Why Consider the IDA Structured Literacy Framework to Inform your Practice
Background
Structured literacy is a term that was initially used by the International Dyslexia Association (IDA). I am often asked why I advocate so strongly for this specific term, isn’t “evidence-based practice” enough to stand behind?
Over the years, I’ve answered this question more times than I can count, and as our advocacy has evolved, so has my response. When DEB (Dyslexia Evidence Based) began, we were fighting a war, not just for recognition, but for survival in a system that was failing our children. We were up against deeply entrenched practices, pseudoscientific interventions, and an education sector where balanced literacy was considered the gold standard, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. At the time, we needed a term that didn’t just say ‘we use evidence’, we needed a term that pointed directly to the kind of evidence that works for students with dyslexia and others with reading difficulties. ‘Structured literacy’ did exactly that.
It gave us and still does a common framework, focus and language.
Unlike the vague umbrella of “evidence-based practice,” which can mean many different things to many different people, including ineffective programmes with limited or questionable research. The IDA Structured Literacy framework leaves little room for misinterpretation. It clearly defines what effective literacy instruction should look like: explicit, systematic, cumulative, diagnostic, and responsive. It is grounded in decades of research from the Science of Reading, and it is the approach most likely to benefit not just children with dyslexia, but all learners.
It also gave families knowledge, a phrase they could use when walking into school meetings, trying to advocate for their child. Saying “my child needs structured literacy” is very different from saying “we want something evidence-based,” especially when the evidence being used by schools may be outdated, misinterpreted, or entirely inappropriate for struggling readers. It also provides a platform for educators to start their learning journey.
As a community, we need, and still need to be clear, specific, and consistent. The term ‘Structured Literacy’ keeps the focus on what works and protects against the watering down of practice in the name of flexibility or preference.
So, while the term may have started as a rallying cry for dyslexia advocates, it has become much more. It is a shorthand for high-quality, research-aligned instruction. It is a safeguard against ineffective programmes. And it is a promise that all children, regardless of diagnosis or label, deserve to be taught in a way that gives them the best chance to read.
Direct link to Infograpgh on the IDA website
Now more than ever, we need a common framework to understand what Structured Literacy is, and when I say this, I mean what it actually looks like in your classroom. The IDA Framework can and will support your classroom practice, because it provides a clear list of instructional content and principles that must be considered when planning, teaching, and assessing literacy.
Misconceptions
One of the most misunderstood elements of Structured Literacy is its emphasis on critical thinking. While some critics argue that Structured Literacy is too mechanical or overly focused on skills, suggesting it lacks space for deep comprehension or creativity, this is far from the truth. Critical thinking is embedded within the Structured Literacy framework. It invites students to think deeply about language and meaning by analysing the author’s intent, character motivation, and themes in texts like Danny the Champion of the World (Year 3), Kensuke’s Kingdom (Year 5), and War Horse (Year 7). Even in Year 1, students explore moral choices and empathy through fairy tales and nursery rhymes. As they progress, they compare and contrast characters and plot outcomes in stories like The Twits or Charlotte’s Web, draw inferences and predictions from poems and news articles, and evaluate persuasive techniques and bias in speeches, advertisements, and modern texts. By Year 8, they are analysing language use and literary devices in adapted versions of Shakespeare and exploring poetic forms across a range of age-appropriate poetry. Structured Literacy uses these rich, meaningful texts to build not only decoding and fluency but also analytical thinking, interpretation, and discussion. The IDA framework ensures vocabulary and background knowledge are explicitly taught essential foundations for deep comprehension.
Another common misconception is that Structured Literacy focuses solely on reading and spelling and does not adequately cover writing. In fact, writing is embedded throughout the IDA framework, which includes explicit instruction in sentence structure, grammar, and text structure. When combined with a rich, knowledge-based curriculum, these elements are naturally woven into daily instruction. For example, while reading Kensuke’s Kingdom, students can be explicitly taught how to construct different sentence types, apply grammar conventions, and recognise text structures such as narrative structures and descriptive passages. Alongside the novel, teachers can introduce factual texts about survival, Japan, or WWII history to build background knowledge and model expository writing. These texts can also be used to explore tone, author’s intent, theme, and character traits in both fiction and non-fiction contexts. Students learn to identify, and use linking words and phrases, vary sentence length for effect, and organise ideas into logical paragraphs. They also practise different writing forms, such as diary entries, character descriptions, news reports, and persuasive letters. Structured Literacy ensures that writing development is not incidental,it is intentional, integrated, and supported through direct teaching and purposeful text selection. The only limitations to what can be taught are the ones we place on ourselves.
Teachers and schools retain the flexibility to choose texts that reflect their learners’ needs and interests, making these selections not just for reading practice, but as springboards for critical dialogue and thoughtful reflection. Structured Literacy supports a classroom where students are not only learning to read but also learning to think.
The last point I want to address is the myth that Structured Literacy doesn’t allow freedom for play or creativity. Really? Have you ever seen a community of educators produce so many engaging games and activities? Some Facebook groups dedicated to Structured Literacy feel more like a Pinterest board, overflowing with creative and playful ideas. The reality is, if play isn’t present in your classroom, particularly in the early years, that’s not a limitation of Structured Literacy, it’s a reflection of how it’s being implemented. Structured Literacy doesn’t mean you can’t introduce joy, fun, or hands-on learning into your day. In fact, it thrives when teachers bring it to life with games, movement, songs, and storytelling. The structure provides clarity and focusses around what to teach, how to teach it, when to teach it, and for whom, but the way you bring that learning to life is entirely up to you. If you’re not seeing creativity, it’s not because Structured Literacy forbids it, it’s because it hasn’t been added yet. It’s time to move past the idea that structure and play are incompatible. They can and should go hand in hand, especially in the early years.
Why it matters?
Structured Literacy is more than just a better way to teach reading or literacy; it is a transformational shift away from practices that left too many children behind. It brings clarity to what effective instruction looks like. It empowers teachers to be diagnostic and responsive. And it gives families a powerful, research-backed framework to advocate for what their children need.
At its heart, Structured Literacy is equity in action. It ensures that every child, regardless of background, ability, or diagnosis, is taught to read and write using what we know works.
New Zealand has made great leaps with Structured Literacy, and the Minister and Ministry have provided us with a curriculum and PLD training that has been approved by the Ministry of Education. However, what it has not provided is a clear framework or pathway to refer to something to help keep us on the right track. Like everything in life, structure matters, and Structured Literacy is no different.
Different providers will use different theories and teaching models from the Science of Reading/Learning. They may use different terminology, and they will recommend different programmes or resources. This is exactly why the International Dyslexia Association (IDA) Framework is crucial, especially for our most vulnerable children. It has given us, and will continue to give us, a common framework to support our students and children, ask the right questions, guide our training, and learn from.
New Zealand educators and parents need this. They need common ground across the many providers offering mainstream PLD. Children in Tier 3 need even more. The IDA Framework reminds us of that. It encompasses all aspects of literacy for all three tiers of children, and it’s clear, it is not just phonics (alphabetic principle/phonology) it is literacy. It ensures we stay grounded in what truly matters.
As we continue to build momentum for literacy reform in New Zealand, it’s important to recognise that Structured Literacy is not a fixed or rigid program, it is a flexible, evolving framework grounded in the best available science. The International Dyslexia Association (IDA) framework was never meant to be set in stone; rather, it grows as the research grows. But what it offers us today is something we urgently need: a clear, practical, and research-informed structure that educators, schools, and families can rely on. In a landscape where terminology, programmes, and training can vary widely, the IDA framework gives us a shared foundation. It helps us ask better questions, stay focused on what works, and ensure that no child is left behind because of inconsistent practice or confusion. Structured Literacy may continue to evolve, but its core principles remain our most powerful tool for making literacy accessible to all.
Other references to learn more
INFORMATION ON PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT IN TRAINING STRUCTURED LITERACY IN NEW ZEALAND FOR PARENTS
Structured literacy Perspectives Document from the International Dyslexia Association
Created By Sharon Scurr Founder of Dyslexia Evidence Based 28 May 2025