Why is there a disconnect?
It doesn’t take long for misconceptions to take hold. Complexity devolves into questionable “marketed certainty” and “sound bite size” understandings. When it comes to reading, there is a long history of polarized reductionist thinking that suggests children learn to read based solely on “phonics” or “whole language” instruction. Replicated seminal research and advances in brain imaging tell a different story and invite us to embark on a deeper dive into What is “The Science of Reading” vs. “What People May Think It Is.
What the Science of Reading Actually Is:
It’s a large, rigorous body of scientific studies from many disciplines including cognitive science, neuroscience, psychology, linguistics, and education about how one learns to read and how reading works in the brain and mind of a fluent reader. This research is both seminal and new. It is important to understand that humans are not hard-wired to read. The reading science emphasizes that efficient use of language structures are needed to form the functional neural networks to read. They include oral language, phonemic awareness, phonics, syllabication, spelling, fluency (i.e., accuracy, punctuated expression, reasoned phrasing, prosody, and rate), vocabulary, semantics, syntax, grammar, comprehension, pragmatics, discourse, transcription, and written expression. That is quite the list.
Bridging the gap between this body of research and instructional methods warrants a deep understanding of teaching, learning, and implementation science. Evidence-based instruction by highly trained educators employing a structured literacy (IDA, 2014) approach includes teaching methods that are direct, explicit, sequential, systematic, cumulative, and diagnostic. Furthermore, districts that demonstrate high proficiency for all learners use high quality materials. Implementation requires a system that supports building capacity in teachers and administrators, team building, frameworks for consensus, and partnering with parents and the broader community.
What some people think the Science of Reading is:
Some assume the science of reading is only about phonics instruction. They may hear the word phonics, and picture worksheet after worksheet and question whether children will ever get to “enjoy” reading. Yes, one language structure taught is phonics but a well informed teacher employs many teaching methods when developing these sound/symbol foundational skills. Many union leaders and superintendents equate it to “Reading First” limiting its scope and rigor. Some interpret the phrase as meaning one “right” way to teach reading. However, as mentioned above, it is a system that provides targeted instructional support and/or intervention based on data across all the structures of language. In addition, teams make instructional recommendations taking into account cultural, behavioral, and linguistic factors alongside the foundational skill data. Others believe it’s only relevant for children with reading difficulties, but it’s beneficial for all learners.
While it rejects tenets of “whole language” and “balanced literacy” that are not supported by empirical research, those concerned about instilling the “pleasure” of reading need not worry. The reading science strongly supports a weft and a weave of automatic word recognition and meaning making while developing knowledge and self-regulated strategies that build deep comprehension.
Moving Forward…
Understandably, the reported woeful statistics on the lack of reading proficiency across the country underscores the need to examine current methods in teaching and learning. The sense of urgency compounds the situation and often promotes curricular decisions based on promises of an affordable “quick fix”. However, there are no silver bullets when it comes to the reading brain. Reading instruction remains a hot topic with passionate opinions, so one must use caution when terms get oversimplified or weaponized. Since the term “Science of Reading” has become popular in education debates, some see it as a new buzzword or trend, ignoring that the research dates back decades. Therefore, educators, policymakers, and researchers need to work towards consensus while continuing to ask important questions that ground new research discoveries. Sometimes moving forward requires a commitment to agree to agree that all persons deserve the right to read, all educators deserve to be fully trained in reading science, and all administrators deserve formation in leading systemic change for literacy. Here at Bay Path University, our students master the content knowledge and the practices that are sought after at this time of urgent demand
