"Mom, I can't do it. I won't do it," Amir sobbed. "I'm dumb, I'm stupid, I'm confused. John told the other kids that 'Amir's dumber than a rock.'"

Sadly, struggling readers, such as children with dyslexia, often make comments like this. They believe and suffer from them.

Unfortunately and unknowingly, school personnel and parents often fuel the struggles propelling these beliefs. They do this by arguing over teaching methods, even asking courts to mandate their method of choice. For struggling readers, methods are important, but for many not paramount. Their instruction is explicit and systematic; it introduces new concepts in logical sequences that build on their competencies.

So, what's sustaining and intensifying the readers' struggles? Often, it's the absence of critical instructional ingredients, ones that educational marketers don't promote. The reason is straightforward: They're free.

Two of these critical ingredients are self-efficacy and coordinated consistency — ingredients that are easy to understand and, in many cases, easy to implement. To help struggling readers, they're so important that teachers, IEP teams and other school personnel should apply them throughout the day, whenever they're needed. "Throughout" includes lunch, recess, homework, science, social studies, wood shop, home room, wrestling practice, creative arts, reading and writing instruction, and so on.

Self-efficacy

In practical and productive ways, strong self-efficacy is the struggling reader's realistic belief, based on experience, that he (or she) can succeed on a particular task if he uses the right strategy and makes a moderate and sometimes persistent effort. This realistic "I can do it" ingredient is based on Bandura's seminal work in identifying and defining self-efficacy.

Unfortunately, incessant struggle and failure has taught many struggling readers to believe they "can't" succeed, even on tasks well within their abilities. Thus, Amir's belief may be wrong, but as previously noted, is typical of many struggling readers: "I'm stupid. Why try? I'll struggle, fail and look like a fool."

So, what happens to the Amirs of the world? Compared to peers with realistically strong self-efficacy, how do they do in school? Professors Dale H. Schunk and Barry Zimmerman summarized the effects:

"Self-efficacy influence[s] task choice, effort, persistence and achievement. Compared with students who doubt their learning capacities, those who have a sense of efficacy for [particular tasks] participate more readily, work harder, persist longer when they encounter difficulties and achieve at a higher level ... Students do not engage in activities they believe will lead to negative outcomes."

Clearly, self-efficacy is critical to struggling readers' motivation and behavior, their willingness to attend to tasks, to think about them, to take reasonable chances, to make moderate efforts, to persist, to do what needs to be done. Not surprisingly, many will defend their emotional integrity with passive, indifferent or aggressive behavior.

Going through the motions of learning with thoughtless attention (like staring blankly at tasks) or creating disruptions (like humming loudly or loudly dropping books on the floor) won't accelerate learning. But they will accelerate failure and increase the likelihood of lifelong struggles and scars.

Fortunately, teachers and parents have many easy, simple ways to begin strengthening struggling readers' poor self-efficacy. One essential way, when teachers work directly with struggling readers, is to give them "just right work," work that matches their instructional levels. These are the levels they typically and comfortably achieve before teachers work directly with them.

For reading and related instruction at this level, Professor Emerita Sandra McCormick of The Ohio State University recommends using materials on which students minimally achieve 90 percent word recognition in paragraph reading and accurately answer 70 to 89 percent of comprehension questions. These figures refer to the struggling readers' first reading of the materials.

Another essential way is for teachers to recognize situations in which struggling readers need independent level materials. They need such materials whenever they're asked to work without immediate and direct instruction and support from teachers. Without such involvement from teachers, instructional level materials will frustrate them.

To establish struggling readers' independent levels for passage and similar reading, McCormick recommends that struggling readers quickly and accurately recognize at least 96 percent of words and accurately answer at least 90 percent of comprehension questions. As with instructional level, these figures refer to the first reading of previously unread materials.

Unfortunately, at these levels, some struggling readers will exhibit severe anxiety. In such instances, they need easier activities and materials. For instructional-level materials, it's probably best to increase McCormick's 90 percent word recognition in passage reading to 95 or 97 percent. For independent level, her 96 percent word recognition in passage reading should increase to 99 percent.

Simply put, sticking to any criteria that produce excessive anxiety will undermine struggling readers' academic progress and emotional well-being.

In introducing the instructional and independent levels, I used the phrase essential way. The reason is straightforward. If teachers routinely give struggling readers more demanding materials and activities, they'll frustrate them, dramatically impeding progress in self-efficacy, reading and related areas. Just as important, it may well increase the likelihood of lifelong struggles.

Because the habitual use of just-right instructional and independent-level materials and activities will likely reduce their struggles, it tends to lessen conflicts between parents and children, teachers and children, and parents and teachers. It helps ensure that struggling readers will correctly practice necessary skills and processes. Typically, incorrect practice exacerbates learning and motivational difficulties; correct practice fosters fluency, self-efficacy and motivation.

Another way to strengthen struggling readers' self-efficacy is "stacking the deck." Before introducing new just-right classwork or homework, Juan's teacher can stack the deck by showing him similar just-right work on which he recently succeeded. Then, she can encourage him to briefly explain how he used the strategy on his recent work and how he can use it to succeed on the new work.

When she sees him working effectively, she can reinforce him through comments he values: "Juan, you're making a good effort and using the POWER writing strategy correctly. And from everything I see, you're doing a great job. Nice going." But if he’s working ineffectively, she might say, "Juan, from what I see, you're making a good effort, but not using the POWER strategy. That's probably why you’re struggling. Let's review your POWER cue cards, so your good effort leads to the success."

If struggling readers' homework is at their just-right independent levels, parents can do the same. They can give their children feedback that emphasizes effort, persistence, and the correct use of strategies. Think of this as EPS: effort, persistence and strategy. Juliana's father might say, "Juliana, for 15 minutes you focused on your homework and followed the directions. You didn't give up. You persisted. And you created something you can be proud of. Nice job."

If struggling readers' homework is at their just-right levels, parents will have numerous opportunities to strengthen their children's self-efficacy. Similarly, by ensuring that typical in-home activities — like children learning to brush their teeth or take out the trash — are at their just-right levels, parents create numerous opportunities to offer EPS feedback.

If, however, teachers and parents require struggling readers to work on tasks that are too difficult, laborious and frustrating, they'll intensify learning difficulties and create expectations of failure — expectations that often lead to anxiety, passivity, aggression, conflict and other harmful outcomes.

Coordinated consistency

Teachers can help reverse expectations of failure by consistently — throughout the day — providing struggling readers with just-right materials and activities for classwork and homework, by teaching and encouraging them to use one or two effective strategies for reading, and by giving them feedback that stresses effort, persistence and correct strategy use. While this can prevent struggling readers from getting confused, it also gives them extra practice without creating extra work.

At the beginning of the school year, coordination takes a little extra effort, effort that eases as teachers and parents develop the habit of selecting just-right materials and activities; holding short meetings to coordinate materials, activities and strategies; using EPS feedback; and peppering activities with persuasive comments, like "Ronald, yesterday you correctly read and spelled these three words, and I believe you can use them correctly to write the email you wanted to send your cousin."

Coordination also gets easier and more valuable as teachers and parents see struggling readers struggle less, look less and less perplexed, show greater willingness to try, and take pride in their accomplishments.

The strengthened motivation of struggling readers is one of the great benefits of combining strategies for strengthening self-efficacy with what some experts have called ROCC — a rich, organized, consistent curriculum. In a critical 1990 article on coordinating instruction for struggling readers, Professor Richard Allington and his colleagues stressed the need for "a consistent and coherent curricular plan," not a fragmented one that fosters confusion.

Such plans increase struggling readers' opportunities to practice correctly and see the logic of lessons and activities. They lessen the all-too-common teacher and parent lament, "But he knew it yesterday." As far into the future as imaginable, coordinated instruction will remain critical. So, for struggling readers, schools and teachers need to make ROCC their reality.

Enhancing recommendations

Choice is a way to enhance struggling readers' self-efficacy and motivation. It's flexible and can easily support ROCC. Though most adults appreciate the choices that bookstores, restaurants and clothing retailers give them, it's often missing from struggling readers' programs. To understand the power of choice, answer this question: Would you rather eat at a restaurant that served only egg salad and black coffee or one with a full menu?

So, teachers and parents can greatly help struggling readers by offering them what retailers offer: choice. "Adam, for Wednesday’s homework, choose one of these three assignments. Sheila, spend about five minutes looking at the paired-reading books. Choose one that I'll read to you, or we'll read aloud as a team. In about 10 minutes, let me know how you want to do the reading."

In addition to daily experience, choice's strong motivational power is clear from the research. As reported by John T. Guthrie, professor emeritus and eminent researcher at the University of Maryland: "Studies have confirmed the conventional wisdom that choice is motivating. Children seek to be in command of their environment, rather than being manipulated by powerful others. This need for self-direction can be met in reading instruction through well-designed choices."

Helping struggling readers identify a few personally important short- and long-term goals and integrating them into daily instruction can add value to their perceptions of coordinated instruction. This can create opportunities for teachers to enhance struggling readers' self-efficacy.

Practically speaking, short is five minutes to one day; long is a few days to a few weeks. But for some struggling readers, even 10 minutes is too long. Thus, teachers need to be sure struggling readers have the self-control and ability to earn their personally important goal within a doable time span. With proper instructional and independent level materials and realistic goals, this need not be as difficult as it might sound.

Not surprisingly, by helping struggling readers link many of their reading materials and activities to personally important goals, they may see greater value in the work. "Getting 80 percent will earn me extra recess ... Acing this will keep me on the team ... If I get good grades this week, my dad will be proud of me ... I'll get a better report card if I learn to read better ... To pass the driving test, I need to learn this stuff ... I need three more work-checks to play that game."

The good news

Conceptually, it's fairly easy to embed self-efficacy and consistency into daily programs. Neither cost piles of $50 bills. Teachers, parents and other members of IEP teams can readily adapt the ingredients to their situations.

Typically, it takes a little thinking, a little practice, a few meetings, moderate effort, moderate persistence and a willingness to emphasize the right strategies: just-right independent and instructional level materials and activities, encouraging comments, EPS feedback, choice and personally important goals. And occasionally, it takes an administration to support a few well-focused professional development sessions, followed by on-site consultation and coaching to help teachers help struggling readers now and in the future.

At worst, it's a wonderful investment that can help untold numbers of struggling and proficient readers.

It's also an investment that fosters many of the critical but abstract goals of education: to help children become passionate life-long learners, effective problem-solvers and effective citizens who respect themselves and all of humanity.