Start with the question
Name the curriculum demand, learner need, or school and board decision in front of you.
Use psychological expertise to interpret language, literacy, and learning evidence—and strengthen tiered supports connected to Ontario curriculum. For educators, school psychologists, doctoral trainees, and administrators.
Psychological expertise helps teams understand learning and plan next steps; educators remain central to curriculum and instruction.
Choose the educator or leadership route below, then follow the question through the evidence and Ontario context.
Name the curriculum demand, learner need, or school and board decision in front of you.
Consider instruction, learning evidence over time, tiered support, and where school psychology may add useful expertise.
Follow the links and keep Ministry direction, OHRC recommendations, professional standards, and research distinct.
A quick practice lens for educators and school psychologists working together.
A decision lens for administrators who oversee the conditions in which support happens.
You do not need specialist training to use the questions. Specialist sources are linked for decisions that require deeper review.
This is the clearest Ministry-policy connection between literacy instruction and school psychology in the Site.
PPM 168 says boards should draw on internal expertise—including psychology staff knowledgeable about evidence-based, systematic, and explicit foundational reading instruction—when determining next steps for students who have received all tiers and have not met the grade-level benchmark.
Read PPM 168 ↗Literacy across contexts, identities, communities, and subject areas.
Foundational knowledge and skills for reading and writing.
Understanding, interpreting, and responding to texts.
Expressing ideas and creating texts for varied purposes.
These are collaborative questions, not diagnostic criteria. See the Ontario Language curriculum and special education laws and policies.
RTI and MTSS are common framework terms for organizing increasingly responsive support. In Ontario, PPM 168 sets Ministry direction for early reading screening and tiered reading instruction.
Systematic, explicit, evidence-based foundational reading instruction for all students, with differentiated and accessible teaching.
More intensive small-group instruction in addition to Tier 1, matched to identified foundational reading needs.
Individual or small-group instruction in addition to Tier 1 when difficulties are multiple, considerable, or persistent. Progress evidence helps teams adjust intensity.
When a student has received all tiers and remains below the benchmark, PPM 168 says boards should draw on internal expertise, including psychology staff knowledgeable about evidence-based foundational reading instruction.
Start with the learning task and the evidence already available. Add specialist assessment or consultation when it will help answer a focused question.
What should the student read, understand, discuss, or write at this grade?
What was explicitly taught, modeled, practiced, and made accessible?
Which skill is changing? What does screening and progress evidence show?
Could consultation or assessment clarify strengths, needs, and next supports?
Research synthesis on language, sound-letter links, decoding, word parts, and connected-text reading.
IES What Works Clearinghouse ↗Research synthesis on multisyllabic decoding, fluency, comprehension practices, and stretch text.
IES What Works Clearinghouse ↗These guides are research resources, not Ontario policy. Use them alongside Ontario curriculum, student context, and professional judgment.
Use this brief to separate what is required, what is recommended, and what the board or school must decide and resource.
Decision prompts for local planning—not a substitute for the source text or board-specific legal advice.
Leadership lens| Decision area | What to ask | Authority / evidence to check |
|---|---|---|
| Access to reading support | Can students receive tiered classroom-based support regardless of disability identification or assessment status? | Ministry direction · PPM 168Check the tiered instruction and protected-time requirements. |
| Screening to action | Do screening and progress data lead to timely, skill-matched instruction and follow-up? | Ministry direction + local processReview PPM 168 alongside school and board implementation. |
| Assessment referral rules | Are referral criteria clear, transparent, and responsive to the learner’s progress? | OHRC recommendationThe Right to Read report recommends criteria informed by response to intervention; distinguish recommendation from binding policy. |
| Psychology expertise | Are psychology staff able to contribute literacy knowledge, consultation, assessment, or systems expertise where useful? | Ministry direction + CPBAO standardsPPM 168 identifies psychology staff expertise; CPBAO governs registrant practice and competence. |
| Equity and accountability | Can leaders see who receives screening, intervention, assessment, and follow-up—and where delays or gaps occur? | OHRC findings / recommendationsUse the inquiry to examine access, transparency, and systemic barriers; check current board data. |
The OHRC inquiry is a human-rights report with findings and recommendations. Its recommendations do not automatically become a statute, regulation, College standard, or board procedure.
Who can change the referral pathway, staffing, training, or intervention access?
What support, professional learning, and collaboration time make the policy workable?
What will show whether students receive support and whether it is helping?
OECM is a not-for-profit collaborative sourcing partner for Ontario’s education and broader public sector. These links can help leaders explore agreements and supplier options.
OECM describes an agreement for English and French early reading screeners, including screening and progress-monitoring options. Check the current agreement, suppliers, tool details, and local requirements before planning a purchase.
View OECM’s screening tools agreement ↗OECM lists structured reading programs and intervention options across levels of support. Use the agreement page to explore current offerings, then assess instructional fit, evidence, implementation supports, accessibility, privacy, and cost locally.
View OECM’s reading programs agreement ↗Shared commitment to student learning does not mean the professions have the same scope or regulator.
Regulates psychologists and psychological associates in Ontario, including registrants practising in school psychology.
Regulates Ontario Certified Teachers and publishes professional standards for teaching practice.
Primary policy, professional standards, inquiry recommendations, and research evidence—labelled by authority.
Notes save in this browser only. Do not enter student or client identifying details.
Writing on literacy, learning, and the research ideas that shape classroom practice.
Read Deborah’s Substack ↗