Maya Valencia Goodall sees speaking as the foundation for reading comprehension

Speaking practice is the foundation for reading comprehension. When students routinely produce language—rehearsing vocabulary, syntax, and discourse through structured academic talk—they build the oral language that reading comprehension draws upon. The term *academic *is used intentionally here to emphasize the need for students to be able to access the complex academic language found in most upper-elementary and secondary texts. This is the shared mis- sion of ELA and ELD teachers: all reading teachers are language teachers, and all language teachers are reading teachers.

Why Speaking Comes First

Our brains are wired for language before print—reading maps speech to text (Ehri, 2005; Scarborough, 2001). But saying that our brains are wired for language does not mean humans learn language without teaching and practice. We learn language by hearing it and by speaking it out loud in meaningful exchanges and interactions with others.

**Oral language **refers to the ability to use spoken language for communication. Importantly, oral language and reading develop reciprocally: speaking out loud strengthens reading comprehension, and reading comprehension reinforces oracy (Ehri, 2005; Scarborough, 2001). Students may decode *photosynthesis *accurately yet fail to comprehend it if they have not spoken about it, used it in grammatically complete language frames*, and connected it to real-world concepts (Hammond and Goldenberg, 2021). For multilingual learners, the link is even more direct: gains in spoken English predict gains in reading comprehension (August and Shanahan, 2006; Goldenberg and Cárdenas-Hagan, 2023).

**Key idea: **Decoding enables access to written words; speaking builds the meaning system that makes those written words comprehensible.

*Language frames are structured scaffolds that support students in producing more advanced language than they could independently. They support all students to engage in intellectually rigorous and grade-level-appropriate learning. Unlike sentence starters, which are open-ended prompts focused on generating ideas (e.g., “My favorite part of the story was”), language frames highlight specific grammatical and linguistic structures needed to convey meaning (e.g., “The is larger than the ”).

Redefining Oral Language: From Teacher Talk to Student Production

Historically, *oral language *was interpreted as teacher talk—modeling, explaining, and thinking aloud—while students listened. Today, oral language must mean **students practicing and producing language: **structured, purpose-driven speaking turns that are planned, coached, and assessed. This is essential for second- language development (Swain, 2000) and for strengthening comprehension pathways for all students, including monolinguals (Deans for Impact, 2015; Archer and Hughes, 2011).

What it looks like:

• Brief, repeated partner exchanges using targeted **language frames **that are grammatically complete and leave space for academic vocabulary.
• Practice cycles: I do—We do—You do (in talk)—Read it—Write it—Say it again with elaboration.
• Immediate, task-focused corrective feedback with student uptake (repeat-backs), so new syntactic structures, vocabulary, and discourse structures enter long-term memory (Shute, 2008; Ellis, 2000).

From Structured Literacy to Structured Multiliteracy

At its core, structured literacy centers oral language for instruction. The International Dyslexia Association’s structured literacy info- map identifies the *what *of instruction—phonology, orthography, syntax, morphology, semantics, discourse—and the how—explicit, systematic, cumulative, data-driven, interactive (IDA, 2023). For multilingual learners, we extend the term to structured multiliteracy: the same evidence-based content and methods, enriched with second-language acquisition (SLA) techniques and asset-oriented use of students’ first languages.

Why the extension matters:

• The IDA components are both oral-language and print systems; speaking practice operationalizes them for all learners.
• Second-language acquisition research highlights high-leverage routines—comprehensible input and output, focus on speaking practice, corrective feedback—that accelerate language proficiency and reading comprehension (Krashen, 1977; Swain, 2000; Hopman and MacDonald, 2018).

Speaking Practice as the Route to Comprehension

Mechanisms that make speaking foundational:

1. **Semantic loading: **Intentional speaking practice, which can include having students pronounce a word or morpheme to activate the phonological processor. This supports meaning making by attaching meanings to words and morphemes, thus supporting print comprehension and moving the word(s) into long-term memory (Ehri, 2005).
2. **Syntactic bootstrapping: **Providing students with support using language frames can help them practice using new vocabulary. Language frames can also be used for practicing grammar and syntactic structures. This type of supported speaking practice helps build the syntactic parsing skills needed for comprehending text (Scarborough, 2001).
3. **Discourse knowledge: **Using language frames (explain, compare–contrast, argue, narrative) in student talk prepares them to process and write using those same text structures (IDA, 2021; TeachingWorks, n.d.).
4. **Cognitive strengthening: **Multilingual experience—and the speaking it entails—enhances executive function and flexible attention, which benefit comprehension (Bialystok, 2011; Kuhl, 2011).

Alignment for ELA and ELD: One Playbook

Nonnegotiables both ELA and ELD educators own:

• Every literacy lesson includes **planned student talk **tied to decoding/comprehension targets.
• Talk-to-text mapping: New vocabulary and language frames are spoken first, then read in decodable/grade-level text, then used in writing.
• Diagnostic talk checks: Quick verbal probes of word meaning, grammar, and discourse moves guide instruction in real time.
• **Feedback with uptake: **Specific, immediate corrections with student repeat-backs.
• Cross-linguistic bridges (for multilingual learners and English-variety speakers): Leverage first-language knowledge of phonology, morphology, and syntax to speed transfer (August and Shanahan, 2006; Bialystok, 2011).

Classroom Playbook: Speaking- First Routines You Can Use Tomorrow

Drawing from OL&LA and the *Teaching Reading Sourcebook *(Honig et al., 2018), these routines integrate structured speaking practice with literacy instruction, which is beneficial to all students:

1. **Frame–rehearse–read–write–****rehearse: **Introduce a grammatically complete language frame with academic vocabulary; rehearse with partners; read a connected passage; write short responses; rehearse again with elaboration.
2. **Morphology “say–build–read”: **Say the base/morpheme and meaning; build two derived words orally in a sentence; then read and write the words in text. For multilingual learners, connect to morphemes in the first language whenever possible.
3. **Syntax switchbacks: **Students restate a content idea in two target forms (e.g., simple—complex), then find the same structure in a text.
4. **Discourse ladders: **Students orally construct narratives or explanations using signal words (because, however, therefore) before reading the same discourse pattern.
5. **Feedback with uptake: **Teacher recasts; student immediately repeats the corrected form; peers then apply it.

Why This Matters—for Language Learning and Reading

For Multilingual Learners, comprehensible output accelerates form–meaning connections that transfer directly to comprehension (Swain, 2000; August & Shanahan, 2006).

For all students, frequent production strengthens the language systems (phonology → morphology → syntax → semantics → discourse) that Structured Multiliteracy teaches explicitly (IDA, 2021/2023; Ehri, 2005; Scarborough, 2001).

Speaking practice is not an add-on. It is the foundation of comprehension in both spoken and written form and is the bridge between structured literacy and second-language acquisition—what we call structured multiliteracy for multilingual learners. When ELA and ELD teams plan for student production of language every day, readers of all backgrounds gain equitable access to meaning in text.

References

Archer, A. L., and Hughes, C. A. (2011). *Explicit Instruction: Effective and Efficient Teaching. *Guilford.

Arrendondo, M., and Cárdenas- Hagan, E. (2021). “Advancing Literacy for Bilingual and Multilingual Students: The role of structured literacy.” Journal of Literacy Research.

August, D., and Shanahan, T. (Eds.). (2006). Developing Literacy in Second-Language Learners. Lawrence Erlbaum.

Bialystok, E. (2011). “Reshaping the Mind: The benefits of bilingualism.” Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65(4), 229–235.

Deans for Impact. (2015). The Science of Learning.

Ehri, L. C. (2005). “Learning to Read Words: Theory, findings, and issues.” Scientific Studies of Reading.

Ellis, R. (2000). Learning a Second Language Through Interaction. John Benjamins.

Goldenberg, C., and Cárdenas-Hagan, E. (2023). “Literacy Research on English Learners: Past, present, and future.” The Reading League Journal.

Honig, B., Diamond, L., and Gutlohn, L. (2018). Teaching Reading Sourcebook (3rd ed.). CORE.

Hopman, E. W. M., and MacDonald, M. C. (2018). “Production Practice During Language Learning Improves Comprehension.” Psychological Science.

International Dyslexia Association. (2021). “Structured Literacy: An Introductory Guide”

International Dyslexia Association. (2023). Structured Literacy Infomap.

Krashen, S. (1977). “Some Issues Relating to the Monitor Model.” On TESOL, 77.

Kuhl, P. K. (2011). “Early Language Learning and the Social Brain.” PNAS, 108(Suppl 3), 13516–13521.

Scarborough, H. S. (2001). “Connecting Early Language and Literacy to Later Reading (Dis)abilities.” In Handbook of Early Literacy Research, Vol. 1.

Shute, V. (2008). “Focus on Formative Feedback.” Review of Educational Research.

Swain, M., and Lapkin, S. (1995/2000). Output hypothesis and the role of production in second-language learning.

TeachingWords. (n.d.). “High-leverage Practices.”https://library.teachingworks. org/curriculum-resources/high-leverage-practices

Maya Valencia Goodall, MA MEd, is a pioneering force in education, driven by a singular mission: to ensure that every student, regardless of their linguistic background, receives the literacy and language instruction they both need and deserve. As co-creator of OL&LA (Online Language & Literacy Academy), co-founder of Lingual Learning, and co-creator of Lexia English within Rosetta Stone/Lexia Learning, her journey has been defined by innovation, impact, and unwavering dedication to empowering diverse learners. Today, she continues to shape the educational landscape as a leader in her role as chief strategy officer at CORE Learning.