Heart Work / Rewriting a Literacy Crisis / What Reading Comprehension Is Really About

What Reading Comprehension Is Really About

with Natalie Wexler

01/22/2025 | 8 minutes 

When education writer Natalie Wexler published The Knowledge Gap five years ago, she didn’t expect it to fundamentally change how teachers and administrators thought about literacy. Yet, across the country, her work has become a touchstone for educators navigating the shift toward knowledge building and the science of reading. 

In this interview, Wexler discusses how the science of reading became a national focus, why reading comprehension depends on knowledge, and what it takes to embrace meaningful change. 

This interview has been edited for length and clarity. 

Lauren Keeling and Natalie Wexler

How the Science of Reading Became a National Phenomenon 

Though science of reading research has been accumulating for decades across linguistics, cognitive science, and education, the term itself has only recently entered the public conversation in a significant way. Today, it feels almost inescapable, with debate over how to teach reading showing no signs of slowing down, even within the science of reading community. 

Wexler reflects on how that shift took shape — and why clarity about the term still matters. 

Lauren Keeling (host): The term “science of reading” has become much more familiar over the past five years — why do you think that is? 

Natalie Wexler: It’s not a term I had heard when I was writing The Knowledge Gap or even when it was published, so it really has been in the last five years or so. The work of Emily Hanford, the audio journalist who did Sold a Story, had a lot to do with it. She’s done a tremendous service in pointing out ways in which typical reading instruction conflicts with what science tells us is likely to work.    

My reservation is that the term “science of reading” has often come to be defined as just phonics, and it’s way more complicated than that. There’s a lot of scientific evidence related to reading comprehension that should be included but often gets left out. There are ways in which the standard approach to teaching reading comprehension also conflicts fairly dramatically with what science tells us. 

Lauren: What role does background knowledge play in reading comprehension, according to cognitive science? 

Natalie: There’s a lot of undisputed evidence that having knowledge of the topic you’re reading about is really helpful to comprehension. Beyond that, the more general knowledge and vocabulary you have, the easier it is to understand just about anything you try to read. 

It’s difficult to get evidence that building kids’ knowledge boosts their general reading comprehension, because we measure with standardized tests that use passages unrelated to specific topics taught. Evidence shows that if you teach different topics and build vocabulary and knowledge, eventually scores on general comprehension tests improve — but that can take three years or more. Few studies last that long. 
 
Based on what cognitive science tells us about the importance of knowledge, we don’t need to wait for mountains of experimental evidence to switch to building kids’ knowledge. 

The Knowledge Gap by Natalie Wexler
'Sold a Story' Podcast Tile

Featured: The Knowledge Gap by Natalie Wexler and Sold a Story by Emily Hanford

The Turning Point 

Lauren: How did you come to identify “the knowledge gap” as critical? 

Natalie: I’d been writing about education for years and thought I knew a lot. I had talked to experts and read a lot of books, but no one had mentioned that we weren’t really trying to build kids’ knowledge at the elementary level. People said we made progress in elementary school, but everything fell apart in high school. 

I volunteered to tutor writing at a fairly high-poverty high school. One thing I noticed was, if I asked students to read what I thought was a straightforward text, they could read it, but they could not understand it because they were missing some background knowledge. For example, I gave some 10th-grade students a piece to read on the Supreme Court, and none of them knew what it was, even though we were 17 blocks away. 

Later, I met Judith Hochman and thought her writing method was what kids needed because it teaches writing and deepens content knowledge. I was on the board of a charter school. I thought, wouldn’t it be great if they could use this method of writing instruction? But she came back to me and said, “Well, the problem is this method of writing instruction only works if it’s embedded in content, and your school isn’t really teaching any content.”   

That really opened the door. I realized this was bigger than one school or city. We were trying to teach abstract comprehension skills, like making inferences as if they could be mastered in the abstract and applied to any text, but that’s not how comprehension works.   

It is a systemic problem, and I think that teachers are as much the victims of this system as students have been.  It’s very painful to acknowledge that what you were doing when you thought you were helping kids maybe wasn’t helping them.  

Boy looking at books in a book shelf.

Students engage in independent reading, whole-group instruction, book exploration, and even song, reflecting the many ways literacy can take shape in the classroom.

Books on display.
Student sitting at desk
Plants growing in pots in a school playground.

Keeping Both Tracks in Sight 

Lauren: I remember talking to my district’s leaders and have since listened to other districts’ leaders and teachers, and oftentimes the story comes back to phonics. They understand skill development, but often the challenge is finding the balance between foundational skills and knowledge building. How would you talk to teachers and administrators about that struggle?   

Natalie: I use the image of two train tracks that eventually converge. For a while, foundational skills — decoding and word recognition — are on a different track from knowledge development. Early on, kids won’t acquire most knowledge through their own reading; it will be through oral language — listening to books read aloud and discussing them, and using the vocabulary from those books so it transfers to long-term memory.  

Eventually, when their foundational skills catch up, that background knowledge will kick in and enable them to read independently about a range of topics.   

I think we’ve been relying on the idea that if kids just keep reading on their own, they’ll eventually get to a point where they can read independently about all sorts of things. But for most kids, that isn’t the case. That’s why read-alouds in kindergarten, first grade, and second grade are so important. We know that listening comprehension exceeds children’s reading comprehension until, on average, around age 13.    

A young child who can’t yet read can still follow a story that’s being read to them. That’s why we need to get them hooked on reading through expressive read-alouds — saying things like, “Let’s talk about this,” “Isn’t this exciting?” “What’s going to happen next?” We’ve been giving kids excerpts and using them as a means to an end for teaching comprehension skills, which turns reading into a task. But there’s another way to approach reading, and it’s fun.  

I’ve been in classrooms where students don’t want their teacher to stop reading, and they still have more to say when it’s time for the discussion to end, where there’s an excitement in the air through shared read-alouds and discussion. And that excitement is just as much a part of teaching reading as phonemic awareness, phonics, and all the other things that also need to be taught.   

Lauren: I love that.  It makes me think of that Kate DiCamillo quote, um, where she says something like reading shouldn’t be presented to children as a chore, but instead as a gift, and I think we’ve lost a little bit of that over time. Can you speak to the value of that reading and reading an entire book over just a snippet?  

Natalie: I’ve been thinking a lot about this. Nonfiction is one thing, because a whole book can go into much more depth about one thing, but you can also get that through a series of shorter texts. But when it comes to fiction, the excitement and the joy are going to come much more effectively if you spend more time in that world. There is evidence that fiction helps develop empathy, and I think that’s because of that transportation into other worlds and other people’s shoes, and I believe only novels can supply that experience.    

Student sitting on the floor, looking up in awe.
Student showing his work in a classroom.

In Pendergast, students move between classroom work and outdoor exploration during the school day.

Trusting the Process 

Lauren: Earlier, you talked about it being hard to do a longitudinal study, but if someone were to ask you, “Does knowledge building work?” What results would you point to? What information would you share to validate?  

Natalie: Though none are perfect, we do have several studies. One comes from Harvard professor James Kim, who created a science-focused, spiraled curriculum called MORE. It brings the same concepts back over months and years at deeper levels. 

In the study, children used MORE in first, second, and third grade. In the first two years, they scored higher than the control group on topics closely related to what they had learned, but not on “far transfer” passages — texts unrelated to the content. By the third year, the MORE students did outperform the control group on those far-transfer passages, even though the control group was using the curriculum that year. It was the accumulation of knowledge that kicked in in the third year and carried over into the fourth year. The effects lasted. 

A problem is, the standardized tests we use to measure whether this is working are all far transfer, and it takes a while for that to be evident. 

There are also some studies at the kindergarten where you can see progress faster, and standardized tests assume less vocabulary. And of course, the anecdotal evidence from what teachers are seeing in their classrooms. 

Seeing to Believe 

Lauren: What would you say to a teacher who needs encouragement to make this shift — someone who wants to do right by their students but is unsure or afraid of changing? How would you help inspire them to try and to believe that even one teacher making this change can have a huge impact? 

Natalie: It’s good to know what the science says and what the data indicates, but I think the most powerful thing is to see this in action. Go to a school that’s using this approach — building knowledge, reading whole texts — and talk to teachers who have done it. 

And then when you do try it, try to tamp down whatever reservations you have. I’ve talked to teachers who thought, “My kids aren’t going to be interested in this,” or “This is going to be too hard.” I understand those concerns. But one teacher told me that even when she wasn’t interested in the text, she read it like it was the most fascinating thing in the world — and the kids thought it was the most fascinating thing in the world. They couldn’t get enough. Once you see that, it’s hard to go back. 

It’s All Connected 

Lauren: Is there anything else you’d like to share with us? 

Natalie: Broadly speaking, we have to stop seeing reading as separate from learning in the content areas and reading and writing as separate from each other. They’re not. When kids write about what they’re learning, it boosts their reading comprehension and deepens their understanding. These things are all connected.   

If you’re a literacy teacher, it’s also important to see yourself as a content-area teacher. And if you’re a content-area teacher — whether it’s math, science, PE, anything — you’re also a literacy teacher. You can find ways to help kids take in new vocabulary and write about what they’re learning, including in math. The basic message I’d leave people with is that it’s all connected. 

Return to Collection

About the Host

Lauren Keeling is a seasoned education professional with a unique blend of experiences. A former broadcast journalist, elementary teacher, and principal, she now combines her passion for education with her love of storytelling at Imagine Learning. Above all, Lauren is a dedicated literacy advocate pursuing a doctorate in Leadership with a focus on Public and Non-Profit Organizations to further her impact on education nationwide.

Join the Club

Heart Work is our platform for telling educators’ stories. Sign up for the Heart Work Club to be among the first to share yours. You’ll also get the latest podcast episodes, articles, and exclusive content delivered straight to your inbox.

January 21, 2026 9:00 am

The AI Clock Is Ticking for K–12 Education 

A new national initiative maps AI’s current and future impact on K–12—and gives leaders the tools to shape what comes next.

Tempe, Arizona — January 21, 2026 — Artificial intelligence is no longer a hypothetical for schools — it is already shaping how students learn, teachers teach, and employers hire. Today, a coalition of national K–12 education leaders, researchers, practitioners, and students announced the launch of Beyond the AI Inflection Point. The initiative explores three plausible futures for K–12 education and is designed to equip education leaders with the clarity and tools to shape a future that best serves students. 

“I’ve seen too many schools respond to AI by swinging to extremes,” said Amanda Bickerstaff, co-founder and CEO of AI for Education. “Some try to ban it, while others rush to adopt GenAI tools without a plan. In both cases, students lose. This project exists because we still have the power to choose a more intentional path forward.”  

AI will shape education whether leaders act or not. What remains undecided is whether that future is shaped by intention or by default. 

The project emerged from a national convening in summer 2025, co-hosted by AI for Education and Imagine Learning, that brought together 20 experts and student voices to consider how AI is already impacting schools and disrupting learning. Inspired by the futurist AI 2027 project, the work moves beyond abstract debates to surface three plausible futures for K–12 education that are already taking shape: 

  1. A return to familiar fundamentals, where schools respond by restricting AI and doubling down on proven practices, often limiting students’ ability to engage meaningfully with new tools 
  2. An over-reliance on technology, where efficiency and automation outpace human judgment, learning, and agency 
  3. Intentional integration, where schools deliberately combine strong instruction with responsible, human-centered use of AI 

“This work pushes us to ask a more fundamental question about AI in schools,” said Sari Factor, Chief Strategy Officer at Imagine Learning. “What is the purpose of learning in an AI-enabled world, and how do we build classrooms and systems that actually serve that purpose and prepare students for their AI-enabled futures? When technology is used intentionally, it can support teachers and students in deeper learning, stronger agency, and outcomes that matter long after graduation.” 

Rather than offering prescriptions, the initiative provides a research-informed narrative and practical frameworks to help district and state leaders move from reactive policies to forward-looking strategies. The moment to choose is now. 

Explore the Work 

Education leaders can download the full report, along with practical toolkits and resources designed to help districts assess where they are today, understand which future they are on, and determine what it would take to move toward a more intentional path with AI. 

Download the report and access tools: 
beyondtheaiinflectionpoint.com 

About Beyond the AI Inflection Point 
Beyond the AI Inflection Point is a collaborative national initiative helping education leaders understand the futures AI could create for K–12 schools — and the choices that will determine which one becomes real, sustainable, and equitable. It brings research, narrative insight, and practical frameworks together to help schools lead with purpose in the age of artificial intelligence. 

About Imagine Learning

Imagine Learning is a leading provider of K–12 learning solutions, supporting students and educators in more than half of U.S. school districts. We work alongside educators to apply data, research, and technology in service of student learning and long-term outcomes. Learn more at imaginelearning.com.

Learn More

About AI for Education

AI for Education leads the responsible adoption of generative AI in K–12 and higher education through comprehensive training, policy development, and practical implementation support. The organization has trained over 300,000 educators across 500+ institutions globally, including some of the largest school districts in the U.S. With the goal of providing AI literacy training to 1 million educators and students, their mission focuses on empowering teachers to confidently navigate AI technology while preparing students for the future. Learn more at aiforeducation.io.

Learn More

January 20, 2026 9:00 am

Imagine Learning Appoints Anjeneya Dubey as Chief Technology Officer to Accelerate Curriculum-Informed AI™ Vision

Cloud and AI leader joins to advance educator-trusted platforms that connect curriculum, insight, and impact.

Tempe, Arizona — January 20, 2026 — Imagine Learning, the largest provider of digital-first K–12 solutions in the U.S., today announced the appointment of Anjeneya Dubey as Chief Technology Officer (CTO), effective immediately. Dubey joins Imagine Learning with more than two decades of global experience leading software engineering, AI innovation, and cloud platforms at scale — most recently as Global Head of Platform Engineering at Honeywell. He previously led engineering for digital education platforms used across K–12 and higher education.

In his new role, Dubey will lead Imagine Learning’s end-to-end technology strategy, with a focus on advancing its Curriculum-Informed AI roadmap — ensuring that instructional rigor, educator trust, and adaptive innovation remain central to every product experience.

“As we build the next era of learning technology, we are investing in leadership that understands both the complexity of enterprise-scale systems and the nuance of classroom impact,” said Leslie Curtis, Executive Vice President & Chief Administrative Officer of Imagine Learning. “Anj’s deep background in SaaS products, data and AI platforms, and developer productivity makes him the ideal leader to power our next wave of curriculum-aligned innovation.”

Dubey brings unmatched experience in building SaaS platforms and AI-powered delivery pipelines; overseeing global cloud infrastructure across AWS, Azure, and GCP; and leading teams of 400+ engineers across five regions. He holds multiple patents in hybrid and multi-cloud architectures and has designed platforms serving over 21 million users in education and industrial domains.

“I’m thrilled to join Imagine Learning at such a pivotal moment,” said Dubey. “This role is a chance to shape how AI can responsibly enhance instructional outcomes, deepen personalization, and support the educators who drive student success every day. Our goal is to bring meaningful technology to classrooms — not just automation, but intelligence that understands and elevates learning.”

The appointment follows a broader trend across the education industry of tapping executive talent from cloud-native and AI-forward organizations. Imagine Learning’s move signals its continued momentum as a market leader committed to instructional quality and platform intelligence.

Dubey will oversee Imagine Learning’s engineering, DevOps, AI/ML, and cloud teams. His first initiatives will include strengthening the company’s curricula data pipeline, accelerating time-to-insight for educators, and scaling product reliability for over 18 million students across the country.

About Imagine Learning

Imagine Learning creates K–12 learning solutions that support the boundless potential of students in more than half the districts nationwide. Empowered with data and insights from educators, we innovate to shape the future of education with a robust, digital-first portfolio of school services and core, courseware, and supplemental solutions.

Learn More

January 16, 2026 9:00 am

After a $45 million math curriculum overhaul, Philadelphia sees results

Published by: Chalkbeat Philadelphia

Philadelphia students’ average scores on state math tests have reached their highest rate in nine years, marking a significant recovery from pandemic-era learning loss. Students from almost every racial group made gains along with students who are English learners, district officials said Thursday at a non-voting Board of Education meeting. “I’m giddy with excitement,” said…

Read Full Article

May include subscriber-only content

January 15, 2026 9:00 am

Imagine Learning and Eedi Launch the First Curriculum-Embedded AI Assessments for U.S. Math Classrooms

​Real-time instructional intelligence built into the lesson drives sharper decisions and stronger instruction — without added tests or tools.

January 15,  2026 — Tempe, AZ — Imagine Learning today announced a strategic partnership with Eedi Labs, the UK-based pioneer in AI-powered learning infrastructure. The collaboration brings real-time, curriculum-aligned assessments directly into daily math instruction, bridging the gap between data and action for teachers.   

The new assessment system will launch in Imagine Learning’s core math curriculum, Imagine IM, for back to school 2026, giving teachers immediate insight into student thinking and the misconceptions that get in the way of grade-level learning. It’s designed to work inside instruction, not around it.  

While benchmarks and standardized tests take time and lack adaptability, Eedi has been tailored to fit naturally into Imagine IM’s instruction, helping teachers respond with precision in as few as 10 questions. 

“Too many platforms ask teachers to test in one place and teach in another,” said Kinsey Rawe, Chief Product Officer at Imagine Learning. “With Eedi, we’ve built a breakthrough that closes that gap. These assessments live inside instruction, where they can actually drive impact.” Eedi’s engine draws on over a decade of student learning data and advanced machine learning to quickly identify where students need support in math. Combined with Imagine Learning’s own generative AI capabilities, the system turns data into direction — giving teachers what they need to teach smarter and respond faster.  

“This partnership shows what’s possible when you pair research expertise with innovation in the service of better teaching and learning,” said Ben Caulfield, CEO of Eedi. “It’s a major step toward our vision of reaching a billion learners with personalized, evidence-based learning.” 

Rewriting the Rules of Classroom Assessment 

Imagine Learning is integrating Eedi’s proven diagnostic engine directly into core curriculum to combine high-quality instructional content with real-time insight into misconceptions. Teachers can immediately adjust pacing, grouping, and support in response to the needs of the students in their classrooms. 

This work marks a step toward bridging core and supplemental instruction, giving districts a more connected view of student learning and growth. And with Imagine Learning’s portfolio of award-winning solutions in ELA and science, this partnership sets the stage to turn an innovation in mathematics into a model for extending real-time assessment across subjects.  

To connect with an Imagine Learning partner and learn more, visit imaginelearning.com. 

About Imagine Learning

Imagine Learning creates K–12 learning solutions that support the boundless potential of students in more than half the districts nationwide. Empowered with data and insights from educators, we innovate to shape the future of education with a robust, digital-first portfolio of school services and core, courseware, and supplemental solutions. Imagine Learning. Empower potential.®  

Learn More

About Eedi 

Eedi is a UK-based applied research organization that develops, tests, and deploys innovations to power next generation learning experiences. The Eedi diagnostic engine is built on a decade of classroom data and powers precise, formative assessments that deliver true personalization at scale. Eedi is the only education-focused AI infrastructure validated by gold-standard science and billions of data points.

Learn More

Heart Work / Rewriting a Literacy Crisis / Bonus Episode

Rewriting a Literacy Crisis

Listen on Spotify
Listen on Apple Podcasts

Bonus Episode: Find Your Marigold

Join Lauren live from Boston in this Heart Work special with instructional coaches Nicole Silva and Janna Murphy for a candid conversation about their work in Marshfield Public Schools. Together, they reflect on what it takes to lead a shift to a knowledge-building literacy program aligned with the science of reading and the impact of embracing change, even when it feels impossible.

Lauren Keeling (host): From Imagine Learning, this is Heart Work, an honest profile of America’s educators.

We are so fortunate today to be recording our very first-ever live Heart Work podcast episode, so feel free to cheer and clap and do all of the things that you want heard. Essentially, what we’re doing is elevating the voices of educators and administrators who are out there doing great work.

We have two of the most brilliant people in the room with us today telling the story of Marshfield Public Schools, which is a really interesting one.

We have Nicole Silva and Janna Murphy joining us, two instructional coaches who have been doing really hard work — not just selecting a new curriculum and moving into very different instructional practices, but also moving the needle in the direction that we want to go as districts and as teachers and leaders, to get to a space where we are inviting every child to the table and believing that every child is welcome to sit there and learn with us.

Can you take us back and give us some context for what it is we’re going to talk about today?

Lauren, Nicole, and Janna delivering their panel on making the shift to a science-of-reading-aligned curriculum.
Welcome sign outside a conference room.

Lauren, Nicole, and Janna delivering their panel on making the shift to a science-of-reading-aligned curriculum.

Janna Murphy: We are, as Lauren mentioned, two instructional literacy coaches in the Marshfield Public Schools. We primarily work with teachers in kindergarten through fifth grade.

We were historically a balanced literacy district, and prior to that, all we had used was Journeys and some antiquated basal readers for quite some time. With our shift to the workshop model several years ago, we had a lot of growing pains that I don’t think were ever fully teased out once it came time for us to look into adopting high-quality instructional materials.

We found that we had a lot of work to do prior to adoption, and that spanned three to four years. It began with quite a bit of professional learning before we could actually begin looking at the selection process.

Nicole Silva: So we really tiered, or bucketed, our shift, starting with the pre-learning we needed to do with teachers and staff around what the science of reading is and how we start to make those shifts in our instructional practices.

We already had some really solid curriculum in place in Heggerty and Fundations, so we had our phonological awareness and phonics programs in place, but we really wanted to bring teachers along in this knowledge-building shift. We did some pre-work around learning about the science of reading through coursework and book studies around Shifting the Balance.

Then we moved on to how we are going to use this knowledge that we now have to look at new programs. We really adopted this notion of “go with your racehorses.” We looked at teachers who were interested in making the shift right alongside us, to join our team and start to look at curriculum and make decisions that way.

Now we’re in phase three, where we’re implementing and adopting and continuing the work that way.

Lauren: None of that is easy, and what I hear you saying, in a really big way, is you focus deeply on thinking about the human side of making a major shift like shifting to a curriculum that is aligned with science of reading best practice and research, and I am hearing you talk about some of the experiences that your teachers had prior, so using a basal, being a part of a workshop model — I was a workshop teacher, so as a kindergarten teacher, we were teaching in those workshops, and I loved it. It was a practice that was comfortable to me. So when it came time to shift, as your team is doing, into something else, it was hard, and I really had to think about what I was doing and why I was changing. I had good leaders like you who helped me learn about that, but we didn’t just jump into the curriculum. We took a step back. So I want to talk about that human lens and think through what you were saying in this very first phase, this very first step you took, which was professional learning, and getting people to see where you wanted to go.

Tell me about how that worked. What did you do? How did you structure it?

Janna: Yeah, so I think what worked in our favor in some ways is that we had — we’re coming back from a global pandemic, our teachers were brand new with a brand-new math curriculum, and so we kind of took the approach of, we went to our top-level leadership and said, from a literacy perspective, because we knew it was high time that we really start looking at what some of these shifts were that had been backed by science of reading research, and we kind of went to them and asked for permission to slow down in order to speed up.

So we said, can we actually build capacity with our teaching staff around why these shifts are important, what the research and evidence is telling us, so that they can make better-informed decisions when we actually start to look at curriculum.

So with their blessing, we were able to put our selection process on hold for a year and spend an entire year engaging in the Shifting the Balance coursework.

So in K through two, that book had already come out, and so we had all our K through two teaching staff participate in the actual course throughout that entire school year, and we paired that with what we call a GLC model, which is grade-level collaboration, but twice a month they met alongside literacy coaches and the reading specialists within their buildings to really unpack the work that we were doing.

So we all had this common experience and language with the course, but we also had this space for, OK, what does this actually look like in my classroom? And it allowed us to get into classrooms to really feel that with them. How could these shifts look? How do they match — or not match — what tools we have in front of us right now? And what would we need to bring in to actually support the remaining shifts?

In three through five, the book had not been released yet, and so we did a lot of professional learning with the three through five teachers, where we were pulling our own stuff and saying, “OK, this is what research is telling us. How do you see this fitting into your classroom?” And in the following year, as we were beginning to actually look at curriculum, the book had come out. So all of our three through five teachers were able to do their own book study simultaneously while we were beginning to look at curriculum.

Nicole: And I think the time that we spent with teachers in those grade-level collaboration meetings was such valuable time because we were able to hear their thoughts and perspectives and worries and concerns.

We did a lot with the Knowledge Matters campaign — pulling in blog posts and podcasts and then having time to come together as a team and really unpack what we have in our classrooms at this point that is lending itself to this type of work, and then, where are we really gonna need to target some of that deep dive of our curriculum adoption to make sure that if this is what the research is telling us, and this is what we believe as teams, what are we looking for in a curriculum as we start to move forward with adoption?

Lauren: And everybody magically got on board.

Nicole: (Laughs) Exactly.

Lauren: And believed it.

Nicole: Exactly.

Lauren: Right? Fingers crossed? So knowing that that’s simply not reality, how did you work with those who were not interested in making this shift? Those who maybe really loved the practices that they were holding dear.

Janna: I think what you said before, Lauren, about really feeling like you loved what you loved and that you felt passionately about the influence it had on students, we had to find a way to honor and embrace what was still working, while also taking that and pairing it with what the research was telling us.

I think that year of professional learning allowed us to see where there was still very valid space to keep some of that in play, while also exploring and maybe having to be a little bit vulnerable and notice that some of what we have been doing isn’t necessarily what’s best for kids anymore.

Nicole: Particularly in K–2, where we already had, you know, a sound foundation in a phonological awareness program, a phonics program, and we knew we were not going to throw the baby out with the bath water in that way.

We could, you know, remind the teachers it’s not all new. There are lots of things that are working well, and as we made our way through the process in general, we were pretty cognizant of reminding them in those spaces where there is a lot of new, but there you are still a teacher at heart and there is room for you to keep those practices that are near and dear to you that are supported by the research.

Lauren: I’m sure a lot of educators felt comforted in that and took comfort in not having to make a huge leap and change but easing into it.

Janna: I think so, and because we both come from the classroom and we both consider ourselves teachers at heart, we were able to take that year to build relationships and the trust that this is uncomfortable for us too. We have not taught this way either, and so it really allowed us to kind of team up and lean on each other while everyone was experiencing the different levels of discomfort.

Nicole: And I would say too, one of the ways, as we went through the book study, Shifting the Balance, one of our options for teachers was to opt into those a little bit early if they were interested in coming on board and being part of the vetting and adoption process. We called those our lab teachers, and one of the ways we really brought some more resistant or hesitant teachers along was by elevating their peers and putting people in place in buildings that would be able to take in the new learning, and also sort of influence and bring their counterparts along.

Lauren: I do wonder, you certainly had a gift in having a full year to be able to lean into professional development and work with your teams and your teachers. Not many districts have that opportunity. So if there’s one, while we’re in this phase, in this moment, what’s one thing that a district that has to, kind of, build the plane while it’s in the air, what’s something they could do to take from this process that you have done, if they don’t have that year lead-up?

Janna: If you don’t have that kind of time, which is something none of us have in education, really, I think it would be just making that a grade-level collaboration time or a professional learning community space that’s sacred, untouchable, for when those teams need to get together, whether they’re sharing the same podcast or an article or going on a site visit somewhere. I think the shared experience is what allowed us to have the conversations, that we weren’t trying to sell it because we had all participated in it together.

Nicole: Absolutely. Completely agree with that.

Lauren: That’s a great way to put it — shared experience. You can lean back on that, which you’re going to tell us about, I think, as we move into this next phase, which was you’ve done the learning, you’ve had the conversations, people are beginning to understand knowledge building or shifting to these different practices. Now it’s time to get into that space where you’re looking at actual materials and curricula and tools and gathering your people around to make that big, tremendous decision. So talk us through that part of your process.

Janna: Yeah, I think in every district, you have your go-getters, the people who really want to jump in immediately because they’re most comfortable when they’re staying a little bit ahead. We certainly had those teachers and tapped into them right away, but we also had some of our most resistant to change also wanting to be a part of the process because they wanted to make sure that their voice was heard.

And that actually really, really worked because it gave the selection committee, which ended up being teachers representative of each of our five buildings, an administrator from each building, a reading specialist, and coaches.

So there were about 30 of us on the selection committee at that point, and it did allow for some very colorful conversations around the myriad of feelings. But it was also really interesting because I think, so often, the people who rise to the top for those things are the ones who are always on the committees and always wanting to do that. So it was really helpful for us to go behind the scenes and tap into someone who maybe doesn’t and isn’t wild about this change, but has a lot of influence in their building or has the trust of their colleagues, and to kind of be able to bring them into the mix was really helpful.

Nicole: And it was also so helpful that we had had that shared experience, so that we could then calibrate what we were looking for when we went forward with looking at curriculum, because there were publishers that would come in and were very shiny and beautiful, but very reminiscent of the program we were coming off of, or something that maybe felt a little more comfortable, but if we brought it back to, is this actually what we’re looking for in a program, even though it looks beautiful?

That was really helpful for us to have that shared understanding to be able to come back to each time.

Lauren: So tell us a little bit more about how that shared understanding played into your selection process. What were your must-haves or your could-haves or your should-never-ever-haves?

You know, how did you work together to develop that process?

Janna: We were part of a two-year process with DESE HQIM adoption process, and so we participated with other districts in the state to look at high-quality instructional materials, and through that work, we were able to create a rubric for our district of what was really an absolute must-have, and we created the rubric based on the most recent evidence and the professional learning we had done. So you might really want this program to have leveled readers, but if that’s not necessarily what’s evidence-based, then that’s not going to make the cut for the rubric, kind of thing.

Yeah. And so when we came up with the pillars of what we really wanted to guide our work with, we then brought in the larger selection process team, and then they were able to tease them out a little bit further, specific to their work.

So, OK, we really want to make sure this is a knowledge-building program and that it includes authentic literature. Then, the classroom teachers and that committee tease that out further and say, yes, and the authentic literature must include X, Y, and Z. And so continuing to bring it back to that anchor of the rubric was what guided most of those conversations during the selection process.

Nicole: And we actually learned as we were developing the rubric that, if any of you have used the Shifting the Balance, the K–2 book is really a foundational skills focus with some of that language comprehension, but it doesn’t really go into the knowledge-building component.

So as we were, you know, creating our rubric and finding our look-fors, we were realizing that we did miss the boat a little bit with K–2, and we had to back up with them and really go into the knowledge-building and vocabulary piece that wasn’t so heavily emphasized. I think, when a lot of people think of the science of reading, they think of phonics, foundational skills, fluency, and decoding, but what we were really trying to highlight for teachers is that there’s much more than just those things, and we need to make sure that we’re finding a good mix.

Lauren: I think that’s an easy slip for teachers, districts, and administrators, that we know so much about foundational skills because that’s where we saw the greatest gap. And where we knew we needed to respond to our students and teach them those foundational skills so that they could read, but then we sort of forgot about the other part of the rope: comprehension, and actually, reading to learn. So being functional readers who are reading to learn things, that’s really important knowledge. So magically, everybody selected the same curriculum. Violins played, right?

So what we know is that that’s never true when you’ve got 30 people in the room, and they are smart and knowledgeable and they love their kids and they love doing what they do.

They find the curriculum and provider that came in and impressed them, and they hold on tight and they advocate for and they rally and they fight for that curriculum and they’re going to get everybody to vote for it because it’s the best one.

So with 30 people, I imagine you had a couple of really strong advocates in a couple of different directions. How did you manage those conversations?

Janna: Under the supervision of our assistant superintendent, who is really — she’s the director of curriculum — we had several meetings throughout that year where, once the publisher presentations were done, we had to look back at the rubric and really ensure that everything we had cited as being a priority was actually identifiable within these different curricula, and in some places, it wasn’t.

And then we had to be really strategic about the conversations because you’re absolutely right. People have really strong feelings, and if something felt either safe or like it was a good match for their teaching style, they felt strongly about it and were more than happy to share those feelings with their colleagues. And we had to be really careful about how we shared how we felt about the curriculum because, regardless of where we ended up, we wanted teachers to know that they had our full support as instructional coaches.

And so we were trying to remain very neutral so as not to rock the boat and say, well, we’re gonna end up with this one because this is the one that they want, and we really kind of just played this idea of like, bring it back to the rubric. What are we looking for? Is it meeting these needs? And if they are meeting the needs, let’s dig in a little bit further and find out which one matches your belief system or your philosophy better.

And it still was — it was still almost a dead tie with, we started with four, and we got it down to two.

Nicole: Yeah. And I think just like Janna was alluding to with us trying to stay neutral — being instructional coaches, our whole job is based on relationship building. And what we really, I think, recognized within this process was really about making sure everybody felt safe and heard and validated in moving forward.

So that even if the program they really wanted was not the one that was selected, they felt like we heard what they felt like was valuable within that program, and we were able to sort of highlight for them in the other program some similarities or some differences in why other people were feeling strongly about, for example, authentic literature was a huge — maybe it wasn’t, was it on a rubric?

Janna: Yes, it was on a rubric.

Nicole: It was on a rubric, and one of the programs that teachers really liked did not have enough authentic literature. So that was sort of a rub that we were balancing with teachers and just bringing them back to that being a priority for us as a district.

Lauren: You really had to trust phase one in this phase. You had to trust the process of the work that you did. Were there ever moments when you had to go relearn or reteach?

Janna: Definitely. I think we’re still bringing it back to that when things come up. I think also, any curriculum, it’s only as good as the person teaching it.

Lauren: Say that one more time, because it’s so true.

Janna: Any curriculum is only as good as the person who’s delivering it or teaching it, and so the idea behind the professional learning was that because no curriculum is ever going to be perfect, they were gonna be equipped with the tools to make decisions within their own classroom that were not going to compromise the learning goals of the program, but we’re also going to meet the needs of the kids sitting in front of them, because that’s what was at the heart of the work.

Lauren: So let’s go ahead and jump into, we have selected a curriculum. You are going to implement this thing. You are rolling it out. You’re getting people ready. How do you do that? Some people are unhappy. Some people are thrilled. Everybody’s in a really uncomfortable learning space. What’s next?

Janna: We have two things that we always refer back to. We have worked with a consultant for many years, and she would always say to us, “When people are unhappy, or when they’re grumbling and complaining, it’s because they’re growing, because growth is not comfortable.” And so we always reminded ourselves of that.

Nicole: And then the other thing she said was, “A plane has never crashed because of turbulence.” So we kind of keep bringing it — you know, in those moments when everybody is sort of like, you can feel the discomfort, it’s like, it’s OK, we’re learning and changing and growing.

Janna: We tapped into some fantastic teachers in the district and created a lab teacher model. So we support K through five buildings, and at every grade level, there are two representatives who work as the lab teachers for that grade level. And so within every school building, there are at least two, in some cases three lab teachers within the building that span the grades.

And those teachers worked alongside us the summer before we implemented to really just stay ahead and to really familiarize themselves with the materials, the instructional practices, and the philosophy behind the curriculum. So that was more of the, OK, how are we gonna be here to support them?

And then there was also the logistical pieces. Like with anything new, there’s just so much stuff, and we find more than anything else, it’s the stuff that bogs teachers down, and they don’t have time to sift through all the stuff. So we went through and actually created one-stop-shop documents, if you will, where everything you could possibly need to get you started for this first module is right here, embedded in here for you.

And that was between the lab teachers and that kind of logistical work behind the scenes. I wouldn’t say it was without its bumps, but it was a fairly smooth start. We did also, to back up for a second, we had some feedback from our teachers because they were, they were fresh off of a math curriculum adoption a couple of years prior to this, and they hadn’t had any professional learning around their new program for math until they came back in September.

And so there was a lot of feedback around the kind of angst that gave them over the summer, and so we did partner with the professional learning company that worked alongside our curriculum, and everyone received their first training in June before they went home for the summer, so that there was some groundwork laid that kind of allowed us to do some of the behind-the-scenes stuff over the summer.

Nicole: Listen, it was bumpy. It’s always going to be bumpy, but we felt like we had systems in place for the stuff, you know, the documents and where to go. But more than anything else, we really wanted to have the human piece, the human side of it in place in those lab teachers ready to go, in ourselves, ready to go, and just really reminding everyone, getting ourselves all calibrated around like, we are humans, and we are going to be uncomfortable. There’s going to be a lot of change happening, and there are people that you can go to to work through that, and that was our biggest, I think, accomplishment moving into it.

Lauren: I love the focus that you put on the human side of change in general, but especially instructional change. So let’s think about those two groups of educators that we always bump into when we’re in the middle of something that is change-related, right? We’ve got the early adopters who are all in, they are going to do this thing, it looks amazing, they love it, and they’re willing to do whatever you need them to do.

And then of course, we have our friends who grow roots and just want to do what they know, and sometimes, aggressively, but also sometimes, just want to — that’s what they’re comfortable doing. Talk a little bit about how we help those team members who just really like it the way they like it.

So you’re in the implementation, the curriculum has been adopted, you have support systems and they’re still standing still. How do you take baby steps with them?

Janna: We really kind of highlighted this idea of integrity over fidelity. Any curriculum is going to come with, do this and read this script and you can do this. And we said, in order to honor what these teachers already know and how they feel they can actually make change in these children’s lives, they have to be able to take this curriculum and make decisions with integrity, versus having to read a script. We were able to partner with them in a way that’s like, we would never insult anyone by assuming that this script that was written knows the students in front of you better than you do, and we named what some of those integrity versus fidelity moves might be. So we were like, you might decide that if there’s a protocol for your first graders, that is going to be way too confusing at this stage of the game, but there’s another protocol that they’re perfectly comfortable with that serves the same purpose, make that adjustment, make that change. We’re like, but what isn’t Integrity is, like, scrapping the whole lesson and ordering a packet off of Teachers Pay Teachers. We were balancing, what can we do here that is not going to compromise the end goal — the learning targets?

Nicole: We really wanted to honor these teachers who have been teaching for so long, who have so many tools in their tool belt that they don’t need to throw out. So I think a lot of the work we did, too, with the grade-level collaboration, those every-other-week meetings were invaluable because we could sit down together, we could talk through all of those growing pains, and you know, recognize and validate the things that they were doing that were working well.

And then when they had questions about — a lot of the questions we got were like, why are they asking me to do it this way? And so then we were able to come back to either the learning we did, or we were able to pull in another piece of professional learning to try and help teachers understand all of the why in the curriculum design, and talk through what is necessary, and then what is that integrity piece.

Lauren: I really want to point to something that you both said, which was integrity over fidelity. So say it with me. Integrity over fidelity. Ready?

Lauren, Nicole, and Janna: Integrity over fidelity.

Lauren: Because teachers are exhausted by fidelity. It’s a great word, but we’re exhausted by it. Integrity speaks to us in a different way, as you just evidenced by how you used that with your team. We talk a lot about our teachers who just need that extra help moving forward, but sometimes we forget to talk about our early adopters, those ones who jump in with both feet and love it, whatever we ask them to do. So as a district, as a team, how did you celebrate the gift that is someone who wants to try that brand-new thing?

Janna: I think we highlight them every opportunity. We got where they were invaluable to us last year and still are, but they’re so generous with their time too. They would so freely open their doors and invite their peers in, and so we really use that energy to create a site visit model where we could, principals teamed up together with other building principals to create a time where they could free up their teachers to go see someone else in action.

And all of that might have seemed like more work for the poor host teacher. It was also a celebration of how much they had dug in and how willing they were to share their successes with their co-teachers, which was so helpful to us.

And it was also — some of those early adopters got really into some of the community piece of the curriculum. And so a lot of their celebrations that we highlighted were the ways that they got the rest of the community involved in their work and people that they brought into the classroom. In a time where we have a lot less time to do that kind of work, they found the ways to combine the two, the new curriculum with opportunities that they used to have that they feel like they maybe don’t have anymore, and marry the two together, which was really nice.

Nicole: We also tried to highlight them as leaders within their buildings and within the district as much as possible, giving them opportunities to run sessions with teachers, either to preview upcoming materials or to open a Zoom room and let teachers at their own grade level pop in and ask them questions.

We also tried to rally everyone together in just saying like, change is hard, and we want you to find your marigold. So I don’t know if you guys have ever heard of the idea of the marigolds being the companion plant, and so, you know, we gave little flower pens to everyone and at each session we ask them to either write a thank you note to their marigold or make sure that they leave a little treat for their marigold or something to just remind everyone that, you know, find your person that’s going to lift you up and keep you going through this whole thing.

Lauren: That’s really lovely. And what a great way to example gratitude through hardship and really remember that we’re all in this together, and it’s best to be side by side.

So you are now in your second year of this implementation, and one of the things that I love when you talk about is that you really held onto that go slow to go fast. So you stepped into a major curriculum change in small chunks. Tell us a little bit about that.

Janna: When we mapped it out, we worked with one of our consultants to say, OK, in year one, these are going to be the things that we all do, and the curriculum we use is built on four modules. We said everyone’s going to, you know, attempt to get through these, and we paced them out, and then we realized as things were going that we were definitely not going to get very far through that last module.

And so then we paired back, and we recalibrated and decided what was possible in year one so that it could be done well instead of just hurling information at kids and moving on to the next lesson. So that was really helpful, I think, to shift our expectations once we were actually living it.

The other thing I think of in K through two — it was beyond knowledge-building curriculum, being a really significant way, a shift for the way we taught reading and did small group instruction. It was also a really significant shift for how teachers teach writing, and so that felt like a really big thing on top of the reading piece last year. We are really digging more into writing this year. We started with some professional development last spring to set the stage, and that’s really where a lot of our work is taking us right now, digging more into the writing piece in K through two.

Nicole: We did set up an instructional priority for us last year that was shared widely with teachers, and what we would come back to is this idea of really focusing on language comprehension through read-aloud and access to complex texts.

We wanted teachers to really get comfortable with that piece of the shift, and as all the questions about writing were coming out, we were taking it all in and setting ourselves up for this next phase, which is now like, OK, how does writing look? But reminding them we’re not going to be good at everything all at once, so just focus on this idea of language comprehension through rich experience with complex texts, and now we’re really getting into why writing is designed this way, how is writing in service of reading comprehension, and trying to phase it in so that teachers are getting good at one thing before we’re moving into something totally new.

Lauren: Very smart. So as we start to wrap up and think about what our takeaways are, if you could leave this group of brilliant people with one high-leverage practice, one thing that you did that you felt has carried through and made a difference from start to finish — well, not finish, you’re never finished, but from start to now. What’s one thing that you would recommend?

Janna: I think that having the luxury of that year we did for professional learning is probably very unrealistic in most cases, especially with some of the state’s requirements around HQIM adoption. But I would say having that really dedicated untouchable time for partnership cross district that has, I don’t think we’ve ever seen teachers lean on each other as much as they have throughout this, and it’s — our five buildings almost operated in like their independent silos.

And this has very much been like, because there’s district positions involved, has brought everyone together, and it’s allowed for that in-building collaboration and that very protected time. But the district has ensured that happens monthly across the schools as well as during our professional development hours on Wednesday afternoons.

So I think that suffering in silence in those silos would not have ensured a smooth rollout for this.

Nicole: The professional learning was what grounded us, and the relationship-building has been what’s sustained us, I think, just having that time and people feeling safe to ask questions or air grievances that we can follow up on because they trust us when they’re not understanding or trust us when they don’t agree with something. Having built that, just like Janna said, across the district now, like we have teachers saying, oh yeah, the teacher from this school just text me and asked me how I did that and they really didn’t know each other before, and now they’re in partnership with each other.

Lauren: It’s really remarkable what relationship-building can do.

Janna: One more thing I would add on, just as a quick plug. Our leadership — principals and assistant principals — engage with most of the professional learning alongside their teachers, and I think that went a long way because our principals and assistant principals have not taught knowledge-building curriculum before, and as the evaluators in the building, I think they were then able to understand the massive shifts that their teachers were making, but also have like a better understanding of what they were looking for in classrooms.

But why is that happening that way? And that was really important to our teachers, because they were accustomed to someone coming in and knowing that they were delivering small-group instruction using a leveled reader or conferring with a student, and so they felt uncomfortable perhaps with some of the new practices that they were using, and wanted to know that their building leaders understood why.

Nicole: And to add to that, they also really included themselves, and still do, in that grade-level collaboration time. So they were part of the conversations we were having about the why or the how, and the “I don’t understand.” They were part of that group mentality that we were all learning together. So that was really helpful.

Lauren: I appreciate you sharing that thought. It is so critical that everyone — everyone — is working to learn together. So as we start to think about what Janna and Nicole have shared with us today, we certainly know without anybody having said it out loud, that change is never simple. It’s never easy, and they have given us a lot of great thoughts and strategies around the steps that they took.

They would also tell you, I think, freely, and have already, that it’s been bumpy and there have been moments where they’ve had to reroute and think again. But we’ve sort of worked through a couple of things that we like to share that wrap up what Marshfield has done that they found successful. And one of the very first practices that I think we can all agree on is that you agreed to learn together. And that made a huge difference moving forward. You agreed to be partners in learning, so teachers, administrators, superintendents, coaches, all sat at the table together and learned side by side, shoulder to shoulder, reducing what sometimes feels like a hierarchy.

My favorite thing that you did is, you pointed to each other and those who were doing great things — you pointed out problems that other team members were having, and you pointed to solutions together. So you were constantly trying to shed bright light on good things that were happening and on collective struggles.

So I think that’s a really impressive element of what you’ve been able to scale. And finally, you gave permission to your teachers and your team to fail forward, which is kind of an overused term nowadays, but to just let people into the room and see how they do what they do, permission to ask hard questions, permission to push back, and want something different or want something more.

So we’re just so grateful that you’re willing to come and share that information with us. I have one final question that goes to both of you that you have to answer out loud. We want to know what keeps your heart in this work, because we know it’s hard. We know there’s not a lot that’s easy about what you do when you walk in the door every day.

So take a moment for us and jot down on that Post-it note what keeps your heart in this work, and I will gladly answer that question while you write. What keeps my heart in this work are the very human beings sitting in this room — listening to your stories, hearing how you’re solving really hard problems, how you’re solutioning and strategizing, and you’re making sure everybody has a voice and opportunity to spend time together. It’s inspiring.

Janna and Nicole, why don’t you tell us what keeps your hearts in this work?

Janna: I think what keeps my heart in this work is the people, the teachers, the students, and the community. And I think back to my first teaching days, I was in Washington Heights, in New York City, in a very underfunded school community.

And when I think back to that now, there is no reason why those children were not deserving of the same access to complex text, and that we expect all children to have access to these materials, and I think that that is, if I can really drill it down, that’s where my heart is, that this is in service of all students everywhere.

Nicole: For me, the relationships, the joy I get from seeing children and teachers learn together, alongside each other, and just the work of the heart.

Lauren: It is heart work, isn’t it? Yes. Appropriately titled, thank you so much for joining us on this panel. It’s been so fun. We appreciate y’all. Thank you.

This episode of Heart Work is produced by Justyna Welsh, Anise Lee, Danny McPadden, and me. Editing and mixing by Fraser Allen. Artwork by Ellen Forsyth. Our executive producer is David McGinty. Music is from Universal Production Music. A big thank you to all the educators and students who opened up their classrooms and shared their stories with us for this episode. Heart Work is brought to you by Imagine Learning.

Return to Collection

About the Host

Lauren Keeling is a seasoned education professional with a unique blend of experiences. A former broadcast journalist, elementary teacher, and principal, she now combines her passion for education with her love of storytelling at Imagine Learning. Above all, Lauren is a dedicated literacy advocate pursuing a doctorate in Leadership with a focus on Public and Non-Profit Organizations to further her impact on education nationwide.

An image of Lauren Keeling.

Join the Club

Heart Work is our platform for telling educators’ stories. Sign up for the Heart Work Club to be among the first to share yours. You’ll also get the latest podcast episodes, articles, and exclusive content delivered straight to your inbox.

January 8, 2026 9:00 am

StudySync 2027 Edition Launches as Part of Imagine Learning’s Full ELA Suite

Leading 6–12 ELA program now part of Imagine Learning’s full K–12 core curriculum lineup

Tempe, Arizona — January 8, 2026 — Imagine Learning today announced that StudySync®, the award-winning English language arts (ELA) program for grades 6–12, is now officially part of its core curriculum portfolio. Alongside the launch of a newly refreshed 2027 edition, this move marks a major milestone in Imagine Learning’s expansion into a full K–12 core ELA suite.

Trusted by thousands of schools for its blend of academic rigor and real-world relevance, StudySync now enters its next chapter with strengthened alignment to the science of reading, a refreshed user experience, and enhanced tools for knowledge building and writing instruction.

“StudySync has always been about helping students connect deeply with literature and ideas through engaging, multimedia-rich instruction,” said Robert Romano, founder of StudySync. “Joining Imagine Learning — and launching this 2027 edition — takes that vision even further. We’re proud to offer classrooms a solution that meets research-based standards while remaining deeply engaging for today’s learners.”

With this launch, Imagine Learning now offers a fully integrated ELA pathway from kindergarten through high school. Educators seeking comprehensive, standards-aligned solutions can now pair StudySync (6–12) with Dragonfly (K–5) — a powerful combination designed by the same team of instructional experts and backed by Imagine Learning’s broader assessment and support ecosystem.

The 2027 edition of StudySync features:

  • A restructured middle school sequence built around deeper knowledge-building themes
  • Stronger fluency, vocabulary, and sentence composition scaffolds grounded in the science of reading
  • A streamlined Teacher Edition with improved usability and pacing tools
  • Updated WritePrecise feedback tools and a refreshed design for both print and digital formats

“StudySync and Dragonfly reflect our commitment to building high-quality curriculum that meets the needs of real classrooms,” said Kinsey Rawe, Executive Vice President & Chief Product Officer at Imagine Learning. “With the launch of StudySync’s new edition, we’re strengthening our ability to support educators with cohesive, research-grounded tools across every stage of literacy instruction.”

The StudySync 2027 edition is now available for review, demo, and purchase. Visit imaginelearning.com/studysync to explore the program and plan for upcoming adoptions.

About Imagine Learning

Imagine Learning creates K–12 learning solutions that support the boundless potential of students in more than half the districts nationwide. Empowered with data and insights from educators, we innovate to shape the future of education with a robust, digital-first portfolio of school services and core, courseware, and supplemental solutions.

Learn More

January 6, 2026 8:00 am

Imagine Learning Announces Imagine IM Maryland to Support Maryland’s Revised Mathematics Standards

Targeted rollout to deliver MCCRS-aligned, IM-certified® curriculum starting back-to-school 2026.

Tempe, Arizona — January 6, 2026 — Imagine Learning, a leading provider of core curriculum solutions in the U.S., today announced its targeted development and rollout of a Maryland-specific version of its Imagine IM core math curriculum. Aligned to the state’s Revised Maryland College and Career Ready Standards (MCCRS) and powered by Illustrative Mathematics®, Imagine IM Maryland will support Maryland districts as they prepare to implement the new standards over the next 3 years.  

MCCRS-aligned K–8 content will be available for back-to-school 2026, with Integrated Algebra 1 and Integrated Algebra 2 following, in accordance with the state’s rollout schedule. 

“Imagine Learning is honored to have supported Maryland educators for many years – including key partners such as Montgomery, Dorchester, and Cecil counties — and we remain fully committed to supporting them throughout this transition,” said Kinsey Rawe, Executive Vice President and Chief Product Officer at Imagine Learning. “Together with Maryland educators and Illustrative Mathematics, we’re shaping a strong path forward — anchored in a curriculum teachers know and trust, and supported by a dedicated team of professional learning experts. 

Imagine IM Maryland maintains the core tenets of Illustrative Mathematics’ research-backed, problem-based approach while incorporating practical enhancements based on years of classroom insight. The solution will be delivered to fit local preferences and will include Imagine Learning’s professional learning pathways to support strong implementation from day one. 

“Maryland’s revised standards call for coherent, engaging mathematics instruction,” said Kristin Umland, CEO and cofounder of Illustrative Mathematics. “Imagine IM Maryland is designed to support teachers with high-quality, problem-based materials aligned to MCCRS, helping them focus on what matters most: supporting students as mathematical thinkers and doers.” 

“This curriculum has helped us build a shared language around problem-solving — across grade levels, buildings, and student groups. It’s not just about what’s in the materials, but how it brings our teachers together around what great math instruction looks like,” said Dr. Jessie Kubek, Instructional Coordinator for Professional Development, Elementary Mathematics, at Cecil County Public Schools. 

Imagine Learning currently supports more than half the districts in the U.S., serving over 18 million students. Its partnership with Illustrative Mathematics spans multiple national and state-specific implementations of IM® v.360 — including New York City, where grades 3–8 math proficiency rose by 3.5 points in one year; Los Angeles, where schools with strong Imagine IM implementations moved 8 points closer to standard on the Smarter Balanced Assessment; and Philadelphia, where third-grade math scores jumped 13 percentage points on the PSSA. In Maryland, Imagine Learning is already working with nearly 250 schools — providing local insight and a strong foundation for what’s next. 

Districts interested in learning more or previewing draft alignment materials can contact Imagine Learning at imaginelearning.com/contact.  

About Illustrative Mathematics 

Illustrative Mathematics (IM) is a nonprofit organization dedicated to creating a world where all learners know, use, and enjoy mathematics. IM provides high-quality instructional materials, professional learning, and a community to support all students’ mathematical growth. Learn more at IllustrativeMathematics.org. 
 

About Imagine Learning

Imagine Learning is the largest provider of digital-first PreK–12 solutions in the United States, serving more than 18 million students in more than half the districts nationwide. Through its core, supplemental, assessment, and professional services offerings, Imagine Learning delivers flexible, data-informed instruction that meets each student’s unique learning path. 

Learn More

Improved Search in Imagine Math Pathway Library 

Imagine IM

December 2025

Find learning pathways faster using new “Pathway Name” filter

We’ve expanded the search filters in Imagine Math’s pathway library to include “Pathway Name,” making it easier to find pathways aligned to your core curriculum. Just enter the name of your core program to quickly locate pathways that match its scope and sequence, saving time and improving alignment with instruction. 

Learn More
Imagine Math Pathway name filter

Heart Work / Rewriting a Literacy Crisis / Episode 3

Rewriting a Literacy Crisis

Listen on Spotify
Listen on Apple Podcasts

Episode 3: It Takes Time and It Definitely Takes Heart

Back in Pendergast, the ultimate question: Did it work? In this final episode, Lauren returns to the district to find out and speaks with renowned education writer Natalie Wexler on the missing piece in reading instruction. Could the answer have been in front of us all along? Listen and find out.

From Imagine Learning, I’m Lauren Keeling, and you’re listening to Heart Work, an honest profile of America’s educators.

When you care so deeply, you make hard choices, and you do hard things, and you fail forward, and you try again, because that’s what great teachers do. They push forward even when it seems impossible, and they come out on the other end saying, “Whew, that was a wreck, but man, did this go really well! I can’t wait to try both of those things again and see how I can make it even better.”

Every teacher I talked to, every administrator I talked to, every human in those two districts that I spoke with — they weren’t interested in being right; they were really interested in doing right.

It’s been three years since the Pendergast Elementary School District overhauled how they teach reading. In episode one, we saw the shift up close.

A playground map showing Arizona and its neighboring states.

A painted playground map shows Arizona and its neighboring states.

The question now is simple: Did it work? Today, I’ll find out, and I’ll also talk with one of the leading voices in the movement to rethink how we teach reading comprehension.

Natalie Wexler: Let me see if I can start my video now. Yeah, there I am. OK.

My name is Natalie Wexler. I am an education writer. I’ve written a book called The Knowledge Gap — The Hidden Cause of America’s Broken Education System and How to Fix It, and I have a new book coming out in January called Beyond the Science of Reading: Connecting Literacy Instruction to the Science of Learning.

I started writing about education because it seemed incredibly important to me — particularly how we can raise education outcomes for all kids, but also narrow the gap between kids at the upper and lower ends of the socioeconomic spectrum.

Lauren: How did you come to identify the knowledge gap as something that was critical to education?

Natalie: It seemed to me there was a missing piece that could make teachers’ jobs easier and students’ jobs of learning easier as well. The term science of reading has often come to be defined as just more phonics, and it’s way more complicated than that.

There is a lot of scientific evidence related to reading and reading comprehension that should be included in the term science of reading, but it often gets left out. And there are ways in which the standard approach to teaching reading comprehension also conflicts fairly dramatically with what science tells us about how that process works. 

Having knowledge of the topic you’re reading about is really helpful to comprehension, and beyond that, the more general knowledge and vocabulary you have, and particularly more academic kinds of knowledge and vocabulary, the easier it is for you to understand just about anything you try to read. So you become a better general reader with more of that general knowledge.

Natalie’s point echoes what I first learned from her book, The Knowledge Gap, that a lot of students are unfairly disadvantaged because they don’t have adequate background knowledge about certain topics or subjects. And that missing knowledge creates a gap between being able to read the words on a page and actually understanding what those words mean.

That message also resonated with Pendergast’s principal, Mr. Gonzalez. Natalie Wexler’s work helped shift the way he thought about reading — and about how it should be taught.

Mr. Gonzalez: I go back to the research from Natalie Wexler. In her book, she talks about baseball, right? And if we don’t have that background, then how are we going to read a book about baseball?

It’s meaningless to us, right? But if you played baseball and you read other books about baseball, then you’re going to comprehend what you’re reading. The ability to dive deep within that text is so important for comprehension, especially with our students who are English language learners. Really developing those opportunities for students to go back and cite text evidence has really helped us in closing that achievement gap.

Ms. Barrett: We did Basel. We taught Basel. Monday, we did this. Tuesday, we did this. Wednesday, we did this.

An educator stands out front of her classroom.

Ms. Barrett stands outside her classroom, ready to welcome her students as the day begins.

That’s Ms. Barrett — she teaches second grade and is who we’d call in administration, an early adopter.

Ms. Barrett: Whereas now, it’s not on a five-day schedule. It’s inclusive. It flows from topic to topic. It’s seamless. The kids enjoy it, and it just makes learning a lot more fun.

(Students singing)

Ms. Barrett (to students): Good job, guys. So I want you to go back and look at the poem, OK, and then we’re going to share those out, and then we’re going to talk about it.

Ms. Barrett: When we’re doing our teaching, the first unit is building that background knowledge, but then the modules build on each other, and so a lot of times my kids are taking ownership and they’re taking leadership, and I can step away and I can let them teach.

Lauren: So you get to facilitate?

Ms. Barrett: Right.

Lauren: How does that feel?

Ms. Barrett: It feels really good. Yeah, it feels really good.

There’s this old phrase, “the sage on the stage”. It refers to a teaching style where the teacher delivers information, often through a lecture or presentation, and students are expected to sit, listen, and absorb.

I’m sure we’ve all experienced that at some point in our lives. But in this classroom, there’s no stage. Students are moving around, leaning into the work, excited to be learning. Ms. Barrett is crouched beside a table, asking a question, and really listening to the answer. She’s inviting students to participate in the process of learning, not just leading it.

Natalie: Kids, when they are still learning to decode, the main way they’re going to be acquiring knowledge is not through their own individual reading. It’s going to be through oral language and listening to books being read aloud and talking about the content of those books, using the vocabulary that they’ve just heard in those books, that’s going to transfer that information to long term memory.

Ms. Barrett (to students): Why do they get a scarf for Pat? Hmm, why do they get a scarf for Pat? Because it’s cold and he needs to what?

Student 1: Be warm.

Ms. Barrett: They want to be warm. So what does James — how does it relate back to our reading? To being an independent reader?

Student: I can read in my head.

Ms. Barrett: Oh, you can read in your head? Nice. That’s awesome. Richard?

Student 2: I can read quietly.

Ms. Barrett: You can read quietly.

Student 3: I can read very big words.

Ms. Barrett: You can read very big words.

Natalie: Eventually, when their foundational reading skills catch up to where their background knowledge is, the background knowledge will kick in to enable them to read independently about a range of topics.

Lauren: Do you feel like the children are growing in that space?

Ms. Barrett: Absolutely. They’re growing with their confidence. They’re growing with their communication from peer to peer and from peer to teacher. The kids just love to dive in, and they have become very independent and excited to learn.

I see that independence in the way they talk about their work.

Lauren: So I don’t know what the centers are. Can you explain the centers to me?

Student 1: First, we put up the timer for 15 or 20 minutes, and then we start our centers.

Student 2: There’s a writing one, there’s a reading, there’s goldfish, there’s Ms. Barrett. We have computers. Wherever our names are, we do that center.

Student 3: Like, if we have writing, we just bring our book with us and we write in it.

Student 1: We write about butterflies sometimes and the weekend.

Student 2: When the timer goes off, we switch centers and it keeps going until it’s lunch.

A young student works on a smartboard during a classroom activity.

A young student in Ms. Gabhart’s class works on the smartboard during a classroom activity.

Natalie: Kids get it, and I mean, I’ve been in classrooms where they don’t want the teacher to stop reading. They still have things to say when it’s time for the discussion to end. There’s this excitement in the air. And that is just as much about teaching reading as teaching phonemic awareness and phonics and all of those things that also need to be taught.

Ms. Irvin: In module four in fourth grade, the students have to identify a service project that they’re going to work together on. We spend some time talking about how kids make a difference in their community. They come up with a list of issues they feel that they can impact in their community, and then they start working on a project for that.  

Ms. Irvin tells me about the PSAs her students are creating.  

Ms. Irvin: One year, my kids worked on collecting items for the Phoenix Children’s Hospital, and this year, they have identified our lost and found as a huge problem on our campus. It was overflowing with bags of clothes. And so they are working to get that all organized, get it out to the students so they can start reclaiming their items. We have a whole list of videos and informational text that teaches them about other students and kids who have made a difference in their community, and their end result is that they create a PSA about the results that they had.  

(Student conversation) 

Lauren: Did they get excited about this? Do they love this?  

Ms. Irvin: Oh, they’re very excited about it. They love asking everyday, “Can I go work on the lost and found? I finished my work. Can I go work on lost and found?” And so they’re really involved in it.

Ms. Johnson: So with the PSA, do we need to understand our audience? Okay, so let’s put that on our list as well.

In Ms. Johnson’s seventh-grade class, the PSA’s addressed a global issue: plastic pollution.

The contrast struck me. The fourth graders took on a problem they saw every day. By seventh grade, they had the knowledge and the words to reach further, to connect something global back to their own community.

Student 1: So, should we try to expand this to more than just Avondale, Glendale?

Student 2: Well, if we focus on Avondale, then we could do something that relates to people who live in Arizona?

Student 1: And then — and then build up to make it bigger?

Student 2: And we can bring more awareness to it, yeah.

Student 1: Yeah, good idea.

Student 2: So we’ll focus on recycling, instead of the alternatives?

A group of students collaborate in front of handwritten posters.

A group of students collaborate in front of handwritten posters, discussing their ideas during a classroom activity.

Ms. Johnson: I’m starting to see my students bring in ideas and things that they’ve learned in other classes to solidify their statements, and that is a neat thing. Many of them have picked up decoding skills, and their vocabulary has expanded. They’re able to read with better flow. So all of the pieces seem to come together at the end of the school year.

It’s been kind of funny because one of my students wanted an extra recess or something. He made a ten-slide PowerPoint with his argument, stating what he wanted, why he wanted it, and why he felt he could get it. So we did a little negotiating, and it worked. So it was fun. He got an extra recess. And so it was really fun. And that’s the beauty of it, when they start applying those skills that I have taught them.

In Pendergast, the changes seem to be working. And in Philadelphia, I saw what’s possible when educators commit to doing things differently.

Lauren: But, if you were to point to some specific data or some evidence. You know, when your district comes to you and says, “Prove to me that this is working,” how would you do that?

Ms. Irvin: Consistently, I’ve had some of the highest scores in the state reading assessment. My grade level last year, within our own school, had the highest percentage of students passing in all of the grade levels that took it.

Mary: 67% of our kindergarten students showed what was called aggressive growth in their reading at the winter benchmark.

Carina: And we’re anticipating it being higher here at our spring benchmark.

Ms. Johnson: So when we take district pretest, district posttest from the previous year in state testing to the current year and state testing, I see growth every year in my students.

Natalie: Teachers see what’s happening in their classrooms. They know things are changing, but it is harder to get that quantitative data based on what we know about what cognitive science tells us about how important knowledge is to comprehension. We have lots of evidence of that. We don’t need to wait for more experimental evidence in order to make this kind of switch.

In Philadelphia and Pendergast, I saw how the debate over reading plays out in real classrooms.

And at the heart of it all isn’t programs or policies. It’s the teachers who show up every day. And it’s the students doing the hard work of learning. That’s what I’ll carry with me. That no matter the district, the program, or policy, change happens because of them.

Natalie: We’ve been giving kids these excerpts, brief texts, and using them as a means to this end of developing reading comprehension skills and turning reading into this kind of task that you have to do. But there’s another way to approach reading, which is like, this is really fun.

Reading is about so much more than scores or assessments. Through books, I’ve lived a thousand different lives. I’ve traveled to far-off places and spent time with people who exist only on the page.

I don’t think we really learn without stories — without history, without firsthand accounts, without the folklore and the fiction that carry voices across time.

Natalie: There is evidence showing that fiction helps develop empathy, and I think that is what helps develop empathy is that transportation into this other world, into other people’s shoes.

Empathy, perspective, possibility — that’s what reading gives us. That’s why this work matters.

Kelsie: I love seeing my students across my campuses get to be their authentic selves while they’re learning and growing in their classrooms with teachers that are excited to show them what they are able to do and how far they can stretch themselves to meet the expectations, and then go past those expectations and carry lifelong skills into the future.

I hope that whoever listens to this podcast, whatever space you’re in as an educator or administrator or parents or students, I hope that what you walk away knowing is that you’re not alone.

And for the people who are new to change, struggling through the middle of change, or planning for change. You’re just not alone.

For the administrator who’s crying in her office because the change is really hard, and some people that you love are really struggling with it, you’re not alone either. You’ll get there on the other side. And you’ll be glad for it.

Ms. Johnson: That’s when you know students are really learning.

Change takes time, and it definitely takes heart. And while the debates keep going, teachers will be in the classroom, doing the real work.

00:00 Introduction

01:11 A conversation with Natalie Wexler

04:05 The power of making a shift

08:52 Fourth-grade projects with purpose

10:48 Seventh-grade voices for change

12:37 Measuring what really matters

15:53 You are not alone

Return to Collection

About the Host

Lauren Keeling is a seasoned education professional with a unique blend of experiences. A former broadcast journalist, elementary teacher, and principal, she now combines her passion for education with her love of storytelling at Imagine Learning. Above all, Lauren is a dedicated literacy advocate pursuing a doctorate in Leadership with a focus on Public and Non-Profit Organizations to further her impact on education nationwide.

An image of Lauren Keeling.

Join the Club

Heart Work is our platform for telling educators’ stories. Sign up for the Heart Work Club to be among the first to share yours. You’ll also get the latest podcast episodes, articles, and exclusive content delivered straight to your inbox.