The Science of Reading: An Instructional Shift

Beth Mildren explores the importance of effective reading and phonics teaching, and what international schools can do to stay up to date with the newest developments around reading

Past “reading wars” used to rage about which was more effective; whole word reading vs. explicit phonics instruction. The war is over, and Science won. An instructional shift of how reading is taught is occurring in nearly every state in America - from colleges to classrooms - and it is important for international school leaders to understand the “why” behind this shift, what the ‘Science of Reading’ means, and the accompanying best teaching practices to ensure that every child learns how to read.

Reading can arguably be defined as ‘the most important skill’ taught during the elementary years; reading by third grade is the most predictive indicator of high school graduation and career success. Yet, helping all students reach reading proficiency has been an elusive task for educators; data indicates that roughly 35% of 4th graders read below grade level. The “reading wars” pendulum has swung from phonics instruction to whole-word reading, and landed somewhere in between, known as ‘balanced literacy.’ ‘Balanced Literacy’ was meant to be the truce in the reading wars, and it felt like a win-win, with some phonics, and lots of whole word reading. A Balanced Literacy philosophy is baked into many familiar programs and resources - Lucy Caulkins, Readers Workshop, and Guided Reading, Reading Recovery, and Leveled Literacy Intervention, just to name a few. 

Meanwhile, also occurring over the decades, cognitive scientists were busy replicating study after study on how to best teach reading, and there is no debate in the scientific community that explicit and systematic phonics instruction leads to better readers. The body of research that is considered settled science is known as the “Science of Reading.” Thus, teaching students how to read is not a mystery; this method of instruction is now referred to as Structured Literacy (SL), practices based on the science of reading, and SL practices are considered the golden standard for effective reading instruction.

The International Dyslexia Association, which promotes an SL approach to reading teaching for all learners, defines SL:

“Structured literacy (SL) approaches emphasize highly explicit and systematic teaching of all important components of literacy. These components include both foundational skills (e.g., decoding, spelling) and higher-level literacy skills (e.g., reading comprehension, written expression). SL also emphasizes oral language abilities essential to literacy development, including phonemic awareness, sensitivity to speech sounds in oral language, and the ability to manipulate those sounds.

Explicit teaching means that teachers clearly explain and model key skills; they do not expect children to infer these skills only from exposure. Systematic means that there is a well-organized sequence of instruction, with important prerequisite skills taught before more advanced skills. For instance, children master decoding and spelling simpler consonant-vowel-consonant words (e.g., tap) with short vowel sounds before learning more complex short-vowel words (e.g. stamp or tapped) with consonant blends or affixes.”

The following elements are explicitly and systematically taught in an SL reading approach:

• Phonology/Phonemic Awareness
• Sound-Symbol Association
• Syllables
• Morphology
• Syntax
• Semantics

As clear-cut as it sounds to follow the science, currently in the College Teacher Preparation Programs in the United States, there is no universal expectation of foundational knowledge and instructional delivery based on SL practices. Only 19 states require teachers to pass a test demonstrating mastery of science-based reading instruction strategies, and 74% of teacher prep college programs fail to cover all essential components of research-based reading instruction. Teachers’ main source of training often comes from the training on their school’s curriculum resources, which have in the past been based on a balanced literacy approach, and have likely missed out on the Science of Reading and SL training.

In my current school, our current curriculum resource does not directly match up with SL instruction, and only through independently supporting teachers’ efforts to make change within their instruction as the building leader, have teachers been able to make the instructional shift. If school leaders want to create an instructional program in which ALL students have access to effective reading instruction, it is our job to ensure that current educators have a solid foundation knowledge foundation of how students learn to read (Science of Reading), and accompanying pedagogy (SL elements).

“When you know better, you do better.”

- Maya Angelou

We have to start by being open-minded to the Science of Reading, even if it means we may have to set aside years of misguided instruction or curricular resources that have not been based in science. 

• Understand the Simple View of Reading, based on Scarborough’s reading rope.
• Take a deep dive into understanding the Structured Literacy elements
• Listen to Emily Hanford’s two seminal investigative reports behind the need for this shift.
  • Hard Words: Why Aren’t Our Kids Being Taught to Read?
  • At a Loss for Words: What’s Wrong With How Schools Teach Reading
• Compare and Contrast Structured Literacy elements to your school’s own reading curriculum and strategies emphasized. Spear-Swearling’s 2018 article is an excellent starting point for this conversation with teachers.

Teachers may agree with the “why” but must also become knowledgeable in effective methods to teach using SL elements, provided with resources to support their teaching.

• Determine a phonics continuum that will be used K-5 at your school.
  • In early reading skills, there will be heavy emphasis on developing phonemic awareness, letter-sound knowledge, and phonics patterns taught.
  • In intermediate readers, there will likely be emphasis on the morphology of prefixes, suffixes, roots, and bases of words. Morphological awareness is the bridge that links foundational skills to unlocking complex text
• Remember that it’s okay to take it slowly with staff. There is no “correct” phonics continuum or program. You can supplement and build on what you already know and have access to. 
  • Adapt materials you currently use. How can you change spelling lists to be based on a phonics pattern instead of thematic? How can students look for phonics patterns in their current trade books/leveled readers? How can you build in new reading strategies such as chunking, looping, and blending/segmenting into your current literacy block?
  • Look for new materials based on structured literacy, as funds become available. Instead of purchasing leveled readers, look for decodable readers based on phonics patterns. Check out free online materials, such as flyleaf decodables, or explore the tools4reading explicit phonics lessons, and the National Centre for Literacy’s Implementation Tool Kits.
  • Change your school literacy culture by changing your vocabulary. Instead of referring to “guided reading groups,” refer to “skill-based small groups.” Small linguistic changes can help reinforce that during small group instruction, students should be learning specific phonics skills using decodable readers for connected text, which also allows work on fluency, vocabulary and comprehension.

When I first began my journey into the Science of Reading, it was humbling. For years I had encouraged, and trained, my teachers in ineffectual teaching methods, and wasted money on expensive programs that were not tied to the SL elements. It was a difficult reality to confront. But it wasn’t a difficult choice to move in the right direction; doing what’s best for students to help each child learn to read is an easy choice.

Annie E. Casey Foundation. (2010, January 1). Early Warning! Why reading by the end of third grade matters. https://www.aecf.org/resources/early-warning-why-reading-by-the-end-of-third-grade-matters/

Hanford, E. (2018). Hard words: Why aren’t kids being taught to read? APM Reports.https://www.apmreports.org/story/2018/09/10/hard-words-why-american-kids-arent-being-taught-to-read

National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Washington, DC: National Institutes of Health. https://www.nichd.nih.gov/sites/default/files/publications/pubs/nrp/Documents/report.pdf

Cowen, C.D. (2016, Summer). What is Structured Literacy? https://dyslexiaida.org/what-is-structured-literacy/

Gewertz, C. (2020, March 3). Teachers in these states have to pass a rigorous test on ‘Science of Reading.’https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/teachers-in-these-states-have-to-pass-a-rigorous-test-on-science-of-reading/2020/03

Farrell, F, et al. (2019). The simple view of reading. https://www.readingrockets.org/article/simple-view-reading

Spear-Swerling, L. (2018). Structured literacy and typical literacy practices: Understanding differences to create instructional opportunities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 51, 201–211.