Miss W told how research changed her teaching
Can't we learn a lot from a teacher who changed her instruction because of research she read?
Over on ‘stack called Laughing in Special Education, Miss W1 posted an article about what she learned and how she responded when she read a study that made her doubt a practice she had been using throughout her career. Her report, under the headline, “A Shock of a Research Spiral: What Research Really Says About Symbol-Supported Reading for Students with ID” (12 December 2025) provided a humane account of how research changed how she was and will be teaching. Here’s her lede (emphasis in the original):
In my early years as a special ed teacher, I plastered worksheets with little picture symbols above challenging words, convinced it would help my students “read with pictures.” We all assumed symbol-supported text made content more accessible. But a recent review of the research has forced me to pause. I was doing some poking around about literacy in general and saw one study that found students with intellectual and developmental disabilities actually scored lower on comprehension questions when a story included symbol cues, and read slower than when the same text was plain. This caused me to want to dive a little deeper.
Miss W did dive in a bit deeper. She explained that a widespread practice might be deleterious, even though there were “arguments” or “reasons” that the method really, honestly, rationally, ought to be helpful. She went to school and learned that it was not helpful.
What could she do? Well, dang it, she reasoned that she should do what teachers ought to do when they learn that a practice isn’t helping their students: Get that procedure, method, program out of their teaching repertoire and replace it with something that is more efficacious. Do what’s right for the kids!
Yay! I’m over here cheering. And, indeed, in honor of Miss W’s professional response, I’m going to devote a forthcoming post here on Special Education Today to summarizing research—there are at least seven studies—about what methods, procedures, approaches, and practices are effective for teaching early reading to students with intellectual disabilities. Stay tuned!
Footnote
Miss W does not put a period after the initial for her last surname. I’m honoring that style here.