📖8 min read · 1,615 words
This is the plain-language version. Same content, written for a quick read.
The frame. Many schools ask paras to run or help with set reading help programs. These programs can help, when they are run the way they were built, and when the program's own method matches how reading is really learned (see the note on LLI below). A para who doesn't know the program's logic, pace, and error fixes is not just less helpful; they may be pulling against the very help the student needs. This brief covers the main program types, what running each one as written means, and what paras can and can't do on their own.
General reading help is one thing: helping a student sound out a word, re-read a sentence, or work out what a word means. Running a set reading help program is another. Programs like Wilson Reading System, Orton-Gillingham, Leveled Literacy Intervention, Heggerty, and SIPPS are structured and scripted, and most are research-backed. (SIPPS stands for Systematic Instruction in Phonological Awareness, Phonics, and Sight Words.) They go in a set order. They are tightly scripted. They run a set way, with set materials and set fixes for errors.
Knowing the program means knowing why each piece is there, not just what to do, but why doing it wrong pulls against the result.
OG is a structured literacy approach that uses sight, sound, and touch together, and it's for students with dyslexia (a reading disability). Wilson Reading System is one of the most used OG-based programs. Key parts:
Lessons go in a set order. Review old phonics patterns before adding new ones.
Students learn to decode (read) and encode (spell) at the same time.
Sight, sound, and touch together. Students see, say, hear, and feel each sound and letter.
Error fixes are direct: the para shows the right answer, and the student says it back.
Training: Wilson and full OG need special training. Paras should not usually be the main person running Wilson without training. They can help a trained teacher, handing out materials, writing down data, running review drills, but the lesson design belongs to a trained person.
LLI was built by Fountas and Pinnell. It is a small-group help program that uses leveled books and a set lesson routine. The lesson order: read familiar books, do word work, write about reading, and show a new book. Key parts:
Each lesson is scripted in the teacher guide, with set words for showing books and prompting during reading.
Running records are used to check accuracy, fluency, and meaning.
A caveat the science of reading has changed: classic LLI has the adult prompt for meaning, structure, and what's on the page (the "three-cueing," or MSV, system) in a set order. Brief 04.12 explains why the field moved away from three-cueing, and brief 07.04 covers Structured Literacy, the approach used with dyslexic readers instead. A student stuck on a word should be helped to sound it out from its letters, not to guess it from the story or the picture. This is not an open argument in the field. The Reading League, which publishes the guide many districts use to judge reading programs, lists three-cueing as a "Red Flag": a practice that does not line up with the science of reading. That guide tells districts to choose a program mainly by whether it is free of those flags. Some states have gone further and banned it outright; in Ohio, no pre-K through grade 5 program or materials may use it (Ohio Revised Code 3313.6028). So if a program's prompts still tell a student to guess a word from the picture or the sentence, that is not a matter of taste. It is the practice the field has ruled against. The caution is about the prompting model, not about the program as a whole.
Para role: paras are often assigned LLI groups, and training is needed. If you're running LLI groups, you should have had formal training on the program; if you haven't, bring it up with your supervisor. Follow the program's routine and your district's direction, but know where LLI is different: if the script has you cue a stuck reader to "think what would make sense" or "look at the picture" instead of sounding the word out, that's the cueing move the field moved away from. Run the lesson the way your district says and raise the question with your program-trained teacher; don't change it on your own either way.
Heggerty is a daily phonemic awareness program that works with sounds, not letters. It's used in PreK through first grade, and also with older students who are weak in phonemic awareness. Lessons are 10 to 15 minutes, they are scripted, and the routine is the same each time. Key parts:
Eight phonemic awareness tasks per lesson. In order: rhyming, onset fluency, blending, picking out the last or middle sound in a word, segmenting, adding sounds, taking sounds out, and swapping sounds.
The teacher or para says a word or set of words, and students answer out loud or with hand gestures.
Para role: Heggerty is routine enough that trained paras can lead it. Know the hand gestures, know the right order, follow the script, and don't change the task order.
SIPPS is a phonics-based intervention from the Center for the Collaborative Classroom (once called Developmental Studies Center). It has four levels (Beginning, Extension, Challenge, and SIPPS Plus for older students in grades 4 to 12) and follows a set format: word reading, decodable text reading, and sight word practice. Key parts:
Lessons are scripted with set teacher and para language.
Lessons run different lengths by level: Beginning about 30 minutes, Extension and Plus 20 to 30, and Challenge about 20. All should move at a brisk pace.
Error fixes are direct: show the right answer, have the student say it back, then check again.
Para role: SIPPS is built to be run by trained paras, with training that comes from the program materials and at least one PD session. The publisher also offers longer certification courses and coaching, so ask your team which training your district provides. If you're running SIPPS, focus on pace and error fixes.
Paras may also see others: Reading Mastery (a Direct Instruction program, see Brief 04.19), Barton Reading and Spelling System (structured literacy with video training), RAVE-O (vocabulary and fluency), and many district-picked main or extra programs. For any program you are asked to run, ask three things: Have I been trained on this? Do I have the manual? Do I know the error fix?
A useful rule: the more the program is built for one student and based on testing, the more trained the person running it needs to be. A rough guide:
Needs specialist training (para should help, not lead)
Full Orton-Gillingham lessons built for one student
Wilson Reading System as the main person running it
Any program that needs ongoing testing to set the lesson order
Para can run with program-specific training
LLI (with program training)
SIPPS
Heggerty
Fluency practice within most programs
Review drills, word card practice, decodable text re-reads
Every program has its own data system. Before you run a session, know three things:
What you are writing down (right per try, fluency rate, error type, book level)
When you record it (during the session, at the end, or both)
Where it goes (who sees it, how it is used to change teaching)
Data taken sloppily makes the program look like it's working when it may not be. Some bad moves: writing down guessed numbers instead of exact ones, skipping data on hard sessions, or not noting error patterns. Write down what really happened.
A para is running a SIPPS Extension lesson with a small group. The lesson says students should sound out a list of words, then read a passage. One student is having a hard time with the word list. The para does not want the student to feel down, so she skips the word list and goes right to the passage. The student does better on the passage because the words are a bit easier, so the data looks better. The teacher checks it, and she wonders why the group is ready to move up a level. When the swap is found, the team sees that two weeks of data are not trustworthy. The fix was not to skip the hard part: it was to follow the error fix and note the pattern for the teacher.
| Try this | Watch out for |
|---|---|
| Know which program you are running and whether you have had formal training for it. | Running a program you haven't been trained on. Hoping the general idea is close enough. |
| Follow the lesson script and order. Don't change the order of tasks. | Skipping parts that feel hard for the student. The hard parts are often where the learning is. |
| Use the program's error fix, not a general one you like better. | Swapping in your own prompts for the program's scripted words. |
| Write down honest data, even when the student struggled. | Writing down data that shows what you hoped, not what happened. |
Bottom line. Reading intervention programs are tools with instructions. Run them without training or without those instructions and you are running a different intervention, which may or may not work. When in doubt, ask for training before you start.
What paras need to know about Wilson, OG, LLI, Heggerty, SIPPS, and other structured programs
For paraprofessionals assigned to support or deliver reading interventions
Why reading intervention programs are different
General reading support -- helping a student decode a word, re-read a sentence, work out what an unfamiliar word means -- is one thing. Delivering a structured reading intervention is another. Programs like Wilson Reading System, Orton-Gillingham, Leveled Literacy Intervention, Heggerty Phonemic Awareness Curriculum, and SIPPS (Systematic Instruction in Phonological Awareness, Phonics, and Sight Words) are structured, sequenced, and tightly scripted, and they are built out of well-evidenced components -- systematic phonics, phonemic awareness, explicit error correction. The evidence for any particular branded program is thinner than the evidence for those components: the most recent review of Orton-Gillingham-based programs found effects that pointed in the right direction but were not statistically significant, and the federal What Works Clearinghouse found only one Wilson study strong enough to count. That is an argument for running the program as designed and judging it by this student's data -- not for assuming the name on the box does the work. They are designed to be delivered in a specific way, in a specific order, with specific materials and specific error correction.
Understanding the program means understanding why each element exists -- not just what to do, but why doing it wrong undermines the outcome.
Major program types: what paras need to know
Orton-Gillingham (OG) and Wilson Reading System
OG is a multisensory, structured literacy approach for students with dyslexia. Wilson Reading System is one of the most widely used OG-based programs. Key features:
Lessons follow a consistent sequence: review previously learned phonics patterns before introducing new ones
Students learn to decode (read) and encode (spell) simultaneously
Multisensory techniques: students see, say, hear, and feel each sound/letter pattern
Error correction is explicit: the para models the correct response and the student repeats
Certification requirement: Wilson and fully-fledged OG delivery require specialized training. Paras generally should not be delivering Wilson as the primary interventionist without training. They can support a trained teacher by managing materials, recording data, or running review drills -- but the lesson design belongs to a certified practitioner.
Leveled Literacy Intervention (LLI)
LLI, developed by Fountas and Pinnell, is a small-group intervention using leveled texts and a structured lesson routine. The lesson sequence: reading of familiar texts, word work, writing about reading, and introduction of a new text. Key features:
Each lesson is scripted in the teacher guide with specific language for introducing texts and prompting during reading
Running records are used to assess accuracy, fluency, and comprehension
A caveat the science of reading has changed: classic LLI has the adult prompt for meaning, structure, and visual information (the "three-cueing," or MSV, system) in a defined sequence. Brief 04.12 explains why the field has moved away from three-cueing, and brief 07.04 covers the Structured Literacy alternative for dyslexic readers -- a student stuck on a word should be prompted to decode it from its letters and sounds, not to guess it from context, the sentence, or the picture. This is not a live argument in the field. The Reading League's Curriculum Evaluation Guidelines list three-cueing as a Red Flag -- one of the practices "not aligned with the science of reading" -- in an instrument whose stated primary basis for selecting a curriculum at all is the absence of such flags. Some states have written the same conclusion into law: in Ohio, no pre-kindergarten-through-grade-five curriculum, instructional materials, or intervention program may use the approach (Ohio Rev. Code 3313.6028). So where a program's prompting sequence still teaches a student to guess a word from the picture or the sentence, that is not a stylistic difference between programs. It is the practice the field has ruled against. The caution is about the prompting model, not about the program as a whole.
Para role: paras are often assigned LLI groups, and training is required. If you are running LLI groups, you should have received formal training on the program; if you have not, raise this with your supervisor. Follow the program's routine and your district's direction -- but know where LLI differs from structured literacy: if the script has you cue a struggling reader to "think what would make sense" or "look at the picture" instead of sounding the word out, that is the three-cueing move the field has moved away from. Run the lesson the way your district directs and surface the tension to your program-trained teacher; don't freelance in either direction.
Heggerty Phonemic Awareness Curriculum
Heggerty is a daily phonemic awareness curriculum (working with sounds, not letters) typically used in PreK through first grade and with older students who have phonemic awareness deficits. Lessons are 10-15 minutes, scripted, and highly routine. Key features:
Eight phonemic awareness tasks per lesson, in sequence: rhyming, onset fluency, blending, isolating final or medial sounds, segmenting, adding phonemes, deleting phonemes, and substituting phonemes
The teacher/para says a word or series of words; students respond orally or with hand gestures
Para role: Heggerty is routinized enough that trained paras can lead it with confidence. Know the hand gestures, know the correct sequence, and follow the script. Do not improvise the task order.
SIPPS (Systematic Instruction in Phonological Awareness, Phonics, and Sight Words)
SIPPS is a phonics-based intervention published by the Center for the Collaborative Classroom (formerly Developmental Studies Center). It has four levels -- Beginning, Extension, Challenge, and SIPPS Plus for older students in grades 4-12 -- and follows a structured format with word reading, decodable text reading, and sight word practice. Key features:
Lessons are scripted with specific teacher/para language
Lesson length varies by level -- Beginning generally about 30 minutes, Extension and Plus 20-30, and Challenge about 20 -- and all should move at a brisk, engaging pace
Error correction is explicit: model the correct response, have the student repeat, then retest
Para role: SIPPS is designed to be deliverable by trained paras. Training is provided through the program materials and at least one professional development session; the publisher also offers multi-day certification courses and ongoing coaching, so ask the team which level of training your district has purchased for your role. If you are running SIPPS, pacing and error correction are the two skills to focus on.
Other common programs
Paras may also encounter: Reading Mastery (a Direct Instruction program -- see Brief 04.19), Barton Reading and Spelling System (structured literacy with video-based training), RAVE-O (vocabulary and fluency focused), and various district-adopted core or supplemental programs. For any program you are asked to deliver, ask: Have I been trained on this? Do I have the manual? Do I know the error correction procedure?
What requires certification vs. what a para can deliver
A useful rule of thumb: the more individualized and diagnostic the program, the more specialized the provider needs to be. A general guide:
Requires specialist training (para should support, not lead)
Full Orton-Gillingham lessons designed for individual students
Wilson Reading System as a primary interventionist
Any program that requires ongoing diagnostic assessment to determine lesson sequence
Para can deliver with program-specific training
LLI (with program training)
SIPPS
Heggerty
Fluency practice sessions within most programs
Review drills, word card practice, decodable text re-reads
Data each program expects
Every intervention program includes a data collection system. Before you run a session, know:
What you are recording (accuracy per trial, fluency rate, error type, text level)
When you record it (during the session, at the end, or both)
Where it goes (who sees the data, how it is used to adjust instruction)
Data collected carelessly -- recording estimated rather than exact accuracy, skipping data on difficult sessions, not noting error patterns -- makes the intervention look effective when it may not be. Record honestly.
Scenario
The well-meaning deviation
A para is running a SIPPS Extension lesson with a small group. The lesson calls for students to decode a list of words, then read a decodable passage. One student is struggling with the word list and the para, not wanting the student to feel defeated, skips the word list and goes straight to the passage. The student performs better on the passage because the passage words are slightly easier. The data looks better. The teacher reviews it and wonders why the group is ready to move up a level. When the substitution is discovered, the team realizes two weeks of data are unreliable. The fix was not to skip the hard part but to follow the error correction procedure and note the pattern for the teacher.
| Try this | Watch out for |
|---|---|
| Know which program you are delivering and whether you have received formal training for it | Delivering a program you have not been trained on and hoping the general approach is close enough |
| Follow the lesson script and sequence -- do not improvise the order of tasks | Skipping parts of the lesson that feel discouraging for the student -- the hard parts are often where the learning is |
| Use the program's error correction procedure, not a general one you prefer | Substituting your own prompts for the program's scripted language |
| Record data honestly, including sessions where the student struggled | Recording data that reflects your hope rather than what actually happened |
Reading is useful, but recall is where it sticks. Three short scenarios, low-stakes, no scoring. About 3 minutes. You can stop any time.
Start the practice set →You do instructional work all day — and you need a clear line between supporting and teaching, with…
Prompting is most of what you do — and the difference between skilled and well-intentioned prompting…
You prompt students through skills they can't yet do alone — and fading those prompts is where actua…
You run programs that another adult also runs — and consistency between you is the difference betwee…