Capturing students’ interest and motivating them to explore new concepts through real-world phenomena and authentic problems has been shown to strengthen engagement and learning. Specific learning goals should be tied to the projects and activities that students complete, which will aid progress monitoring and instructional decision-making. For those students who need extra support, EdTech solutions may offer easy or automatic differentiation that helps teachers keep them meaningfully engaged and able to make progress.Ěý

We can see that relevant, hands-on learning screen time is different and offers significant value compared to passive screen time, like simply watching videos, which parents and educators are most concerned about.Ěý

The research on how students learn continues to grow, and instructional technology should reflect what we’ve learned—not simply what’s possible technologically.

Effective tools are intentionally designed around established learning science principles and make those principles clear rather than leaving educators to guess.

As Bryan Goodwin, CEO of McREL Institute, recently shared during a °Ç¸çşÚÁĎ webinar, “The real power of the science of learning is that it’s universal.” His work reinforces the importance of understanding the different phases of learning and adjusting instructional strategies accordingly. That’s another reason why keeping teachers at the center of instruction matters so much—they’re the ones best equipped to make those decisions.

Beyond design principles, education leaders should also look for evidence that a solution actually works. Review independent case studies, third-party efficacy research, and design evaluations whenever they’re available. Organizations like at Johns Hopkins University can be valuable resources, and vendors should be able to clearly explain the research supporting their products.

Ultimately, the question isn’t whether technology is innovative. It’s whether it helps students learn more effectively than they would without it.

Research shows that among the many education leadership roles,ĚýĚýin their school through their support of effective instruction. This support shows up in a variety of ways:

• Working with teachers on instruction, such as determining effective practices, observing and coaching, and reviewing data
• Collaborating with staff to create a cohesive program that includes strong curriculum and shared instructional practices
• Investing in targeted, practical professional development
• Enabling teachers to learn from each other in multiple ways
• Incorporating shared instructional leadership and decision-making

Further, a study of Chicago principals revealed that principals in schools that were improving had established a “culture of shared organizational learning,” and they linked related goals to the school vision for continued staff inspiration.

Short answer: Completely! Phenomena form the backbone of every Concept.

In Science Techbook, every Concept starts with a compelling real-world phenomenon and presents engaging topics like “Why do wolves howl?”, “How do bees find nectar?”, and “What causes shadows?” Students return to the anchor phenomenon throughout the Concept, with each new investigation and activity adding another layer of understanding.

What makes this approach effective:

• Four entry points: Phenomena can be introduced through video, images, datasets, or hands-on activities, giving teachers flexibility and students multiple ways to connect.
• Sustained engagement: The phenomenon threads through every lesson in a Concept, so students stay invested in figuring out why, not just learning what.
• Original content: For elementary students, °Ç¸çşÚÁĎ’s exclusive Real-World Phenomena Jr. series pairs short videos with ready-to-use instructional activities designed specifically to bring science to life. Older students also get age-appropriate content, hands-on activities, and interactives.
• Student-as-scientist: Rather than simply telling students answers, Science Techbook lets learners ask questions and make predictions, collect and analyze data, build and revise models, and make evidence-supported claims, like real scientists.

Would it be surprising to you that thinking processes used in one domain may be similar to processes used in another? that there are parallels between the processes involved in scientific inquiry/engineering practices and those involved in text comprehension.

For example, when students plan and carry out an investigation, they’re constructing meaning, just like when reading a text. When they analyze data from multiple sources, they’re coordinating information originating from different kinds of texts: their notebooks, class posters, discussions, and printed materials. When they make evidence-based claims, they’re adopting the same evaluative stance that strong readers take as they read.

In practice, high-quality science instruction asks students to:

• Read and discuss informational texts, including trade books, researcher-designed texts, graphs, tables, and digital simulations
• Write scientific explanations and arguments using claims, evidence, and reasoning—the same structure ELA standards emphasize
• Interpret and create multimodal representations, such as diagrams, data tables, drawings, and models (transferable skills)
• Engage in evidence-based discussion, supporting their ideas, responding to peers, and revising thinking and conclusions as needed

These actions lead to deeper text comprehension (even going beyond what’s being explicitly taught), analytical reading rather than scanning for information, and stronger reasoning used in writing across disciplines.