SCIENCE OF READING 101

Reading proficiency is based upon brain development

Reading proficiency requires the development of a specific set of foundational skills.
Students who achieve reading proficiency have developed a sufficient skill set.
Students who struggle have a SKILL GAP. Learn more

What is the best instructional approach to help the most students
achieve reading proficiency?

Hint: the current approach is failing 2 out of 3 students in the U.S.!
More of the same is not working!
There is a better alternative that closes the Skill Gap.

Facts about the current reading instructional paradigm in the US

68% of 4th grade students in the US failed to score proficient in reading on the 2022 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) (1) (Numbers in parenthesis are references. Go to the reference tab for background information.) Learn more
When the scores are broken out by race, 84% of Black, 80% of Hispanic and 59% of White 4th grade students failed to score proficient in reading on the 2022 NAEP. This represents a significant Achievement Gap.
Low reading proficiency scores overall and the Achievement Gap between White students and Black and Hispanic students are a longstanding issue. The current system is clearly not working for most students.
Failure and success is distributed. High performing classes and schools in most cases have some students who fail. Low performing classes and schools in most cases have some students who succeed. It is not clear cut that there are classes/schools where 100% of students succeed because they are using the right curriculum and the teacher is providing the proper instruction and the opposite where all of the students are failing because of inadequate instruction.
Instruction alone cannot explain why some students succeed while others fail in the same classroom taught by the same teacher using the same curriculum. Most high-performing teachers using the supposed "science of reading" have students who fail and teachers considered low-performing likely have some students who succeed and may still be teaching based upon the "science of reading".
On average, schools serving low-income populations score lower than schools serving higher-income populations on state and national reading tests. This fact is not easily explained by instructional differences alone.
Phonics-based instruction is the dominant instructional model in use today.
However, phonics proponents often claim that low scores are primarily caused by inadequate instruction in phonics. The claim is that teachers are not teaching based upon the science of reading which promotes phonics instruction.

The purpose of this site is to explore an alternative theory to explain why the current system is failing so many students. We believe that most teachers are caring, competent professionals and are teaching based upon the current science of reading, yet the system is also failing them. Fix the system, provide the proper curriculum, and most teachers and students will succeed. It is time to rethink the current science of reading for it is failing on a massive scale and negatively impacting the futures of so many students, especially Students of Color and those impacted by poverty.

Summary of the Current Science of Reading

There are two primary reading instruction approaches: 1) whole language (2), and 2) phonics (3).
Blended or balanced learning is a combination of the two primary approaches (4).
Phonics has been the dominant approach with relatively short periods of time when whole language was tried because phonics had such a high failure rate (5).
During the last period of time when whole language was tried broadly (1975 to 2000), phonics proponents resurfaced to reclaim dominance. This period of time is often referred to as the "Reading Wars". It is often stated that phonics won the Reading Wars although the difference in comparative scores was small (6). Neither approach has proof that it works for the majority of students to achieve reading proficiency.
Generally, there are two stages of development: 1) pre-reading skills development (learning to read), and 2) reading comprehension and knowledge acquisition (reading to learn).
Phonics instruction focuses on pre-reading skills development with a strong emphasis on phonics principles. This includes development of skills such as print awareness, letter recognition, letter sounds, phonemic awareness and basic vocabulary.
The predominant claim made by phonics proponents is that low reading scores are caused by teachers not sufficiently teaching phonics explicitly.
Most claims that phonics instruction is evidence-based are linked only to increased scores on phonics tests, not improvements in reading fluency and comprehension. (7)
Most phonics advocates believe that improved scores on phonics-based tests equate to improved reading fluency and comprehension.
There is no body of evidence that proves increased scores on phonics-based tests directly result in improved scores for reading fluency and comprehension. (8)

Possible Failure Modes

There are three possible failures modes or combinations of the three modes.

Inadequate instruction
Inadequate curriculum
Students who fail have challenges learning

Most phonics proponents actively advocate that the primary failure mode is inadequate instruction. They claim that the phonics-based curriculum is research and evidence-based and thereby cannot be at fault for the low scores. Article after article or social media post claims that teachers are just not teaching phonics adequately. That may be true in limited circumstances, but cannot fully explain the widespread failure.

We disagree with this position and present evidence below to demonstrate that low scores are primarily the fault of curriculum limitations, which in turn leads to inadequate instruction because of the curriculum issues. Student learning capacity and home-life experiences also impact learning effectiveness. Students who have a Skill Gap must receive adequate skill development training to close the Skill Gap to empower effective learning.

Alternative theory

Students who develop sufficient skills learn how to read fluently with comprehension. This includes much more than just phonological skills. Learn more
Students who struggle are deficient in one or more key skills--The Skill Gap. The Gap usually consists of required skills outside of the phonological focus. Learn more
Most students who struggle entered kindergarten behind in a variety of foundational skills and never caught up. Schools may be not closing the Skill Gap in most cases, but they are not "breaking the students". (9)
The current phonics-based curriculum focuses too narrowly and does not catch up most students who are behind in skills outside of the phonological realm.
Students who enter school with an adequate foundational skill base learn how to read under the current instructional paradigm and most can learn using any viable reading curriculum. The standard curriculum meets their needs, but may not be the most effective approach even for those who succeed.
Phonological skills are important but not sufficient. Students need to develop additional skills to become proficient readers.
Whole language instruction works for some students who have sufficient skills, but it is not a complete reading system.
Neither whole language or phonics-based instruction is sufficient for most students. Students who struggle require additional training to close the Skill Gap.

Why Phonics-based Instruction is "Phailing" Most Students

1. English is phonetically opaque. It is not phonetically transparent.

Languages that have a high correlation between letters and sounds are considered phonetically transparent. Once the letter sounds are learned, it is relatively easy to sound out words. Example languages are Spanish and Italian.
Languages that have a complex orthography are considered to be phonetically opaque. English is especially opaque. Sounding out most words is difficult, inconsistent, and often confusing. Examples of this challenge follow.
Only about 20% of English words can be sounded out with a clear letter-to-sound correlation. (10)
Up to 50% of English words can be partially sounded out using complex rules, most of which have more exceptions than adherents. (10)
Most every dictionary entry requires a different phonetic spelling to convey how to pronounce each word because the original spelling does not properly convey how to sound out the word. For example, the dictionary pronunciation guide shows the following options for the word "was": wŭz, wŏz; wəz when unstressed. If the word "was" were phonetically transparent and could be sounded out, it would not require separate pronunciation instructions. Unfortunately, most words in English require separate pronunciation instructions because they cannot be sounded out directly.
There are 26 letters in the alphabet with a normally associated sound or simple code. However, there are 18 additional sounds, most with multiple possible spellings or complex codes. For example, there are six different possible spellings or codes for the long “a” sound: 1. /a/ as in agent, 2. /a-e/ as in cake, 3. /ai/ as in train, 4. /ay/ as in day, 5. /ei/ as in reindeer, and 6. /ey/ as in grey. If a student is asked to sound out any word with the long "a" sound, there are many different ways it could be spelled, so they must learn the multiple codes and memorize the correct spelling and pronunciation for each word. There are close to 200 different ways to spell the codes of the 44 sounds.
There are at least 24 different ways it is possible to phonetically spell the word "cake". The "c" and the "k" letters represent the same sound. There are four different combinations of how the "c and k" could be used in the word: c-k, c-c, k-k, and k-c. Then there are six different ways to spell the long "a" sound. Examples of possible phonetic spellings include caik, cak, ceik, kayk, etc. Two different dictionary entries show the pronunciation as "keyk" and "kāk". A student truly only learns how to spell and pronounce the word "cake" by memorization.
There are ten different ways to pronounce the “ough” code: 1: enough (uff), 2. plough (ow), 3. through (ew or oo), 4. though (rhymes with go), 5. thought (rhymes with spot), 6. thorough (oh), 7. cough (off), 8. hiccough (up), 9. hough (ock), and 10. louch (loch). No rules could possibly help students figure out how to "sound out" these words. They just have to memorize the correct pronunciation for each word as they do with most words.
An often-used phonics rule states: When two vowels go walking, the first one does the talking. Unfortunately, that rule is incorrect about 60% of the time. It does not work for words such as: good, about, earth, bear, noise, author, and friend. (11) Rules seem to work at first under controlled circumstances, but in the end they confuse students more than they help. Some rules are initially helpful in controlled text, but in the end, they are not overly helpful when it comes to proficient reading.
One might think that the "ea" combination (code) would be easy to sound out. Since it contains two vowels, students are taught that the first one does the talking as noted in the above example. However, this particular code has many different sounds as noted in the example below. (http://readingkingdom.com)

Phonics does play an important role in learning how to read. Students need to understand the connection between letters and the sounds of language. However, as noted above, English is not a language where sounding out words is directly practical in most cases. Over time students figure out that most words have to be memorized and that only sometimes can direct letter-to-sound correlations be used to help learn new words.

For example, once a student learns how to decode the word "cake", that helps them to learn similar words such as "take" and "bake" more easily. Once they learn the word "cat" that letter blend is helpful to learn new words that use "cat" as part of the word such as "category". When students encounter a new word they often can use similar words they already know to give them guidance on how to pronounce this new word. However, that technique cannot be relied upon consistently.

In the end, a student must memorize the name of each word so they can recall it automatically when reading. More on this topic is discussed below.

There is a huge difference between the phase of trying to sound out a word to originally learn it vs. fluent reading. Fluent reading requires the memorization of the name of the whole word.

2. Reading requires automatic whole word recognition and rapid naming linked to meaning

Please read a sentence or two on this page and contemplate the nature of what really took place.

You likely did not "sound out" any words or consciously apply any rules of phonics if you read fluently.
Reading fluently with comprehension involved the following major systems in your brain:

You visually saw the information through your visual optical system and the sensory input was transferred to the proper place in the brain for processing.

You attended (paid attention) so that the process of reading could be accomplished. You were not distracted and were able to complete the task. All of the sensory information got to the right place in your brain and was processed correctly.
The information was recognized by your brain as text and was run through your word pattern recognition system. You recognized each letter pattern as a word from memory.
Each word pattern was run through your naming system (network) to identify the name associated with each word.
Each word was then associated with the proper sound and meaning in your memory.
You retained the meaning of each word in working memory until you determined the overall meaning of the text you read from your perspective and background knowledge.
You decided what meaning from the text to store in long-term memory for recall later as part of your background knowledge.
You did not rely upon the "sounding out" capability in your brain unless you encountered a new word. Then you would use the capability as needed and appropriate to help build the name of the new word and its meaning in your visual and auditory memory. Because most words cannot be sounded out, most people must rely upon another source to ensure they understand the proper way to say the new word and then commit that name of the whole word to auditory memory. If the word is similar to another word you already know, or can be fully or partially sounded out, sounding out the word may be helpful. But, it is also wise to confirm the proper name of the word to make sure it is correct.

Phonology is foundational to building reading skills, but it is not sufficient alone to empower a student to become a fluent reader with comprehension. Fluent reading with comprehension requires building additional skills that strongly rely upon visual processing, pattern recognition, memory, naming, sequencing, syntax, and meaning. Fluent reading with comprehension requires automatic word recognition linked to meaning.

Based upon the long-standing national scores, it is evident that the current phonics-based instructional system is not sufficient for most students, especially those who have a Skill Gap.

However, we are not advocating traditional whole language instruction as an alternative. That system is not sufficient alone either. But, it is important to realize that fluent reading requires the recognition, naming, and meaning of whole words. The question is how best to develop the full skill set that empowers fluent reading with comprehension.

3. Transition Gap from pre-reading skills to reading fluency with comprehension
Why most research conclusions about phonics are misleading

Phonics-based instruction and testing is the dominant instructional model in grades K-2 in the US.
However, state tests starting in 3rd grade do not test phonics content. Rather they test reading comprehension. These are two very different types of tests.
Scores for phonics tests in grade K-2 have risen significantly with so much emphasis on phonics instruction. However, reading comprehension scores on state and national tests have not improved in general.
Scores for phonics-based tests in grades K-2 generally are not made available publicly. State tests scores for reading comprehension in 3rd grade and above are generally made available publicly. Outside of the school system, most are not aware of the comparison of phonics-based testing scores in grades K-2 vs. state reading comprehension scores. We recently worked with two large school districts and had access to the K-2 test scores. Interestingly, about half of students who were deemed to be at grade level or above in grades K-2 based on phonics tests did not pass the 3rd grade state reading tests based upon fluency and comprehension.
Since the two tests are so different, proficiency scores on phonics-based tests may not be a good predictor of success on reading comprehension tests.
Most phonics-based curriculum that claims to be evidence based is using phonics testing as their evidence, as opposed to using reading comprehension scores to test efficacy. There is little published data to show that phonics instruction alone leads to early reading fluency with effective reading comprehension (8).
Reading proficiency requires the development of additional skills beyond what is taught with traditional phonics-based curriculum. Students who acquire these additional skills do well on reading comprehension tests starting in 3rd grade. Those who do not acquire these additional skills do not test well on reading comprehension tests even if they scored well on phonics tests.
Most phonics-based curricula do not adequately develop the additional skills required for reading comprehension. Students who succeed often develop these skills at home or through more comprehensive support programs either in school or after school.
Studies have shown that students who are read to aloud at home and engage in the proper discourse with family often learn to read better and faster (12). In fact, many of these students will enter school already reading or very close to being able to read. Other studies have shown that schools which adopt a proper immersion program in grades K-2 to catch up students who are behind help students to acquire the additional skills needed to become proficient readers by 3rd grade (13).

Most claims by phonics curricula of being evidence-based are linked specifically to improvements in phonics-related test scores. They are not based upon improvements in reading fluency and comprehension. This fact helps to explain why phonics programs are not necessarily helping to improve reading comprehension scores.

We checked the What Works Clearing House for studies that prove phonics programs improved reading comprehension scores. We could not find any. We found plenty of studies showing that various phonics-based interventions improved phonics-based test scores.

However, we did find a study of one of the major phonics early reading programs called Smarty Ants by Achieve 3000. The study concluded that there was no improvement in early reading fluency. (Study Report)
Interestingly, this program claims to be evidence-based and is one of the leading programs approved by states for use in schools.

There are two recent studies that claim phonics is not working:

Article, https://www.theguardian.com/education/2022/jan/19/focus-on-phonics-to-teach-reading-is-failing-children-says-landmark-study
1. There is a link to the study report within the article.
Phonemic awareness study, https://psyarxiv.com/ajxbv
Conclusion:

At present, recommendations to spend instructional time on advanced phonemic awareness training outside of print, or that students should develop “phonemic proficiency” to become proficient readers, are not evidence-based.

4. Phonological Awareness

Phonological awareness is one of the primary elements of phonics training.
Many studies proudly claim improvements on phonological awareness tests after intensive interventions.
However, in 2004, a highly respected Australian researcher named Max Colheart and his colleague Anne Castles published, in the journal Cognition, a comprehensive review of phonological awareness studies titled “Is there a causal link from phonological awareness to success in learning to read?” They “conclude that no study has provided unequivocal evidence that there is a causal link from competence in phonological awareness to success in reading and spelling acquisition.” Similar conclusions have been confirmed in more recent evaluations of published studies.

5. Non-content words

Non-content words represent a relatively small percentage of all words, yet are used extensively to create the structure of text (14). They often represent over 50% of words in a given text. They are also often referred to as function words. They stitch the content words into the proper grammatical structure. Examples of function words include in, the, to, there, was, do, under, and a. Function words include auxiliary verbs, prepositions, articles, conjunctions, and pronouns.
Non-content words usually are difficult, if not impossible, to sound out. So, they are often referred to as sight words. Because they have no content meaning, their importance is often minimized. They are often taught out of context through rote memorization, often with the use of flash cards. This usually does not teach the proper meaning which impedes comprehension.
Teaching non-content words properly with a focus on meaning is critical to developing comprehension skills. Non-content words provide hidden clues on meaning and pronunciation. Consider the following example. The farmer uses equipment to produce the produce. In the first case, the non-content word “to” signified what follows is a verb. In the second case, the non-content word “the” signified what follows is a noun.

6. Early vocabulary is often too limited, confusing and boring

Most early vocabulary is usually limited to words that fit the phonics model of instruction.
This limits the scope of stories and often creates nonsensical storylines that don't match the oral skills of students and the complexity of what they can handle with their oral language skills.
This confuses most students and unfortunately may bore them.
Oral vocabulary relies upon the name of the whole word. Early phonics instruction introduces a new concept of deconstructing the word into individual sounds that can lead to confusion. Students are taught words that can be sounded out but soon run into words that cannot be sounded out. They are then given confusing and complex rules to try to make it seem as if most words can be sounded out or they are told to just memorize the words. Some students can get through this confusion relatively easily while most do not.
This often leads to drilling word lists which are boring and don't lead to the richness of reading comprehension.

7. Mixed up letters

There is an interesting puzzle that has circulated for some time which challenges conventional wisdom about how we read and the role of phonics in the act of reading. People react to it differently. Many phonics advocates dismiss it, but the reality presented cannot be ignored. The information below shows two paragraphs where the letters in words are mixed up. The beginning and last letter are correct for each word, but the letters in between are mixed up. Yet most people who read fluently can actually read this mixed up presentation of text. See for yourself. The following quote comes from a blog created by a literacy writer named Mem Fox from Australia.

And if phonics is so important, so fundamental, so essential—as so many claim—and so crucial to our ability to make meaning from text, how come we can read the following with ease?

Aoccdrnig to rscheearch at an Elingsh uinervtisy, it deosn’t mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is that the frist and lsat ltteers are in the rghit pclae: the rset can be a toatl mses but you can still raed it wouthit a porbelm. This is bcuseae we don’t raed ervey lteter but the word as a wlohe.

So, hey, waht does this say abuot the improtnace of phnoics in raeidng? Prorbalby that phonics ins’t very imoptrnat at all. How apcoltapyic is that, in the cuerrnt licetary wars!

Mem Fox, https://memfox.com/for-parents/for-parents-the-folly-of-jolly-old-phonics/

If you are able to read the “mixed-up” paragraph above, it clearly shows that you are relying upon the visual memory of the whole word and not the sounding-out principles of phonics in order to read.

8. Sequencing

Visual sequence in nature is often not critical. If you see a deer and two fawns, it usually does not matter in what order they appear. You would still say I see a deer and two fawns, and the meaning would be clear. If you see a lion in nature, it would not matter if you see it from the left side or the right side. Mirror images of objects usually do not matter as you recognize the item either way. Left side vs. right side does not matter in most cases. What matters is that you recognize the lion no matter which way they are facing (15).

However, in text order does matter. There is a difference between a "b" letter and "d" letter even thought they are mirror images. The difference must be learned.

It is important to read from left to right and not jump around in the sentence when reading. It is also important to decode a word from left to right. In the following three words, they all have the same letters, but letter order creates a different word. (now / won / own)

Most students pick this concept up naturally, but many do not. It requires explicit instruction to address and must be systematically evaluated. Most traditional programs do not address this key element of reading adequately.

9. Dyslexia

Dyslexia is a term that is often used to represent that a student has difficulty with reading properly. The word itself does not necessarily identify the underlying cause of the difficulty. Some students reverse letters or words, others do not but still have difficulty reading properly.

Several studies have shown differences in brain development and neural network activation between good readers and struggling readers using fMRI scans (16). Some researchers claim that 20% or greater of students have dyslexia. According to some researchers, the symptoms of dyslexia are similar for students who have a true brain dysfunction and students who have experienced inadequate instruction (17).

We believe that most students who have difficulty with reading, and who may or may not be diagnosed as having dyslexia, can benefit from the proper training to ensure development of the full set of skills that empower reading success. Closing the Skill Gap can help most students.

10. Some students seem to learn how to read easily while others do not

Some students enter kindergarten already reading proficiently. (18)
Other students learn how to read relatively easily using any valid reading approach and do not necessarily require explicit training in phonics. (18)
The majority of students enter kindergarten behind in key skills compared to the first two groups of students noted above. Those who are behind appear to need additional training to catch them up to grade level. The question is what kind of training is best able to catch up them up and empower reading success?
What is different about the first two groups of students who seem to learn how to read proficiently without requiring explicit phonics instruction compared to those who struggle? Is it genetics or brain development based upon their life experiences during early childhood? We are not aware of any study that proves the difference is solely based upon genetics, but a child does not know how to read when born. It seems logical to assume that the necessary reading skills were developed based upon what the student experienced. There are studies that suggest children who are read to aloud daily during the early formative years and who were talked to correctly and in large quantities have developed stronger neural networks that prepare them better for reading success. (19) Additional studies also suggest that the home life environment can have a large impact on brain development and mindset. Stress and adverse childhood experiences can have a significant negative impact on how well a student will do in school. (20)
However, the majority of students struggle to learn how to read and no traditional phonics-based program appears to fully meet their needs. National and state reading scores attest to this fact.
First, it is important to note that the first two groups of students did not need phonics-based training in order to learn how to read proficiently.
Second, phonics-based training alone does not appear to be meeting the needs of most students who struggle.

11. Cognitive processing skills

Cognitive processing skills empower all of the functions that the brain manages, including reading. (21)
Cognitive processing enables thinking, planning, memory, driving, running, playing sports, and learning.
There are 70 individual cognitive processing skills that have been identified by scientists but the key groups include 1) attention, 2) memory, 3) processing speed, 4) visual processing, 5) auditory processing, and 6) logic and reasoning. Memory includes working memory, short and long-term memory, auditory memory and visual memory. (21)
How well a student can process information can significantly impact their ability to learn how to read proficiently.
It is common practice to evaluate hearing and vision for each student to ensure these key functions are working properly and address any deficits.
However, it is not common practice to evaluate how well the brain is functioning. Traditional cognitive skill testing is time consuming and expensive, so cognitive skill assessments are rare.
At least one cognitive skill assessment is available online and is very affordable. (Gibson Test)
Historically students with sufficient cognitive processing skill issues were designated as special education and provided compensation strategies. There are now brain development exercises that can help to improve cognitive processing skills.

12. Individual personal student factors matter

There is a considerable body of science that suggests life experiences from womb-to-classroom (ages 0-5) significantly impact foundational brain development and how well prepared a student will be when entering kindergarten. (22)
Students who face adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) are at greater risk.
Mindset and social emotional skill development are critical factors in how well a student will do in school.
Students who face greater stress and uncertainty are at greater risk.

Conclusions

The current system is failing the majority of children.
More of the same is not working.
Blaming teachers broadly for the failure is not helpful when the issue is more complex and requires a re-evaluation of the curricula and system.
We are not aware of any valid studies that demonstrate a causal relationship between phonics instruction and reading proficiency.
When a program claims to be evidence-based, make sure the evidence is based upon increased reading proficiency vs. improved scores on phonics tests.
Families play a critical role in helping to prepare their children for success.
In order to address this widespread reading crisis, every elementary school needs to provide all students with a comprehensive skill development training to close the Skill Gap.

The correct brain development empowers reading success