In Episode 77 of the Teaching Literacy Podcast, guest host Dr. Laura Tortorelli sits down with Dr. Jake Downs to unpack a recent grade 3 intervention study published in Reading Research Quarterly with co-authors Freddy Hiebert, Kristin Conradi Smith, and Katie Martz. Together, they explore the demands of reading long, complex words and a straightforward blending routine for supporting multisyllabic word reading. They also discuss the need for supporting accuracy and automaticity in complex text and how to use the multisyllabic blending strategy with the repeated reading Read Like Us protocol. Plenty of takeaways for any upper elementary teacher, reading coach, or literacy support professional. Read the article here! No paywall!Downs, J., Hiebert, E., Conradi Smith, K., & Martz, K. (2026). Promoting reading accuracy and fluency outcomes with complex texts: A Grade 3 intervention comparison. Reading Research Quarterly. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.70117 Episode Outline:0:00 Intro — Guest host Laura Tortorelli introduces the episode1:44 Study overview — Jake Downs et al. study comparing simplified vs. complex texts in Reading Research Quarterly4:24 Welcome, Jake — Jake joins the conversation4:48 Complex text effects — Accuracy, fluency, and comprehension decrease with harder text3:54 Why accuracy matters — Accuracy as the “floor of good reading”4:58 Why harder texts? — Vocabulary density, idea sophistication, word automaticity7:24 Teachers’ quandary — Grade-level texts cause accuracy and fluency to plummet8:00 What can we do? — Scaffold rather than water down text9:32 RLU 1.0 vs. new study — Adding long word blending to improve accuracy10:09 Multisyllabic approaches — Syllable types vs. morphology; limitations of each12:48 Hybrid peel-off approach — Combining morphology with syllabication15:58 Curricular design — 80/20 split: text reading vs. word blending17:36 Text design vs. scope & sequence — Pull words from strong texts, not vice versa21:56 Texts in upper grades — Building vocabulary, knowledge, and comprehension22:38 Word repetition — ~25 encounters per target word through repeated readings24:57 A day in Read Like Us — Step-by-step blending routine and repeated reading protocol28:48 Study parameters — 60 sessions, 12 topics, 5 texts each from ReadWorks.org29:38 Comparison condition — A validated decoding intervention, not a weak control31:36 Key differences — Text complexity, word complexity, and word-text alignment34:04 Findings: Accuracy — RLU students 2.79x more likely to reach benchmark35:49 Findings: Fluency — Comparable growth; no cost from harder texts37:33 Vocabulary hypothesis — Likely benefits from text volume and topic diversity37:57 Who benefits? — Students at ~95%+ accuracy; not below 90%40:14 Advice for teachers — Scaffolding is essential; payoff is compound interest43:00 Selecting words — Pick hard, text-meaningful words; 3 words, 5–7 minutes45:41 Challenging deficit views — Build on what students can do; scaffold the edge48:08 What’s Jake optimistic about — Public-facing research and free resources49:38 Laura’s take: Rethinking ZPD — Scaffolding should match text challenge, not avoid it
