Anderson argues that we should begin with variations of the concepts so that students can see what difference a change would make.  He prompts students to notice these differences (and the difference they make) by posing “what if” questions.

  • What if someone drinks sea water rather than fresh water?
  • What if the predator in this ecosystem suddenly disappears?
  • What if this heart valve were missing?
  • What if the sugar concentration was increased in this solution?

When students first predict the outcome of a change, and then add those changes to diagrams they create together, they arrive at a shared understanding of each concept. This approach lets them understand in a deeper way than simply explaining how something works and having students paraphrase that explanation.

Moore-Anderson restricts the responses to keep things from getting out of hand by giving choices like, “Will a change in X make Y increase, decrease, or stay the same?” and having students defend their answers.

Practical Examples Inspire Teachers

The true strength of this book for me as a classroom teacher comes from his descriptions of using this method in his lessons.

When Moore-Anderson moves from summaries of cybernetic theories into examples of actual classroom conversations with students, he allows me to imagine implementing his method with my own students.

As a teacher, my favorite education books are those that inspire ideas outside of those mentioned in the writing, and Moore-Anderson does exactly that throughout each chapter.  As I read his stories, I was able to picture myself having similar conversations with my students and thought of other topics to which I could apply his method.

Difference Maker gives me a way to think about content delivery rather than prescribing an exact method for me to copy.

Is It for Everybody?

The Difference Maker method might not be equally appropriate in all settings.

I imagined my middle schoolers might find this approach frustrating because they lack the foundational knowledge to make reasonable predictions. On the other hand, I thought my juniors and seniors would thrive with these sorts of classroom conversations.

I trust Moore-Anderson when he says he applies the method in class with eleven year old students, but I’m not sure I would. As with all techniques, success relies on adapting them to your context.

As the title makes clear, this book is intended for biology teachers. Since all biological processes have noticeable cause and effect relationships within systems, that makes sense.

I had a bit harder time recognizing topics in which I might apply it to chemistry and physics.  So, I will definitely recommend this book to my biology teacher friend and suggest that he loan it to the environmental science teacher across the hall.

As a chemistry and physics teacher, I might want to have it in the back of my mind as I planned some lessons, because it would provide a way of thinking about how to explain cause and effect. However, I wouldn’t make it a regular practice as Moore-Anderson does with biology.  (Did I mention earlier that it is good to adapt to context?)

Can I Be in This Class?

My biggest takeaway from reading Difference Maker is that I would have loved to be in this biology class when I was a student. I would have absorbed more, seen deeper threads, and remembered more.  I would have walked away with a better understanding of myself and my relationship with my environment.


Beth Hawks taught middle and high school science for 25 years, serving as the science department chair at GRACE Christian School in Raleigh, North Carolina for 17 years. A graduate of Oral Roberts University, Beth has taught 8th grade Physical Science, Physics, Chemistry, Algebra IB, Health, Photography, and Yearbook. She frequently provided professional development to colleagues in her role as resident brain enthusiast and has now moved into consulting full time under the name The Learning Hawk.

You can hear Beth speak at our Science of Learning conference in NYC in April.

Guest Post: “My Learning and the Brain Story”
Guest Post
Guest Post

Beth Hawks has taught science for 25 years. She now serves as the science department chair at Grace Christian School in Raleigh, North Carolina. A graduate of Orla Roberts University, Beth has taught 8th grade Physical Science, Physics, Chemistry, Algebra IB, among other courses. She frequently provides professional development to colleagues in her role as resident brain enthusiast.


When I started teaching at my current school twenty-one years ago, one of the “areas for improvement” on my year-end evaluation was that I didn’t seek out professional development.  I couldn’t disagree.  Back then, it never occurred to me to seek it out.  Both schools I had previously taught in said, “It is professional development day.  Go over there and learn.”  

Headshot of author and teacher Beth Hawks

While I read about teaching, I did not attend very many workshops or conferences that took place on school days.  I hated being out of my classroom, and every teacher knows what a pain it is to develop sub plans.  

That all changed when a brochure showed up in my mailbox for the 2018 Learning and the Brain conference.  

Teachers get a lot of brochures advertising workshops and conferences from a variety of sources, and we ignore most of them. I was on my way to the recycling bin with this one when a keynote speaker whose book I had just read caught my attention, so I opened the brochure.  As I looked at the names and credentials of speakers and the topics of sessions, I was impressed.  

By the end of that morning’s door duty, I was prepared to beg.  I said to my administrator, “You know how I never want to go to anything?  I’ve never wanted to go to anything more than this!”  They approved my request provided that I would teach my academic team what I had learned upon my return.  

Deal.

What I found when I got to Boston was not just one great speaker, but an incredible collection of researchers, scientists, and educators with deep knowledge.  More importantly, they were down to earth and transparent, willing to answer questions and talk and follow up with me after the conference because they cared about improving my practice, not just getting a speaking gig.  I couldn’t get enough of being taught by these experts.  

When I returned home, I was given time in a faculty meeting to present about what I had learned.  I had so much to present, I asked if I could have two.  It was lovely knowing that what I had learned would benefit classrooms other than my own.

In 2019, I attended the Boston conference again.  While the first year had been great, this was the year that I absolutely fell in love with the science of learning.  From the keynote presentations of Barbara Oakley, David Daniel, David Rose, and Sarah Jayne Blakemore to the sessions of John Almarode and Marcia Tate, I came home with both theory and practical advice that changed my classroom practice dramatically.  

  • I thought about encoding and engagement in new ways.  
  • I made a clumsy attempt at interleaving.  
  • I instituted more pre-questions and retrieval than ever before.  

Trying new methods was energizing because I was doing it with more sense of purpose and intention, knowing it was based on evidence.  

I emailed my principal from the airport and told her how much I had learned and that I was pretty sure I could develop a six session course for my colleagues.  She got it approved by our accrediting organization for CEU credit, and by January, nineteen of my fellow teachers were getting the benefit of my Learning and the Brain experience.  We had a great time learning together and brainstorming new ideas for our classes, which ranged from transitional kindergarten to AP Calculus.  

When we were all thrown into virtual instruction just two months later, it was reassuring to have a basis for decision making about what mattered regardless of location.  

  • Encoding looked different than it had in my classroom, but I could still adapt what I had learned about encoding to this new context.  
  • Retrieval would be done through an online chat rather than mini-whiteboards, but I could be confident about the fact that it was still important.  

Those who had taken the course expressed the same feelings, and I was grateful that I had been able to provide them with that reassurance by being a conduit of the Learning and the Brain experience. 

Because of this conference, I became a voracious consumer of cognitive science research.  Last year, when the school allowed me to run the six week course again, I had trouble staying within my time limits because I had learned even more from books, blogs, and podcasts that I would not have sought out without the experience of Learning and the Brain.  Now, I find myself making resource recommendations to the teachers around me several times a week.

This November, I had the awesome opportunity of bringing a friend with me to the conference.  Watching him appreciate the experience deepened my love for it even more.  I enjoyed introducing him to people I respect, and we both got to meet some of our academic heroes.  Talking through what we had learned on our walks back to the hotel helped us both learn even more.  While I appreciate that the virtual option exists for those whose budgets won’t allow travel, I greatly value the things that happen in person.  The ability to talk directly to someone whose work I admire (e.g. Daniel Willingham) can’t be replicated digitally.  I would recommend to anyone that they attend the conference in person if they can. 

I am writing this during Thanksgiving week, so let me end with this.  I am thankful for Learning and the Brain.  If that brochure had not appeared in my box five years ago, I would not have grown in my teaching as much as I have or been able to help my colleagues grow in theirs.  I am thankful so many educators get to learn and grow and communicate with each other, and I am grateful to call them friends.

Why Time is a Teacher’s Greatest Commodity…and What to Do When You Don’t Have Enough of It
Guest Post
Guest Post

Today’s guest post is by Jim Heal, Director of New Initiatives, and Rebekah Berlin, Senior Program Director at Deans for Impact.

Long-time readers know how much I respect the work that Deans for Impact does. Their Resources — clear, brief, research informed, bracingly practical — offer insight and guidance in this ever-evolving field.


Ask any teacher to name a rare commodity in their profession and there’s a good chance they will reply with the word: “Time.” Whether it’s time to plan, grade, or even catch one’s breath in the midst of a busy school day, time matters.

Time is perhaps most important when it comes to time spent focusing on the material you want students to learn. So, how do you ensure that you’re making the most of the time you have with students and that they’re making the most of the way you structure their time?

Water Is Life

To answer this, let’s consider the following scenario. You’re a 7th Grade ELA teacher teaching a lesson on ‘Water is Life’ – a nonfiction text by Barbara Kingsolver. One of the objectives for this lesson is: Analyze the development of ideas over the course of a text.

You know from reading the teacher’s guide that student success will require them to compare two parts of the reading: a section describing a lush setting with an abundance of water and another describing an arid setting where rain hardly ever falls. Comparing the two will allow students to explore one of the main ideas of the text: The environmental role played by water and water sustainability.

Here is the section of the lesson[1] designed to address these aims. Take a moment to read it and consider when students are being asked to think deeply about comparing the two settings:

You arrive at school on the morning you’re due to teach this content, and there’s an unexpected announcement for students to attend club photo sessions for the yearbook during your lesson.

Big Changes, Little Time

At this point you realize that, by the time your class gets back together, you’ll need to cut ten minutes from this part of the lesson and now you have a choice to make:

If you only had twenty minutes to teach the thirty minutes of content you had planned for, how would you adapt your plan so that the most important parts of the lesson remained intact?

Let’s begin addressing this challenge with a couple of simple truths:

First: The harder and deeper we think about something, the more durable the memory will be. This means that we need students to think effortfully about the most important content in any lesson if we want it to stick.

Second: If you treat everything in the lesson as equally valuable and try to squeeze it all into less time, students are unlikely to engage in the deep thinking they need to remember the important content later.

Therefore, something’s got to give.

To help determine what goes and stays, you’re going to need to differentiate between three types of instructional tasks that can feature in any given lesson plan.

Effortful Tasks

Tasks and prompts that invite students to think hard and deep about the core content for that lesson.

In the case of ‘Water is Life’ a quick review of the plan tells us the effortful question (i.e. the part that directs students to the core knowledge they will need to think deeply about) doesn’t come until the end of the allotted thirty minute period.

This question is this lesson’s equivalent of the ‘Aha!’ moment in which students are expected to “analyze the development of ideas over the course of the text” (the lesson objective) by exploring the way the author uses juxtaposition across the two settings.

If you reacted to the shortened lesson time by simply sticking to the first twenty minutes’ worth of content, the opportunity for students to engage in the most meaningful part of the lesson would be lost. It’s therefore crucial to ask what is most essential for student learning in each case and ensure that those parts are prioritized.

Essential Tasks

Foundational tasks and prompts that scaffold students to be able to engage with the effortful questions that follow.

Just because effortful thinking about core content is the goal, that doesn’t mean you should make a beeline for the richest part of the lesson without helping students build the essential understanding they will need in order to engage with it effortfully.

In the case of ‘Water is Life’ – even though some of the tasks aren’t necessarily effortful, they are an essential stair step for students to be able to access effortful thinking opportunities.

For example, consider the moment in the lesson immediately prior to the effortful thinking prompt we just identified:

As you can see, even though we want students to go on and address the effortful task of juxtaposing the language in each of the two settings, that step won’t be possible unless they have a good understanding of the settings themselves. This part might not be effortful, but it is essential.

In this example, it isn’t essential that students share their understanding of each setting as stated in the plan, but it is essential that they do this thinking before taking on a complex question about juxtaposed settings. In other words, the instructional strategy used isn’t essential, but the thinking students do is.

Armed with this understanding, you can now shave some time off the edges of the lesson, while keeping its core intentions intact. For instance, in a time crunch, instead of having groups work on both questions the teacher could model the first paragraph and have students complete the second independently.

Strategies like these would ensure students engage more efficiently in the essential tasks – all of which means more time and attention can be paid to the effortful task that comes later on.

Non-Effortful, Non-Essential Tasks

Lower-priority tasks and prompts that focus on tangential aspects of the core content.

Lastly, there are those parts that would be nice to have if time and student attention weren’t at a premium – but they’re not effortful or essential in realizing the goals of the lesson.

If your lesson plan is an example of high-quality instructional materials (as is the case with ‘Water is Life’) you’ll be less likely to encounter these kinds of non-essential lesson components. Nevertheless, even when the lesson plan tells you that a certain section should take 30 minutes, it won’t tell you how to allocate and prioritize that time.

This is why it’s so important to identify any distractions from the ‘main event’ of the lesson. Because effortful questions are just that: they are hard and students will need more time to grapple with their answers and to revise and refine their thinking – all of which can be undermined by non-essential prompts.

For instance, it might be tempting to ask…

…“What was your favorite part of the two passages?”

…“What does water sustainability mean to you?”

…“Has anyone ever been to a particularly wet or dry place? What was it like?

These might seem engaging – and in one definition of the term, they are – it’s just that they don’t engage students with the material you want them to learn. For that reason alone, it’s important to steer clear of adding questions not directly related to your learning target in a lesson where you’re already having to make difficult choices about what to prioritize and why.

Three Key Steps

It’s worth noting that, even though our example scenario started with a surprise announcement, this phenomenon doesn’t only play out when lesson time gets unexpectedly cut. These kinds of decisions can happen when you know your students will need more time to take on an effortful question than the curriculum calls for, or even when lesson time is simply slipping away faster than you had anticipated. In either case, you would need to adjust the pacing of the lesson to accommodate the change, and bound up within that would be the prioritization of its most important parts.

There are steps one can take to ensure the time you have becomes all the time you need. Here are three such strategies informed by Deans For Impact’s work supporting novice and early-career teachers:

Identify the effortful tasks – aka the opportunities for effortful thinking about core content within the lesson. These effortful ‘Aha!’ moments can appear towards the end of the lesson, so don’t assume that you can trim content ‘from the bottom up’ since that could result in doing away with the most important parts for student learning.

Determine which are the essential tasks – aka the foundational scaffolds students will need in order to engage with those effortful thinking opportunities. These stepping stone tasks will often deal with the knowledge and materials students need to engage in the effortful part of the lesson. Even though they can’t be removed, they can be amended. If in doubt, concentrate on the thinking students need to do rather than the surface features of the instructional strategy.

Trim those parts of the lesson that don’t prompt effortful thinking or the foundational knowledge required to engage in it. This means that anything NOT mentioned in the previous two strategies is fair game for shrinking, trimming or doing away with altogether. Ask yourself whether this part of the lesson is instrumental in getting students to engage deeply with the content you want them to take away.

So, even if lesson time always feels like it’s running away (which it often is!) there are steps we can take to ensure teachers (and subsequently students) make the most of it.


Jim Heal is Director of New Initiatives at Deans for Impact and author of ‘How Teaching Happens’. He received his master’s in School Leadership and doctorate in Education Leadership from the Harvard Graduate School of Education.

Rebekah Berlin is Senior Director of Program at Deans for Impact. She received her Ph.D. in teaching quality and teacher education from the University of Virginia.

If you’d like to learn more about the work of Deans for Impact, you can get involved here.


[1] “Grade 7: Module 4B: Unit 1: Lesson 1” by EngageNY. Licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 3.0.