The Science of Reading - 2020
The Science of Reading - 2020
The Science of Reading - 2020
OF READING
WINTER 2020
If We Know Better,
We Must Do Better.
2
Literacy rates in the US have been We have a
relatively flat for decades.
reading crisis
According to the National Assessment of Educational Progress
(NAEP), our country’s most representative and longest-standing in Tennessee.
assessment of what US students know and can do in core
subject areas, fourth- and eighth-grade students have shown
only modest increases in reading achievement since 1992.
• 35 percent of fourth-graders nation-wide performed at
or above proficiency in reading in 2019 compared to 29
percent in 1992.
• Eighth-graders have shown slower growth in achievement
(proficient or above), improving from 29 percent in 1992 to
34 percent in 2019.
• In 2019, the average reading scores for both fourth-graders
and eighth-graders were lower compared to the 2017
assessment (2 percent and 3 percent lower, respectively).
• Twelfth grade reading proficiency is on a decline, nationally.
In 1992, 40 percent of high school seniors were proficient
or above in reading, compared to 37 percent in 2015. (NAEP
did not test twelfth-graders in 2017 or 2019.)
3
The human brain is not naturally wired to read. Reading is a
complex set of skills that must be explicitly taught.
“
and access to text at their “just right” reading level. This is not true.
PSYCHOLOGIST,
OR COGNITIVE
SCIENTIST IN
The Science of Reading
THE RESEARCH
COMMUNITY.”
KEITH STANOVICH
4
Reading requires a complex set of mental processes.
6
Foundational reading skills must be taught explicitly and
systematically.
The National Reading Panel evaluated existing research and Explicit: pre-determined skills
evidence to find the best ways of teaching children to read. The are taught directly
Panel considered roughly 100,000 reading studies published since
1966, and another 10,000 published before that time. The National Systematic: skills are taught in
Reading Panel’s analysis made it clear that the best approach to a logical progression
early reading instruction is one that incorporates:
9
Foundational reading skills can’t stand alone.
Students also need background knowledge and
vocabulary to be skilled readers.
Some falsely believe that children must first learn to read before they can read to
learn. Others assume that building knowledge is not developmentally appropriate
for our youngest learners or that young students or students who are far behind
are not capable of learning complex content or ideas.
10
“
“TEACHERS CAN
READ ALOUD TO
BUILD STUDENTS’
KNOWLEDGE OF THE
WORLD BEYOND
THEIR SCOPE AND
This does not mean our youngest learners should be expected
to build knowledge solely by reading on their own. Consider the
benefits of reading aloud to babies and toddlers:
•
•
•
•
Teaches language structure
Introduces new concepts and information
Builds listening skills and language comprehension
Teaches vocabulary
These same benefits carry into a child’s school years. In the early
grades, teachers should read aloud content-rich texts that are
two-three grade levels above their current grade to help students
grow their knowledge, vocabulary, and oral language skills.
TO HELP STUDENTS Research shows that from birth to about age 13, children’s oral
language abilities exceed their reading comprehension abilities,
meaning children learn more from listening to texts than they do
MAKE CONNECTIONS when reading on their own. Read alouds are essential in the early
grades to develop students’ listening comprehension, build their
FROM THE KNOWN knowledge of the world, and boost their academic vocabulary.
TO THE NEW. The same best practices for building knowledge for young learners
hold true for readers who may be far behind. Struggling learners
benefit from building their background knowledge and vocabulary,
THERE IS LIKELY and from growing their language comprehension skills. Knowledge
and vocabulary level the playing field for students who come to
NO BETTER WAY TO school with language and experience gaps.
DRAW CHILDREN IN
TO THE TREASURES
STORED IN THE
WRITTEN WORD
THAN THROUGH The Science of Reading
READING ALOUD TO
THEM AS MUCH AS
POSSIBLE.”
DAVID LIBEN
11
“
Teaching knowledge and vocabulary
improves reading comprehension.
Exposing students to new vocabulary, concepts, and background
knowledge grows students’ language comprehension, which
improves both decoding and reading comprehension. For students
to develop deep content knowledge and expertise that sticks,
MANY FACTORS
vocabulary and knowledge must be taught intentionally and
systematically by spending extended classroom time reading, CONTRIBUTE TO
listening to, and discussing multiple texts on the same topic.
The texts must offer a rich diet of facts, ideas, and vocabulary SUCCESSFUL
words, and not be “trivial literature” or reading selections on
fragmented topics. COMPREHENSION–
Vocabulary can make or break a reader’s success with a text: the
more words a reader knows, the better her comprehension is. ACCURATE, FLUENT
Readers become frustrated and struggle to comprehend when just
two percent of the vocabulary is unfamiliar. WORD READING,
Having a solid base of knowledge of a topic helps readers take
in new information as they read, solidifying and improving
VOCABULARY
comprehension. Knowledge helps a reader fill in any blanks
left by authors and aids in making inferences. Knowledge also KNOWLEDGE,
helps readers think about and internalize new information. As
we read new information on a given topic, readers with existing
background knowledge can more easily connect the new
AND THE USE
information with existing knowledge.
OF STRATEGIES
TO PREPARE TO
READ AND FIX UP
MEANING WHEN IT
BREAKS DOWN–BUT
IN STUDIES THAT
HAVE EXAMINED
THESE DIFFERENT
The Science of Reading
CONTRIBUTIONS TO
COMPREHENSION,
KNOWLEDGE IS THE
MOST IMPORTANT
CONTRIBUTOR.”
12
CERVETTI & HIEBERT
The connections between
content knowledge and The Baseball Study
comprehension are significant.
In the famous “Baseball
Study,” researchers compared Knowledge of the topic (baseball) had a
the relative impact of reading
ability to the impact of MUCH bigger impact on comprehension
knowledge of a topic. In the than did generalized reading ability.
study, middle school students
were grouped according
to reading ability and their
knowledge of baseball.
Students read a passage about
baseball and were then tested
on their comprehension.
Reading makes a person smarter; it builds This type of strategy-based reading instruction
“crystalized intelligence” (knowledge, facts, skills) does not benefit students. Rather, we can look
and must be practiced regularly and frequently. to science to better inform reading strategy
The more one reads and is read to, the smarter instruction:
one becomes. This is referred to as the Matthew
Effect in reading. A high volume of reading • Reading strategy instruction is best taught
increases children’s decoding ability, word after students are solid in their decoding
knowledge, vocabulary, and comprehension. skills, starting around third or fourth grade.
Additionally, as children become more skilled
readers, they enjoy reading more and are more • Reading strategies are learned easily and do
motivated to read, which in turn continues to not require extensive teaching and practice.
hone their skills. The “rich” readers get “richer.”
• The handful of strategies that have the
Unfortunately, the opposite is also true. most positive impact on comprehension are
Struggling readers tend to get less access to those that unlock the meaning of the text at
texts, particularly texts that are interesting and hand, such as making connections to prior
The Science of Reading
engaging, are less motivated to read, and have knowledge, asking questions of the text,
fewer opportunities to strengthen their reading summarizing as one reads, and monitoring
skills. The “poor” readers get “poorer.” one’s own comprehension.
14
Use writing instruction as a tool Eliminate practices that are
to increase equity and boost ineffective and inequitable.
reading comprehension. There are numerous programs and approaches
that are still used widely but are not based on
We must move away from the the science of reading. There is strong evidence
misinformed practice of teaching to show these approaches do not work.
writing separately from reading. Whole language is a philosophy that assumes
that learning to read is a natural phenomenon
Anchoring writing tasks and questions on the
and that if children are exposed to enough
text at hand evens the playing field for students
texts, they will develop a love of reading and
who may have limited personal experiences to
the skills needed to be fully literate. Whole
draw on. For example, reading about airplanes
language is often charactertized by lessons that
and then asking students to write about a time
encourage children to use context clues rather
when they traveled in an airplane excludes any
than decoding skills as the primary method of
child who has not had this experience.
word recognition. For example, if a line of text is
The Tennessee Academic Standards are “The Palomino was scarred,” a reader in a whole
designed to create equitable learning language classroom may be encouraged to look
experiences for all students. The standards at the pictures or use context clues to guess at
require that students have rich experiences the words, inaccurately making “The pony was
within the text: building knowledge through scared“ an acceptable response. Whole language
reading, using evidence in their writing that places emphasis on experiencing literacy over
can only be found in the text, and learning explicitly building knowledge through rich text
academic vocabulary found in those very texts. and systematic phonics instruction.
By grounding discussion and writing tasks Balanced literacy is deeply rooted in whole
in the text itself, all students are given equal language and claims to add phonics instruction.
opportunities to learn and engage. Reading and Most often though, phonics instruction
writing become a shared experience in learning fails to be added. If it is included, it is rarely
about any topic. explicit or systematic. Balanced literacy is not
balanced because it does not give adequate
Approaching writing instruction in this way time and attention to teaching the skills-based
also boosts reading comprehension. Cognitive competencies of reading that we know are
science shows that we understand and essential to becoming a skilled reader.
remember the things we pay attention to
and think about deeply. When students write
about what they have learned from texts, using
specific information and vocabulary, they better
understand and retain the new content.
“IT’S TIME THAT WE RETIRE
‘BALANCED LITERACY,’
FOCUSING LESS ON
IDEOLOGICAL AND RHETORICAL
The Science of Reading
16
“
Ask yourself these leadership questions.
• What is the picture of literacy achievement in your district,
school, classroom, or community? Which students are
learning to read proficiently by third grade? What instructional
decisions are leading to their success?
IF YOUR DISTRICT • How does the science of reading research play out in your
district literacy strategy? Professional learning opportunities
ISN’T HAVING AN for teachers and leaders? Classroom practice? Materials
selection?
‘UH OH’ MOMENT • What does your instructional leadership team understand
about the science of reading?
AROUND READING • What opportunities exist for teachers and leaders to
participate in professional learning on the science of reading?
INSTRUCTION, IT • Are terms like whole language, balanced literacy, guided
17
Commit to learning more about the science
of reading and determine how you will bring
the science of reading to the students in
your district.
Learn with Local Colleagues
Connect with districts who have been implementing high-quality
instructional materials based in the science of reading. Below are
some districts we know are already engaging in this work:
Lauderdale
County Schools
7 schools
Lenoir City
Schools
3 schools
Loudon
County Schools
Fayette Jackson-Madison Lincoln Marshall 9 schools
County Schools School System County Schools County Schools
10 schools 27 schools 8 schools 10 schools
Podcasts
Hard Words: Why aren’t our kids being taught to read? A primer on
the science of reading.
Books
The Knowledge Gap: The hidden cause of America’s broken
education system—and how to fix it by Natalie Wexler
References
Page 2
Shanahan, T. (n.d.). I’m a Terrific Reading Teacher, Why Should I Follow the Research? Retrieved No-
vember 14, 2019, from https://www.shanahanonliteracy.com/blog/im-a-terrific-reading-teacher-why-
should-i-follow-the-research.
Page 3
NAEP Report Card: Reading. (n.d.). Retrieved November 14, 2019, from https://www.nationsreportcard.
gov/reading/nation/scores/?grade=4.
Tennessee Department of Education. State of Tennessee. (n.d.). Retrieved November 14, 2019, from
https://reportcard.tnk12.gov/districts/0/page/DistrictOverall.
Tennessee Department of Education. Data Downloads & Requests. (n.d.). Retrieved November 14,
2019, from https://www.tn.gov/education/data/data-downloads.html.
Page 4
Stanovich, K. (1994). Romance and Reality. The Reading Teacher, (47), 280–291.
Kastner, T. K. S. (2015, May 12). The Reading Brain. Retrieved November 15, 2019, from https://blogs.
scientificamerican.com/frontiers-for-young-minds/the-reading-brain/
Genishi, C. (2013, November 7). Young Children’s Oral Language Development. Retrieved November 15,
2019, from https://www.readingrockets.org/article/young-childrens-oral-language-development
Page 5
Tennessee Department of Education. (2018). Teaching Literacy in Tennessee. Retrieved from https://
www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/readready/documents/teaching-literacy-in-tn/teaching_literacy_in_tn_up-
date_4_9_18.pdf
Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special
Education, 7(1), 6-10.
Scarborough, H. S. (2001). Connecting early language and literacy to later reading (dis)abilities: Evi-
dence, theory, and practice. In S. Neuman & D. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook for research in early literacy
(pp. 97–110). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
19
Page 9
Dyslexia International Association. (2018, August 21). Ladder of Reading Infographic—International
Dyslexia Association. Retrieved November 15, 2019, from https://dyslexiaida.org/ladder-of-reading-in-
fographic-structured-literacy-helps-all-students/
Lyon, G. R. (1998). Overview of Reading and Literacy Initiatives. Retrieved from https://www.nichd.nih.
gov/publications/pubs/jeffords.htm.PUB
Page 10
Willingham, D. T. (2008, Summer). What is Developmentally Appropriate Practice? American Educator,
pp. 34-39.
Page 11
Liben, D. (n.d.). ‘Both and’ Literacy Instruction K-5 A Proposed Paradigm Shift for the Common Core
State Standards ELA Classroom. Retrieved from https://achievethecore.org/file/1204
Denworth, L. (2017, May 5). The Magic of Reading Aloud to Babies. Retrieved November 15, 2019, from
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/brain-waves/201705/the-magic-reading-aloud-babies
Fisher, D & Frey, N. (2014). Speaking and Listening in Content Area Learning. The Reading Teacher,
68(1), 64–69
Kaefer, Tanya & Neuman, Susan & Pinkham, Ashley. (2014). Pre-Existing Background Knowledge
Influences Socioeconomic Differences in Preschoolers’ Word Learning and Comprehension. Reading
Psychology. 36. 203-231.
Page 12
Sarah M. Lupo, Alicia Berry, Emma Thacker, Amanda Sawyer and Joi Merritt, Rethinking Text Sets to
Support Knowledge Building and Interdisciplinary Learning, The Reading Teacher, , (2019).
Reading Comprehension Requires Knowledge—of Words and the World. Hirsch, E. D., Jr. American
Educator, v27 n1 p10-13,16-22,28-29,48 Spring 2003
Schmitt, Norbert & Jiang, Xiangying & Grabe, William. (2011). The Percentage of Words Known in a Text
and Reading Comprehension. The Modern Language Journal. 95. 26-43.
Page 13
Recht, D. R., & Leslie, L. (1988). Effect of prior knowledge on good and poor readers’ memory of text.
Journal of Educational Psychology,80(1), 16.
The Science of Reading
Kaefer, Tanya & Neuman, Susan & Pinkham, Ashley. (2014). Pre-Existing Background Knowledge
Influences Socioeconomic Differences in Preschoolers’ Word Learning and Comprehension. Reading
Psychology. 36. 203-231.
Page 14
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, NIH, DHHS. (2000).
Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching Children to Read: Reports of the Subgroups (00-4754).
Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
20
Stanovich, Keith E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in
the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 22, 360-407.
Cunningham, A. & Stanovich, K. (1998) “What Reading Does for the Mind.” American Educator, 22 (1/2),
8-15.
Shanahan, T., Callison, K., Carriere, C., Duke, N. K., Pearson, P. D., Schatschneider, C., & Torgesen, J.
(2015). Improving Reading Comprehension in Kindergarten Through 3rd Grade. Retrieved from https://
ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/PracticeGuide/14
Page 15
Willingham, D. T. (2010). Why don’t students like school?: a cognitive scientist answers questions about
how the mind works and what it means for your classroom. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Bergeron, B. S. (1990). What Does the Term Whole Language Mean? Constructing a Definition from
the Literature. Journal of Reading Behavior, XXII(4). Retrieved from https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/
pdf/10.1080/10862969009547716
Moats, L. C. (2000). Whole Language Lives On: The Illusion of “Balanced” Reading Instruction. Thomas
B. Fordham Foundation, October. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED449465.pdf
Shanahan, T. (2014, October 31). Unbalanced Comments on Balanced | Shanahan on Literacy [Blog
post]. Retrieved November 15, 2019, from https://shanahanonliteracy.com/blog/unbalanced-com-
ments-on-balanced-literacy
Page 16
Shanahan, T., Callison, K., Carriere, C., Duke, N. K., Pearson, P. D., Schatschneider, C., & Torgesen, J.
(2015). Improving Reading Comprehension in Kindergarten Through 3rd Grade. Retrieved from https://
ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/PracticeGuide/14
Brown, L. T., Mohr, K. A. J., Wilcox, B. R., & Barrett, T. S. (2017). The effects of dyad reading and text
difficulty on third-graders’ reading achievement. The Journal of Educational Research, 111(5), 541–553.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2017.1310711
Shanahan, T. (2019, September 21). Reading Workshop: How Not to Teach Reading Comprehension
| Shanahan on Literacy [Blog post]. Retrieved November 15, 2019, from https://www.
shanahanonliteracy.com/blog/what-do-you-think-of-the-reading-workshop-or-how-not-to-teach-
reading-comprehension
Moats, L. C. (2000). Whole Language Lives On: The Illusion of “Balanced” Reading Instruction. Thomas The Science of Reading
B. Fordham Foundation, October. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED449465.pdf
Page 17
McClellan, R., Kingsley, B., & Myracle, J. (2019, March 7). We Have a National Reading Crisis. Retrieved
November 15, 2019, from https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2019/03/07/we-have-a-national-read-
ing-crisis.html
21
1207 18th Avenue South
Suite 326
Nashville, TN 37212
615-727-1545
TNSCORE.ORG