View source for Reading

{{Short description|Taking in the meaning of letters or symbols}}
{{About||the town in England|Reading, Berkshire|the article on literacy|Literacy|other uses}}
{{cs1 config|name-list-style=vanc}}
{{pp-pc}}

{{Very long|date=September 2024}}{{Reading}}

'''Reading''' is the process of taking in the sense or meaning of [[symbol]]s, often specifically those of a [[written]] language, by means of [[Visual perception|sight]] or [[Somatosensory system|touch]].<ref>{{Cite dictionary |entry-url=https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/read |entry=read |dictionary=Merriam-Webster |date=17 July 2023}}</ref><ref>{{Cite dictionary |entry-url=https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/read|entry=Definition of 'read' |dictionary=Collins English Dictionary}}</ref><ref>{{cite dictionary |entry=Read: Reproduce mentally or vocally the written or printed words by following the symbols with the eyes or fingers |dictionary=The concise Oxford Dictionary|date=1990|publisher=Oxford University Press|isbn=0-19-861243-5 |title=The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Current English }}</ref><ref>{{Cite dictionary |entry-url=https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/read|entry=read |dictionary=Cambridge Dictionary}}</ref>

For educators and [[research]]ers, reading is a multifaceted process involving such areas as word recognition, [[orthography]] (spelling), [[Alphabetic principle|alphabetics]], [[phonics]], [[phonemic awareness]], vocabulary, comprehension, fluency, and motivation.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.readingrockets.org/article/what-reading|title=What is reading? Reading Rockets|date=24 April 2013}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.nichd.nih.gov/sites/default/files/publications/pubs/nrp/Documents/report.pdf|title=National reading panel, Teaching child to read, Reports of the subgroups|date=2000}}</ref>

Other types of reading and writing, such as [[pictograms]] (e.g., a [[hazard symbol]] and an [[emoji]]), are not based on speech-based [[writing system]]s.<ref>{{cite book|title=Typology of Writing Systems|author=Joyce, Terry |author2=Borgwaldt, S.|page=2|publisher=John Benjamins Publishing|date=2013|isbn= 978-90-272-0270-3}}</ref> The common link is the interpretation of symbols to extract the meaning from the visual notations or tactile signals (as in the case of [[braille]]).<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.afb.org/blindness-and-low-vision/braille/what-braille|title=What Is Braille?|website=The American Foundation for the Blind}}</ref>
[[File:Muse reading Louvre CA2220 (cropped).jpg|thumb|upright=1.2|A reading [[muse]]]]
[[File:Reading a newspaper. Catania, Italy (cropped).jpg|thumb|upright=1.20|There is a growing body of evidence which illustrates the importance of reading for pleasure for both educational purposes as well as personal development.<ref>{{cite book|title=Research evidence on reading for pleasure, Department for Education, England, DFE-57519-2012|year=2012}}</ref> Photo: Reading a newspaper in Catania, Sicily.]]

==Overview==
[[File:03282012Casa hogar niñas tlahuac30 (cropped).JPG|thumb|upright=1.20|Volunteer reads to a girl at the Casa Hogar de las Niñas in [[Mexico City]].]]
[[File:A PASSENGER ON THE LONE STAR PASSES THE TIME READING IN HER COMPARTMENT AS THE TRAIN CROSSES OKLAHOMA ENROUTE FROM... - NARA - 556033.jpg|thumb|upright=1.20|right|Woman reading on a train ride to pass the time, [[Oklahoma]], U.S., June 1974]]
Reading is generally an individual activity, done silently, although on occasion a person reads out loud for other listeners; or reads aloud for one's own use, for better comprehension. Before the reintroduction of [[Palaeography|separated text]] (spaces between words) in the late [[Middle Ages]], the ability to read silently was considered rather remarkable.<ref>{{Cite web | url=http://www.stanford.edu/class/history34q/readings/Manguel/Silent_Readers.html | title=The Silent Readers | website=Alberto Manguel, Chapter 2 of A History of Reading (New York; Viking, 1996) | access-date=2013-06-20}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://chaucer.fas.harvard.edu/how-read-medieval-handwriting-paleography|title=How to Read Medieval Handwriting (Paleography)|website=chaucer.fas.harvard.edu}}</ref>

Major predictors of an individual's ability to read both alphabetic and non-alphabetic scripts are oral language skills,<ref name="Seidenberg-2017">{{cite book |title=Language at the speed of light|date=2017|page=106|author=Mark Seidenberg|publisher=Basic Books |isbn=978-0-465-08065-6}}</ref> [[phonological awareness]], [[rapid automatized naming]] and [[verbal IQ]].<ref>{{Cite journal|vauthors=Powell D, Stainthorp R, Stuart M, Garwood H, Quinlan P |title=An experimental comparison between rival theories of rapid automatized naming performance and its relationship to reading |journal=Journal of Experimental Child Psychology |volume=98 |issue=1 |pages=46–68 |date=September 2007 |pmid=17555762 |doi=10.1016/j.jecp.2007.04.003 |url=http://centaur.reading.ac.uk/36269/1/Powelletal.JECP2007Revised_post_print%5B1%5D.pdf }}</ref>

As a [[Leisure activities|leisure activity]], children and adults read because it is enjoyable and interesting.  In the US, about half of all adults read one or more books for pleasure each year.<ref name="Pinsker-2019">{{Cite web|url=https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2019/09/love-reading-books-leisure-pleasure/598315/|title=Why Some People Become Lifelong Readers|last=Pinsker|first=Joe|date=2019-09-19|website=The Atlantic|language=en-US|access-date=2019-10-02}}</ref>  About 5% read more than 50 books per year.<ref name="Pinsker-2019" />  Americans read more if they: have more education, read fluently and easily, are female, live in cities, and have higher [[socioeconomic status]].<ref name="Pinsker-2019" />  Children become better readers when they know more about the world in general, and when they perceive reading as fun rather than as a chore to be performed.<ref name="Pinsker-2019" />

===Reading vs. literacy===
Reading is an essential part of [[literacy]], yet from a historical perspective literacy is about having the ability to both read and write.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/literate|title=Definition of 'Literate'|website=Merriam-Webster|date=6 July 2023 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/us/definition/english/literacy?q=literacy|title=Literacy: The ability to read and write; knowledge or skills in a specific area, Oxford learner's dictionary|date=2021-02-06}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/literacy|title=LITERACY &#124; English meaning – Cambridge Dictionary}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|author=Houston, Rab|date=1983|title=Literacy and society in the west, 1500–1850|journal=Social History|volume=8|issue=3 |pages=269–293|doi=10.1080/03071028308567568}}</ref>

Since the 1990s, some organizations have defined literacy in a wide variety of ways that may go beyond the traditional ability to read and write. The following are some examples:
* "the ability to read and write&nbsp;... in all media (print or electronic), including digital literacy"<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.eli-net.eu/fileadmin/ELINET/Redaktion/user_upload/European_Declaration_of_the_Right_to_Literacy2.pdf|title=European Declaration of the Right to Literacy|publisher= European Literacy Policy Network|date=2016|access-date=2021-02-09|archive-date=2021-08-15|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210815234944/http://www.eli-net.eu/fileadmin/ELINET/Redaktion/user_upload/European_Declaration_of_the_Right_to_Literacy2.pdf}}</ref>
* "the ability to&nbsp;... understand&nbsp;... using printed and written materials associated with varying contexts"<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://gaml.uis.unesco.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2018/12/4.6.1_07_4.6-defining-literacy.pdf|title=Defining literacy, UNESCO|date=2018-10-18}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.oecd.org/skills/piaac/publications/Skills_Matter_Additonal_Results_from_the_Survey_of_Adult_Skills_ENG.pdf|title=Skills matter, PIAAC, OECD|date=2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|title=Skills Matter: Additional Results from the Survey of Adult Skills, OECD Skills Studies|date=2019|publisher=OECD |isbn=978-92-64-79900-4}}</ref>
* "the ability to read, write, speak and listen"<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://literacytrust.org.uk/information/what-is-literacy/|title=What is literacy – National literacy trust|page=1|date=2021}}</ref>
* "having the skills to be able to read, write and speak to understand and create meaning"<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.education.vic.gov.au/school/teachers/teachingresources/discipline/english/literacy/Pages/introduction-to-literacy-in-english.aspx|title=Introduction to literacy in English, Literacy Teaching Toolkit, Victoria State Government, Australia|date=2021-04-19}}</ref>
* "the ability to&nbsp;... communicate using visual, audible, and digital materials"<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.literacyworldwide.org/about-us/why-literacy|title=Why literacy, International literacy association|date=2021-02-08|access-date=2021-02-06|archive-date=2021-02-04|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210204012454/https://www.literacyworldwide.org/about-us/why-literacy}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.literacyworldwide.org/about-us/why-literacy|title=International literacy association|date=2021|access-date=2021-02-06|archive-date=2021-02-04|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210204012454/https://www.literacyworldwide.org/about-us/why-literacy}}</ref>
* "the ability to use printed and written [[information]] to function in society, to achieve one's goals, and to develop one's knowledge and potential".<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://nces.ed.gov/naal/fr_definition.asp|title=National Assessment of Adult Literacy (NAAL)|website=nces.ed.gov}}</ref> It includes three types of adult literacy: prose (e.g., a newspaper article), documents (e.g., a bus schedule), and [[numeracy|quantitative literacy]] (e.g., using arithmetic operations in a product advertisement).<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.nap.edu/download/11267|title=Measuring Literacy: Performance Levels for Adults (2005), National Academy of Sciences|date=2005}}</ref><ref name="Carnegie"/>

In the academic field, some view literacy in a more philosophical manner and propose the concept of "multiliteracies". For example, they say, "this huge shift from traditional print-based literacy to 21st century multiliteracies reflects the impact of communication technologies and multimedia on the evolving nature of texts, as well as the skills and dispositions associated with the consumption, production, evaluation, and distribution of those texts (Borsheim, Meritt, & Reed, 2008, p. 87)".<ref>{{cite journal|journal=Journal of Language and Literacy Education |title=Multiliteracies in the classroom, Emerging conceptions of first-year teachers |volume=10 |issue=1 |pages=114–135|author=Boche, B.|date=2014}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|title=Multiple Literacies Theory: A Deleuzian Perspective|author=David R. Cole|publisher=Sense|date=2009|isbn=978-90-8790-909-3}}</ref> According to cognitive neuroscientist [[Mark Seidenberg]] these "multiple literacies" have allowed educators to change the topic from reading and writing to "Literacy". He goes on to say that some educators, when faced with criticisms of how reading is taught, "didn't alter their practices, they changed the subject".<ref>{{cite book |author=Seidenberg, Mark |title=Language at the speed of sight|pages=277–279|publisher=Basic Books|location=New York|year=2017|isbn=978-1-5416-1715-5}}</ref>

Also, some organizations might include numeracy skills and technology skills separately but alongside of literacy skills.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://education.alberta.ca/literacy-and-numeracy/about-literacy-and-numeracy/|title=Literacy and numeracy – Alberta Education|date=2021}}</ref>

In addition, since the 1940s the term literacy is often used to mean having knowledge or skill in a particular field (e.g., [[computer literacy]], [[ecological literacy]], [[health literacy]], [[media literacy]], quantitative literacy ([[numeracy]])<ref name="Carnegie">{{Cite web|url=https://www.carnegiefoundation.org/blog/a-brief-history-of-the-quantitative-literacy-movement/|title=A Brief History of the Quantitative Literacy Movement, The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching|date=2021}}</ref> and [[visual literacy]]).<ref>{{Cite book|title=Literacy in the new media age|author=Kress, Gunther R.|publisher=Routledge|year=2003|isbn=978-0-415-25356-7|location=New York}}</ref><ref>Zarcadoolas, C., Pleasant, A., & Greer, D. (2006). ''Advancing health literacy: A framework for understanding and action''. Jossey-Bass: San Francisco, CA.</ref><ref>{{cite book|title=Ecological Literacy: Education and the Transition to a Postmodern World|publisher=SUNY Press, NY|date=1991|isbn=978-0-7914-0874-2|url=https://archive.org/details/ecologicallitera0000orrd}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |author1=Reid, Gavin |title=Addressing Difficulties in Literacy Development |author2=Soler, Janet |author3=Wearmouth, Janice |author-link3=Janice Wearmouth |date=2002 |isbn=978-1-315-01571-2 |editor1-last=Reid |editor1-first=Gavin |doi=10.4324/9781315015712 |editor2-last=Soler |editor2-first=Janet |editor3-last=Wearmouth |editor3-first=Janice}}</ref>

===Writing systems===
{{Main|Writing system}}

In order to understand a text, it is usually necessary to understand the spoken language associated with that text. In this way, writing systems are distinguished from many other symbolic communication systems.<ref name="Daniels">{{cite book|title=The World's Writing Systems |year=1996|publisher=Oxford University Press|isbn= 978-0-19-507993-7|editor=Daniels, Peter T. |editor2=William Bright|title-link=The World's Writing Systems}}</ref> Once established, writing systems on the whole change more slowly than their spoken counterparts, and often preserve features and expressions which are no longer current in the spoken language. The great benefit of writing systems is their ability to maintain a persistent record of information expressed in a language, which can be retrieved independently of the initial act of formulation.<ref name="Daniels"/>

===Cognitive benefits===
[[File:Old man reading newspaper early in the morning at Basantapur-IMG 6800.jpg|thumb|upright=.60|Senior reading a newspaper in Nepal]]
Reading for pleasure has been linked to increased cognitive progress in vocabulary and mathematics during adolescence.
<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.cls.ioe.ac.uk/news.aspx?itemid=2740&itemTitle=Reading+for+pleasure+puts+children+ahead+in+the+classroom%2C+study+finds&sitesectionid=27&sitesectiontitle=News&returnlink=news.aspx%3Fsitesectionid%3D27%26sitesectiontitle%3DNews%26from%3D01%2F09%2F2013%26to%3D01%2F10%2F2013%26range%3DSeptember%25202013/ |title=Reading for pleasure puts children ahead in the classroom  |website=Centre for Longitudinal Studies}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal | doi=10.1002/berj.3180|title = Reading for pleasure and progress in vocabulary and mathematics| journal=British Educational Research Journal| volume=41| issue=6| pages=971–991|year = 2015|last1 = Sullivan|first1 = Alice| last2=Brown| first2=Matt| url=http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/10021113/}}</ref><ref name=":0" />Sustained high volume lifetime reading has been associated with high levels of academic attainment.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Menadue|first1=Christopher Benjamin|last2=Jacups|first2=Susan|date=2018|title=Who Reads Science Fiction and Fantasy, and How Do They Feel About Science? Preliminary Findings From an Online Survey|journal=SAGE Open|volume=8|issue=2|page=215824401878094|doi=10.1177/2158244018780946|issn=2158-2440|doi-access=free}}</ref>

Research suggests that reading can improve stress management,<ref name="Brown-2016">{{Cite web|url=https://www.businessinsider.com/14-reasons-why-reading-is-good-for-your-health-2016-12|title=14 reasons why reading is good for your health|last=Brown|first=Brendan|date=December 12, 2016|website=Business Insider}}</ref> memory,<ref name="Brown-2016" /> focus,<ref name="Brown-2018">{{Cite web|url=https://ideapod.com/15-incredible-benefits-reading-read-every-day/|title=15 incredible benefits from reading every day|last=Brown|first=Justin|date=January 31, 2018|website=[[Ideapod]]}}</ref> writing skills,<ref name="Brown-2018" /> and [[imagination]].<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://whytoread.com/imagination-why-reading-makes-you-more-creative/|title=Imagination And Why Reading Makes You More Creative|date=August 30, 2018|website=Why To Read}}</ref>

The cognitive benefits of reading continue into mid-life and the senior years.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.cls.ioe.ac.uk/news.aspx?itemid=3101&itemTitle=Long-term+vocabulary+benefits+from+%E2%80%98reading+for+pleasure%E2%80%99+in+childhood&sitesectionid=27&sitesectiontitle=News&returnlink=news.aspx%3Fsitesectionid%3D27%26sitesectiontitle%3DNews%26page%3D2/ |title=Long term vocabulary benefits from 'reading for pleasure' in childhood |website=Centre for Longitudinal Studies}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |author1=Sullivan A. |author2=Brown M. | year = 2015 | title = Vocabulary from adolescence to middle age | url = http://llcsjournal.org/index.php/llcs/article/view/310 | journal = Longitudinal and Life Course Studies | volume = 6 | issue = 2| pages = 173–189 | doi=10.14301/llcs.v6i2.310| doi-access = free }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |author1=Bavishi A. |author2=Slade MD. | author3=Levy BR | year = 2016 | title = A chapter a day: Association of book reading with longevity | journal = Social Science & Medicine | volume = 164 | pages = 44–48 | doi=10.1016/j.socscimed.2016.07.014|pmid=27471129 |pmc=5105607 }}</ref>

Research suggests that reading books and writing are among the brain-stimulating activities that can slow down cognitive decline in seniors.<ref name=Neurology20130703>{{Cite web |url=http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/science/2013/07/being-a-lifelong-bookworm-may-keep-you-sharp-in-old-age/ |title=Being a Lifelong Bookworm May Keep You Sharp in Old Age |last=Koren |first=Marina |date=July 23, 2013 |website=Smithsonian |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130707000152/http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/science/2013/07/being-a-lifelong-bookworm-may-keep-you-sharp-in-old-age/ |archive-date=July 7, 2013 |access-date=July 5, 2013 |url-status=live }} which cites {{Cite journal |title= Life-span cognitive activity, neuropathologic burden, and cognitive aging|last=Wilson |first=Robert S. |date=July 3, 2013 |journal=Neurology |volume=81 |issue=4 |pages=314–321 |display-authors=etal |doi=10.1212/WNL.0b013e31829c5e8a |pmid=23825173 |pmc=3772831 }}</ref>

===The right to read===

On April 23, 1968, when speaking on the  occasion  of the International Conference  on  Human  Rights  organized  by the  United  Nations, the Director-General  of [[Unesco]], Mr.   René   Maheu, said "One  must first be  able to read".<ref>{{cite web|url=https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000155105|year=1968|title=Illiteracy and human rights}}</ref> The following year, James Allen, the then U.S. Commissioner
of Education, declared, “There is no higher nationwide priority in
the field of education than the provision of the right to read for all.” At that time, UNESCO estimated there are 750 million people around the world who cannot read and write. The [[International Literacy Association]] reported that, according to UNESCO (2017), 250 million children around the world lack basic literacy skills, saying "it’s an issue of social justice".<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.literacyworldwide.org/docs/default-source/resource-documents/the-case-for-childrens-rights-to-read.pdf|title=The Case for Childrens Rights to Read|year=2018}}</ref> The right to read and write has been addressed by a variety of organizations, such as the South African Human Rights Commission. <ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.sahrc.org.za/home/21/files/The%20Right%20To%20Read%20and%20Write%20Report%20(12%20Aug%202021).pdf|title=The Right to Read and Write, South African Human Rights Commission|year=2021}}</ref>

On January 27, 2022, the [[Ontario Human Rights Commission]] (OHRC) released a report on its public inquiry entitled ''Right to Read inquiry report'', compiled with the expert assistance of [[Linda Siegel (psychologist)|Dr. Linda Siegel]] and Dr. Jamie Metsala.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/right-to-read-inquiry-report|title=Right to Read inquiry report|date=January 27, 2022}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://educhatter.wordpress.com/2022/03/18/right-to-read-whats-standing-in-the-way-of-fixing-early-reading/|title=Right to read, what's standing in the way of fixing early reading|date=March 18, 2022}}</ref> It followed the unanimous decision of the [[Supreme Court of Canada]], on November 9, 2012, recognizing that learning to read is not a privilege, but a basic and essential human right.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/12680/index.do|title=Moore v. British Columbia (Education)|date=November 9, 2012}},</ref> The inquiry found that Ontario's education system is not fulfilling its obligations to meet students' right to read. With science-based approaches to reading instruction, early screening, and intervention, we should see only about 5% of students reading below grade level. However, in 2018–2019, 26% of all Ontario Grade 3 students and 53% of Grade 3 students with special education needs, were not meeting the provincial standard. The Ontario curriculum encourages the use of the [[Reading#Three cueing system (Searchlights model)|three-cueing system]] and [[balanced literacy]], which are ineffective because they teach children to "guess" the meaning of a word rather than sound it out. What is required is [[Evidence-based education|evidence-based curriculum and instruction]].

[[Ministry of Education (Ontario)|The Minister of Education for Ontario]] responded to this report by saying the government is taking immediate action to create a plan that includes "revising the elementary Language curriculum and the Grade 9 English course with scientific, evidence-based approaches that emphasize direct, explicit and systematic instruction, and removing references to unscientific discovery and inquiry-based learning, including the three-cueing system, by 2023."<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.ohrc.on.ca/sites/default/files/Right%20to%20Read%20Min%20of%20Ed%20%20Response%20ENG.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/https://www.ohrc.on.ca/sites/default/files/Right%20to%20Read%20Min%20of%20Ed%20%20Response%20ENG.pdf |archive-date=2022-10-09 |url-status=live|title=The Ministry of Education thanks the Ontario Human Rights Commission for its Right to Read Inquiry report|date=March 11, 2022}}</ref>

===State of reading achievement===
{{See also|Reading#Reading achievement: national and international reports|l1=Reading achievement: national and international reports}}

Reading has been the subject of considerable research and reporting for decades. Many organizations measure and report on [[#Reading achievement: national and international reports|reading achievement]] for children and adults (e.g., [[NAEP]], [[PIRLS]], [[PISA]] [[PIAAC]], and [[EQAO]]).

Researchers have concluded that approximately 95% of students can be taught to read by the end of the first or second year of school, yet in many countries 20% or more do not meet that expectation.<ref name="fall2004torgesen">{{Cite web|url=https://www.aft.org/ae/fall2004/torgesen|title=The Evidence That Early Intervention Prevents Reading Failure, The American Federation of Teachers|author=Joseph K. Torgesen|year=2004}}</ref><ref name="Teaching Reading Is Rocket Science">{{Cite web|url=https://www.aft.org/sites/default/files/moats.pdf|title=Teaching Reading Is Rocket Science, American Federation of Teachers, Washington, DC, USA, 2020|page=5|author=Louisa C. Moats}}</ref>

A 2012 study in the U.S. found that 33% of grade three children had low reading scores – however, they comprised 63% of the children who did not graduate from high school. Poverty also had an additional negative impact on high school graduation rates.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://assets.aecf.org/m/resourcedoc/AECF-DoubleJeopardy-2012-Full.pdf|title=How Third-Grade Reading Skills and Poverty Influence High School Graduation, figures 2, 4 and 6, The Annie E. Casey Foundation|year=2012}}</ref>

According to the 2013 [[NAEP|Nation's Report card]] in the United States, 32% of grade four students failed to perform at or above the ''Basic Reading Level''. By 2019 this had increased to 34%. There was a significant difference by race and ethnicity (e.g., black students at 52% and white students at 23%). See more about [[#Reading achievement: national and international reports|the breakdown by ethnicity in 2019 and 2022 here]]. Following the impact of the [[Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on education|COVID-19 pandemic]], this increased to 37% in 2022, and by 2024 it was at 40%.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/reading/nation/scores/?grade=4|title=Nation's Report Card, reading scores, grade 4|year=2022}} {{PD-notice}}</ref> It is believed that students who read below the basic level lack sufficient support to complete their schoolwork.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.edweek.org/leadership/reading-scores-fall-to-new-low-on-naep-fueled-by-declines-for-struggling-students/2025/01|title=Reading Scores Fall to New Low on NAEP, Fueled by Declines for Struggling Students, edweek.org|author=Sarah Schwartz|date=January 29, 2025}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/reports/reading/2024/g4_8/|title=Nations report card, reading|year=2024}}</ref>

According to a 2023 study in California, only 46.6% of grade three students achieved the English reading standards.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://caaspp-elpac.ets.org/caaspp/|title=Test Results for California's Assessments website|year=2023}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://edpolicyinca.org/sites/default/files/2023-12/r_cottingham-dec2023.pdf|title=What Does it take to accelerate the learning of every child, Policy Analysis for California Education|author1=Benjamin W. Cottingham|author2=Heather J. Hough|author3=Jeannie Myung|date=December 2023}}</ref> Another report states that many teenagers who've spent time in California's juvenile detention facilities get high school diplomas with grade-school reading skills. "There are kids getting their high school diplomas who aren't able to even read and write." During a five-year span beginning in 2018, 85% of these students who graduated from high school did not pass a 12th-grade reading assessment.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://edsource.org/2023/in-californias-youth-justice-system-high-school-graduates-with-grade-school-reading-skills/688955|title=In California's youth justice system, many high schoolers graduate with grade-school reading skills, Edsource|date=2023-06-06|author=Betty Marquez Rosales |author2=Daniel J. Willis }}</ref>

Between 2013 and 2024, 37 US States passed laws or implemented new policies related to evidence-based reading instruction.<ref name="Sarah Schwartz"/> In 2023, New York City set about to require schools to teach reading with an emphasis on [[phonics]]. In that city, less than half of the students from the third grade to the eighth grade of school scored as proficient on state reading exams. More than 63% of Black and Hispanic test-takers did not make the grade.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/education/ny-nyc-mandate-public-schools-teach-reading-phonics-20230509-twzrkyjkqjgxhnnpzz3dcmqt7i-story.html|title=NYC to mandate citywide reading approach in bid to lift lagging literacy rates, New York Daily News|date=2023-05-09|author=Cayla Bamberger|website=[[New York Daily News]] }}</ref>

Globally, the [[COVID-19 pandemic]] created a substantial overall learning deficit in reading abilities and other academic areas. It arose early in the pandemic and persists over time, and is particularly large among children from low socio-economic backgrounds.<ref>{{cite report|title=A systematic review and meta-analysis of the evidence on learning during the COVID-19 pandemic, Nature Human Behaviour|author1=Bastian A. Betthäuser |author2=Anders M. Bach-Mortensen |author3=Per Engzell |date=January 30, 2023|doi=10.1038/s41562-022-01506-4|doi-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://amplify.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Amplify-mCLASS_MOY-COVID-Learning-Loss-Research-Brief_022421.pdf?_gl=1*19gt681*_ga*MTI4MzE4Njc3MS4xNjQ1ODk1NzM5*_ga_KB37BKPPF6*MTY4NjA1OTU1NS4yLjEuMTY4NjA1OTYzOC42MC4wLjA|title=COVID-19 means more students not learning to read, Amplify|date=February 2021}}</ref> In the US, several research studies show that, in the absence of additional support, there is nearly a 90 percent chance that a poor reader in Grade 1 will remain a poor reader.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.readingrockets.org/article/waiting-rarely-works-late-bloomers-usually-just-wilt|title=Waiting Rarely Works: Late Bloomers Usually Just Wilt|author=American Federation of Teachers, Reading rockets|year=2004}}</ref>

In Canada, it was reported that, in the province of [[Ontario]] 27% of grade three students did not meet the provincial reading standards in 2023.This increased to 29% in 2024.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.eqao.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/infographic-provincial-results-2023-g3.pdf|title=EQAO's 2022–2023 assessment of reading, writing and mathematics, grade three|year=2023}}</ref> Also in Ontario, 52% of grade three students with special education needs (students who have an Individual Education Plan), were not meeting the provincial standards in 2022. This increased to 55% in 2024.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/right-to-read-inquiry-report/executive-summary|title=Executive summary, Right to Read inquiry report, OHRC|date=January 27, 2022}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.eqao.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/highlights-provincial-results-2024-g3.pdf|title=Highlights of provincial results|year=2024}}</ref> The province of [[Nova Scotia]] reported that 32% of grade three students did not meet the provincial reading standards in 2022.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://plans.ednet.ns.ca/sites/default/files/documents/2021-22-LM3.pdf|title=2021–2022 Nova Scotia Assessment, Literacy and Mathematics/Mathématiques in Grade 3|year=2022}}</ref> The province of [[New Brunswick]] reported that 43.4% and 30.7% did not meet the Reading Comprehension Achievement Levels for grades four and six respectively in 2023.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www2.gnb.ca/content/dam/gnb/Departments/ed/pdf/K12/results/grade-4-6-english-reading.pdf|title=New Brunswick Provincial Assessment Results 2022–2023, Grades 4 & 6 English Reading Proficiency|year=2023}}</ref>

The Progress in International Reading Literacy Study ([[PIRLS]]) publishes reading achievement for fourth graders in 50 countries.<ref name="PIRLS">{{Cite web|url=https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/pirls/|title=Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) – Index|website=nces.ed.gov}}</ref> The five countries with the highest overall reading average are the Russian Federation, Singapore, Hong Kong SAR, Ireland and Finland. Some others are: England 10th, United States 15th, Australia 21st, Canada 23rd, and New Zealand 33rd.<ref name="PIRLS-2016">{{Cite web|url=http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/pirls2016/international-results/wp-content/uploads/structure/PIRLS/3.-achievement-in-purposes-and-comprehension-processes/3_1_achievement-in-reading-purposes.pdf|title=PIRLS 2016 Exhibit 3.1: Achievement in Reading Purposes}}</ref><ref name="Barclays-2017">{{Cite web|url=https://qz.com/1147045/singapores-fourth-graders-read-at-the-most-advanced-level-in-a-global-test-of-literacy/|title=Where the world's fourth-graders read at the most advanced level, Barclays, 2017-12-05|date=5 December 2017 }}</ref><ref name="PIRLS-2017">{{Cite web|url=https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/664562/PIRLS_2016_National_Report_for_England-_BRANDED.pdf|title=Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS): National Report for England, 2017-12-12}}</ref>

The Programme for International Student Assessment ([[PISA]]) measures 15-year-old school pupils scholastic performance on mathematics, science, and reading.<ref name="About PISA">{{Cite web|url=http://www.oecd.org/pisa/aboutpisa/|title=About PISA|website=OECD PISA|access-date=8 February 2018}}</ref> Critics, however, say PISA is fundamentally flawed in its underlying view of education, its implementation, and its interpretation and impact on education globally.<ref name="Zhao, Y. 245–266">{{cite journal|author=Zhao, Y.|title=Two decades of havoc: A synthesis of criticism against PISA|journal=J Educ Change |doi=10.1007/s10833-019-09367-x|date=January 22, 2020|volume=21 |issue=2 |pages=245–266 |s2cid=213889847 }}</ref><ref name="washingtonpost.com">{{cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2019/12/03/expert-how-pisa-created-an-illusion-education-quality-marketed-it-world|title=Expert: How PISA created an illusion of education quality and marketed it to the world, The Washington Post|newspaper=[[The Washington Post]] |date=December 3, 2019}}</ref><ref name="theguardian.com">{{cite web|url=https://www.theguardian.com/education/2014/may/06/oecd-pisa-tests-damaging-education-academics|title=OECD and Pisa tests are damaging education worldwide – academics, The Guardian|website=[[TheGuardian.com]] |date=May 6, 2014}}</ref>

Many older students also lag behind in reading skills and are "hidding in plain sight". The [[RAND Corporation]] reported that 44% of teachers in grades 3-12 say their students always or almost always have difficulty reading the content in their class. Ninety-seven percent of teachers modify their teaching to accommodate this concern.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/teachers-say-older-kids-need-help-with-basic-reading-skills-too/2024/08?utm_source=nl&utm_medium=eml&utm_campaign=popweek&M=10979198&UUID=6a0c64198acb1707042a63f7df9be9be&T=14452022|title=Teachers Say Older Kids Need Help With Basic Reading Skills, Too, edweek.org|author=Sarah Schwartz|date=August 29, 2024}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/older-students-who-struggle-to-read-hide-in-plain-sight-what-teachers-can-do/2024/05?utm_source=nl&utm_medium=eml&utm_campaign=cm&M=9888172&UUID=6a0c64198acb1707042a63f7df9be9be&T=13064708|title=Older Students Who Struggle to Read Hide in Plain Sight. What Teachers Can Do, edweek.org|author=Elizabeth Heubeck|date=May 16, 2024}}</ref>

The reading levels of adults, ages 16–65, in 39 countries are reported by the [[Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies]] (PIAAC).<ref name="PIAAC-OECD">{{Cite web|url=https://www.oecd.org/skills/piaac/|title=PIAAC-OECD}}</ref> Between 2011 and 2018, PIAAC reports the percentage of adults reading ''at-or-below level one'' (the lowest of five levels). Some examples are Japan 4.9%, Finland 10.6%, Netherlands 11.7%, Australia 12.6%, Sweden 13.3%, Canada 16.4%, England (UK) 16.4%, and the United States 16.9%.<ref name="OECD-2013">{{Cite web|url=https://www.oecd.org/skills/piaac/Skills%20volume%201%20(eng)--full%20v12--eBook%20(04%2011%202013).pdf|title=OECD Skills Outlook 2013, p. 257}}</ref>

According to the [[World Bank]], 53% of all children in low-and-middle-income countries suffer from 'learning poverty'. In 2019, using data from the [[UNESCO]] Institute for Statistics, they published a report entitled ''Ending Learning Poverty: What will it take?''.<ref>{{cite report|hdl=10986/32553|title=Ending Learning Poverty: What will it take, World Bank|pages=1–34|date=2019|author=World Bank}}</ref> Learning poverty is defined as being unable to read and understand a simple text by age 10.

Although they say that all foundational skills are important, include reading, numeracy, basic reasoning ability, socio-emotional skills, and others – they focus specifically on reading. Their reasoning is that reading proficiency is an easily understood metric of learning, reading is a student's gateway to learning in every other area, and reading proficiency can serve as a proxy for foundational learning in other subjects.

They suggest five pillars to reduce learning poverty: 
# Learners are prepared and motivated to learn
# Teachers at all levels are effective and valued 
# Classrooms are equipped for learning
# Schools are safe and inclusive spaces, and
# Education systems are well-managed.

==Learning to read==
[[File:Az girl reading a book. e-citizen.jpg|thumb|275px|right|Researchers have concluded that approximately 95% of students can be taught to read by the end of the first or second year of school, yet in many countries 20% or more do not meet that expectation.<ref name="fall2004torgesen"/><ref name="Teaching Reading Is Rocket Science"/>]]'''Learning to read''' or '''reading skills acquisition''' is the acquisition and practice of the skills necessary to understand the meaning behind printed words. For a skilled reader, the act of reading feels simple, effortless, and automatic.<ref name="Rayner, 2001">{{cite journal|last=Rayner|first=Keith|year=2001|title=How psychological science informs the teaching of reading|url=http://www.psychologicalscience.org/journals/pspi/pdf/pspi22.pdf|journal=Psychological Science in the Public Interest|series=2|volume=2|issue=2|pages=31–74|doi=10.1111/1529-1006.00004|pmid=26151366|author2=Barbara Foorman|author3=Charles A. Perfetti|author4=David Pesetsky|author5=Mark S. Seidenberg|citeseerx=10.1.1.14.4083|s2cid=134422|access-date=2021-01-15|archive-date=2017-08-12|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170812141810/http://www.psychologicalscience.org/journals/pspi/pdf/pspi22.pdf}}</ref> However, the process of learning to read is complex and builds on cognitive, linguistic, and social skills developed from a very early age. As one of the four core language skills (listening, speaking, reading and writing),<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.cgcc.edu/literacy/resources/four-basic-language-skills|title=The Four Basic Language Skills &#124; Gorge Literacy &#124; Columbia Gorge Community College|website=www.cgcc.edu|access-date=2021-01-15|archive-date=2020-10-31|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201031124749/https://www.cgcc.edu/literacy/resources/four-basic-language-skills}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://learnenglish.britishcouncil.org/skills|title=Skills|website=LearnEnglish}}</ref> reading is vital to gaining a command of written language.

In the United States and elsewhere, it is widely believed that students who lack proficiency in reading by the end of grade three may face obstacles for the rest of their academic career.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.nsba.org/-/media/NSBA/File/cpe-learning-to-read-reading-to-learn-white-paper-2015.pdf?la=en&hash=8E0E470C3E263C66E4491EC035224DC9018C6D5F|title=Center for public education, March 2015, NSBA.org}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://lincs.ed.gov/publications/pdf/PRFbooklet.pdf|title=Put Reading First, The National Institute for Literacy}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Docs/PracticeGuide/wwc_found_reading_summary_051517.pdf|title=Foundational Skills to Support Reading for Understanding in Kindergarten Through 3rd Grade, The Institute of Education Sciences}}</ref> For example, it is estimated that they would not be able to read half of the material they will encounter in grade four.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.ccf.ny.gov/files/9013/8262/2751/AECFReporReadingGrade3.pdf|title=Why Reading by the End of Third Grade Matters, p. 9, the Annie E. Casey Foundation, 2010}}</ref>

In 2019, among American fourth-graders in public schools, only 58% of Asian, 45% of Caucasian, 23% of Hispanic, and 18% of Black students performed at or above the ''proficient level'' of the [[#Reading achievement: national and international reports|Nation's Report Card]].<ref name="auto7">{{Cite web |title=NAEP Reading: National Achievement-Level Results |url=https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/reading/nation/achievement/?grade=4 |access-date=February 1, 2023 |website=Nation's Report Card}}</ref> Also, in 2012, in the [[United Kingdom]] it has been reported that 15-year-old students are reading at the level expected of 12-year-old students.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/education-20346204|title=Many teenagers can't read GCSE exam papers, BBC News|work=BBC News|date=2012-11-16}}</ref>

As a result, many governments put practices in place to ensure that students are reading at grade level by the end of grade three. An example of this is the Third Grade Reading Guarantee created by the State of [[Ohio]] in 2017. This is a program to identify students from kindergarten through grade three that are behind in reading, and provide support to make sure they are on track for reading success by the end of grade three.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://education.ohio.gov/Topics/Learning-in-Ohio/Literacy/Third-Grade-Reading-Guarantee|title=Third Grade Reading Guarantee &#124; Ohio Department of Education}}</ref><ref name="OhioEdu-2017">{{Cite web|url=http://education.ohio.gov/getattachment/Topics/Learning-in-Ohio/English-Language-Art/English-Language-Arts-Standards/ELA-Learning-Standards-2017.pdf.aspx?lang=en-US|title=Reading Standards for Foundational Skills K–12, OHIO Department of Education, 2017}}</ref> This is also known as [[remedial education]]. Another example is the policy in England whereby any pupil who is struggling to decode words properly by year three must "urgently" receive help through a "rigorous and systematic phonics programme".<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-curriculum-in-england-primary-curriculum|title=National curriculum in England: primary curriculum|website=GOV.UK|date=6 May 2015 }}</ref>

In 2016, out of 50 countries, the United States achieved the 15th highest score in grade-four reading ability.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/pirls/pirls2016/tables/pirls2016_table01.asp|title =PIRLS reading results by country, NCES, 2016}}</ref> The ten countries with the highest overall reading average are the Russian Federation, Singapore, Hong Kong SAR, Ireland, Finland, Poland, Northern Ireland, Norway, Chinese Taipei and England (UK). Some others are: Australia (21st), Canada (23rd), New Zealand (33rd), France (34th), Saudi Arabia (44th), and South Africa (50th).

===Spoken language: the foundation of reading===
Spoken language is the foundation of learning to read (long before children see any letters) and children's knowledge of the phonological structure of language is a good predictor of early reading ability. Spoken language is dominant for most of childhood; however, reading ultimately catches up and surpasses speech.<ref>{{cite book |title=Language at the speed of light|date=2017|pages=101–121|author=Mark Seidenberg|publisher=Basic Books |isbn=978-0-465-08065-6}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|title=Handbook of Reading Research, Volume IV|pages=[https://archive.org/details/handbookofreadin0003unse/page/142 142–143]|date=2011|publisher=Routledge|author1=Kamil, Michael L.|author2=Pearson, P. David|author3=Moje, Elizabeth Birr|author-link3 = Elizabeth Birr Moje| author4=Afflerbach, Peter|isbn=978-0-8058-5342-1|url=https://archive.org/details/handbookofreadin0003unse}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|title=Phonology, Reading Acquisition, and Dyslexia: Insights from Connectionist Models|date=August 2000|journal=Psychological Review |volume=106 |issue=3|doi=10.1037/0033-295X.106.3.491|author1=Harm, M. W. |author2=Seidenberg, M. S.|pages=491–528|pmid=10467896}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy/RF/K/|title=Common Core States Standard Initiative, USA, English language arts|page=Appendix A-26|access-date=2021-01-15|archive-date=2021-01-21|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210121211638/http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy/RF/K/}}</ref>

By their first birthday most children have learned all the sounds in their spoken language. However, it takes longer for them to learn the phonological form of words and to begin developing a spoken vocabulary.<ref name="Seidenberg-2017"/>

Children acquire a spoken language in a few years. Five-to-six-year-old English learners have vocabularies of 2,500 to 5,000 words, and add 5,000 words per year for the first several years of schooling. This rapid learning rate cannot be accounted for by the instruction they receive. Instead, children learn that the meaning of a new word can be inferred because it occurs in the same context as familiar words (e.g., ''lion'' is often seen with ''cowardly'' and ''king'').<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://researched.org.uk/2019/06/24/d_-y_u-kn_w-wh_t-i-me_n-reading-for-inference/|title=Inference, says Clare Sealy, isn't a skill that can be taught. But it can be improved – through knowledge., ResearchED|date=24 June 2019}}</ref> As British linguist [[John Rupert Firth]] says, "You shall know a word by the company it keeps".

The environment in which children live may also impact their ability to acquire reading skills. Children who are regularly exposed to chronic environmental noise pollution, such as highway traffic noise, have been known to show decreased ability to discriminate between [[phonemes]] (oral language sounds) as well as lower reading scores on standardized tests.<ref name="CohenGlass1973">{{cite journal|last1=Cohen|first1=Sheldon|last2=Glass|first2=David C.|last3=Singer|first3=Jerome E.|title=Apartment noise, auditory discrimination, and reading ability in children|journal=Journal of Experimental Social Psychology|volume=9 |issue=5|year=1973 |pages=407–422 |issn=0022-1031 |doi=10.1016/S0022-1031(73)80005-8}}</ref>

===Reading to children: necessary but not sufficient===
[[File:Early literacy.jpg|thumb|Reading to children is not the same as teaching children to read; however, it does help if the children's attention is directed to the words on the page as they are being read to.<ref name="MyersBotting2008" /><ref name="Piasta-2012">{{cite journal|title=Increasing Young Children's Contact With Print During Shared Reading: Longitudinal Effects on Literacy Achievement, 2012-04-17|year=2012|doi=10.1111/j.1467-8624.2012.01754.x|pmid=22506889|last1=Piasta|first1=S. B.|last2=Justice|first2=L. M.|last3=McGinty|first3=A. S.|last4=Kaderavek|first4=J. N.|journal=Child Development|volume=83|issue=3|pages=810–820}}</ref>]]

Children learn to speak naturally – by listening to other people speak. However, reading is not a natural process, and many children need to learn to read through a process that involves "systematic guidance and feedback".<ref name="NIFDI">{{Cite web |last1=Hempenstall |first1=Kerry |title=Whole Language! What was that all about? |url=https://www.nifdi.org/news/hempenstall-blog/441-part-1-whole-language-what-was-that-all-about |website=National Institute for Direct Instruction |access-date=29 January 2019}}</ref><ref name="Gough">{{cite journal |last1=Gough |first1=P.B. |last2=Hillinger |first2=M.L. |title=Learning to read: An unnatural act. |journal=Bulletin of the Orton Society |date=1980 |volume=30 |pages=179–196|doi=10.1007/BF02653717 |s2cid=143275563 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/mar98/vol55/num06/Why-Reading-Is-Not-a-Natural-Process.aspx|title=Why Reading Is Not a Natural Process, volume 55, number 6, ASCD, Alexandria, VA|year=1998|access-date=2021-01-15|archive-date=2021-01-16|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210116180435/http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/mar98/vol55/num06/Why-Reading-Is-Not-a-Natural-Process.aspx}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Lyon|first1=G. Reid|title=Why Reading Is Not a Natural Process|journal=Educational Leadership|date=1998|issn=0013-1784}}</ref>

So, "reading to children is not the same as teaching children to read".<ref>{{cite book |author=Seidenberg, Mark |title=Language at the speed of sight|pages=114–117|publisher=Basic Books|location=New York|year=2017|isbn=978-1-5416-1715-5}}</ref> Studies with primary age children indicate that having a child read rather than being read to is the better way to improve reading achievement.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.shanahanonliteracy.com/blog/reading-aloud-to-kids-and-why-lessons-need-purposes|title=Reading Aloud to Kids and Why Lessons Need Purposes, Timothy Shanahan (educator)|date=June 11, 2017}}</ref>

However, there is some evidence that "shared reading" with children does help to improve reading if the children's attention is directed to the words on the page as they are being read to.<ref name="MyersBotting2008">{{cite journal |last1=Myers|first1=L. |last2=Botting|first2=N. |title=Literacy in the mainstream inner-city school: Its relationship to spoken language|journal=Child Language Teaching and Therapy|volume=24 |issue=1|year=2008 |pages=95–114|issn=0265-6590 |doi=10.1177/0265659007084570|s2cid=145153275 |url=http://openaccess.city.ac.uk/13719/3/Lucy%20RC%20paper%20revised%20CRO.pdf }}</ref><ref name="Piasta-2012"/>

Nonetheless, reading to children is important because it socializes them to the activity of reading; it engages them; it expands their knowledge of spoken language; and it enriches their linguistic ability by hearing new and novel words and grammatical structures.<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal |last=Sun |first=Yun-Jun |last2=Sahakian |first2=Barbara J. |last3=Langley |first3=Christelle |last4=Yang |first4=Anyi |last5=Jiang |first5=Yuchao |last6=Kang |first6=Jujiao |last7=Zhao |first7=Xingming |last8=Li |first8=Chunhe |last9=Cheng |first9=Wei |last10=Feng |first10=Jianfeng |date=28 June 2023 |title=Early-initiated childhood reading for pleasure: associations with better cognitive performance, mental well-being and brain structure in young adolescence |url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0033291723001381/type/journal_article |journal=Psychological Medicine |language=en |volume=54 |issue=2 |pages=359–373 |doi=10.1017/S0033291723001381 |issn=0033-2917}}</ref>

===Optimum age for learning to read===
There is some debate as to the optimum age to teach children to read.

The [[Common Core State Standards Initiative]] (CCSS) in the United States has standards for foundational reading skills in kindergarten and grade one that include instruction in print concepts, phonological awareness, phonics, word recognition, and fluency.<ref name="auto1">{{Cite web|url=http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy/RF/K/|title=English Language Arts Standards » Reading: Foundational Skills » Kindergarten &#124; Common Core State Standards Initiative|website=www.corestandards.org|access-date=2021-01-15|archive-date=2021-01-21|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210121211638/http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy/RF/K/}}</ref> However, some critics of CCSS say that "To achieve reading standards usually calls for long hours of drill and worksheets – and reduces other vital areas of learning such as math, science, social studies, art, music and creative play".<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2015/01/13/report-requiring-kindergartners-to-read-as-common-core-does-may-harm-some/|title=Report: Requiring kindergartners to read – as Common Core does – may harm some|last=Strauss|first=Valerie|date=13 January 2015|newspaper=The Washington Post}}</ref>

The [[Programme for International Student Assessment|PISA 2007]] OECD data from 54 countries demonstrates "no association between school entry age&nbsp;... and reading achievement at age 15".<ref name="Suggate">Sebastian Suggate, "Watering the garden before a rainstorm: the case of early reading instruction" in ''Contemporary Debates in Childhood Education and Development'', ed. Sebastian Suggate, Elaine Reese. pp. 181–190.</ref> Also, a German study of 50 kindergartens compared children who, at age 5, had spent a year either "academically focused", or "play-arts focused" and found that in time the two groups became inseparable in reading skill.<ref>{{Cite journal | last1 = Suggate | first1 = S. P. | last2 = Schaughency | first2 = E. A. | last3 = Reese | first3 = E. | title = Children learning to read later catch up to children reading earlier | url = https://archive.org/details/sim_early-childhood-research-quarterly_2013-03_28_1/page/33 | doi = 10.1016/j.ecresq.2012.04.004 | journal = Early Childhood Research Quarterly | volume = 28 | pages = 33–48 | year = 2013 }}</ref> The authors conclude that the effects of early reading are like "watering a garden before a rainstorm; the earlier watering is rendered undetectable by the rainstorm, the watering wastes precious water, and the watering detracts the gardener from other important preparatory groundwork".<ref name=Suggate/>

Some scholars favor a [[developmentally appropriate practice]] (DAP) in which formal instruction on reading begins when children are about six or seven years old. And to support that theory some point out that children in [[Finland]] start school at age seven (Finland ranked 5th in the 2016 [[PIRLS]] international grade four reading achievement.)<ref name="auto3">{{Cite web|url=https://timssandpirls.bc.edu/pirls2016/international-results/pirls/student-achievement/pirls-achievement-results/index.html|title=PIRLS Achievement Results – PIRLS 2016}}</ref> In a discussion on academic kindergartens, professor of child development [[David Elkind]] has argued that, since "there is no solid research demonstrating that early academic training is superior to (or worse than) the more traditional, hands-on model of early education", educators should defer to developmental approaches that provide young children with ample time and opportunity to explore the natural world on their own terms.<ref name="Elkind">{{cite journal|first=David |last=Elkind |title=Much Too Early| journal= Education Next|year= 2001 |url=http://educationnext.org/much-too-early/}}</ref> Elkind emphasized the principle that "early education must start with the child, not with the subject matter to be taught".<ref name="Elkind" /> In response, [[Grover J. Whitehurst]], Director, Brown Center on Education Policy, (part of [[Brookings Institution]])<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.brookings.edu/about/centers/brown/about|title=Brown centre on education policy|date=9 July 2020}}</ref> said David Elkind is relying too much on philosophies of education rather than science and research. He continues to say education practices are "doomed to cycles of fad and fancy" until they become more based on [[Evidence-based education|evidence-based practice]].<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://californiapolicycenter.org/tag/grover-j-whitehurst/|title=Transitional Kindergarten: A Boondoggle by any other name, Brown Center on Education Policy, 2014-01-14|access-date=2021-01-15|archive-date=2021-01-21|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210121202945/https://californiapolicycenter.org/tag/grover-j-whitehurst/}}</ref>

On the subject of Finland's academic results, as some researchers point out, prior to starting school Finnish children must participate in one year of compulsory free pre-primary education and most are reading before they start school.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://timssandpirls.bc.edu/pirls2016/encyclopedia/countries/finland/overview-of-the-education-system/index.html|title=Overview of the Education System – PIRLS 2016 Encyclopedia}}</ref><ref name="Refsnes-2019">{{Cite web|url=https://www.shanahanonliteracy.com/blog/when-should-reading-instruction-begin|title=When should reading instruction begin? &#124; Shanahan on Literacy|first=Hege|last=Refsnes|website=www.shanahanonliteracy.com}}</ref> And, with respect to ''developmentally appropriate practice'' (DPA), in 2019 the [[National Association for the Education of Young Children]], Washington, D.C., released a draft position paper on DPA saying "The notion that young children are not ready for academic subject matter is a misunderstanding of developmentally appropriate practice; particularly in grades 1 through 3, almost all subject matter can be taught in ways that are meaningful and engaging for each child".<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.naeyc.org/sites/default/files/globally-shared/downloads/PDFs/resources/position-statements/2nd_public_draft_dap.pdf|title=NAEYC Position Statement on Developmentally Appropriate Practice: 2020, Proposed Final Draft – Not For Citation}}</ref> And, researchers at [[The Institutes for the Achievement of Human Potential]] say it is a myth that early readers are bored or become trouble makers in school.<ref>{{Cite web|url= https://iahp.org/myths-reading/|title=Myths about reading|date=20 July 2017}}</ref>

Other researchers and educators favor limited amounts of literacy instruction at the age of four and five, in addition to non-academic, intellectually stimulating activities.<ref name="vanKleeck2010">{{Cite journal | last1 = Van Kleeck | first1 = A. | last2 = Schuele | first2 = C. M. | doi = 10.1044/1058-0360(2010/09-0038) | title = Historical Perspectives on Literacy in Early Childhood | url = https://archive.org/details/sim_american-journal-of-speech-language-pathology_2010-11_19_4/page/341 | journal = American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology | volume = 19 | issue = 4 | pages = 341–355 | year = 2010 | pmid = 20581109}}</ref>

Reviews of the academic literature by the [[Education Endowment Foundation]] in the UK have found that starting literacy teaching in preschool has "been consistently found to have a positive effect on early learning outcomes"<ref name="EEFliteracy">{{Cite web |url=https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/evidence-summaries/early-years-toolkit/early-literacy-approaches/ |title=Early Literacy Approaches |author=Education Endowment Foundation |work=Early Years Toolkit |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210403082305/https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/evidence-summaries/early-years-toolkit/early-literacy-approaches/ |archive-date=3 April 2021 |access-date=2021-04-03 }}</ref> and that "beginning early years education at a younger age appears to have a high positive impact on learning outcomes".<ref name="EEFearly">{{Cite web |url=https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/evidence-summaries/early-years-toolkit/earlier-starting-age/#closeSignup |title=Earlier Starting Age |author=Education Endowment Foundation |work=Early Years Toolkit |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210403074141/https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/evidence-summaries/early-years-toolkit/earlier-starting-age/ |archive-date=3 April 2021 |access-date=2021-04-03 }}</ref> This supports current standard practice in the UK which includes developing children's phonemic awareness in preschool and teaching reading from age four.

A study in [[Chicago]] reports that an [[Early childhood education|early education program]] for children from low-income families is estimated to generate $4 to $11 of economic benefits over a child's lifetime for every dollar spent initially on the program, according to a cost-benefit analysis funded by the [[National Institutes of Health]]. The program is staffed by certified teachers and offers "instruction in reading and math, group activities and educational field trips for children ages 3 through 9".<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.nichd.nih.gov/newsroom/releases/020411-CPC|title=High-quality Preschool Program Produces Long-term Economic Payoff|author=NIH|date=2011-02-04}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.nichd.nih.gov/newsroom/releases/031115-podcast-reynolds|title=Small investment in children's education yields big results|author=NIH|date=2015-03-11}}</ref>

There does not appear to be any definitive research about the "magic window" to begin reading instruction.<ref name="Refsnes-2019"/> However, there is also no definitive research to suggest that starting early causes any harm. [[Timothy Shanahan (educator)|Researcher and educator Timothy Shanahan]], suggests, "Start teaching reading from the time you have kids available to teach, and pay attention to how they respond to this instruction&nbsp;– both in terms of how well they are learning what you are teaching, and how happy and invested they seem to be. If you haven't started yet, don't feel guilty, just get going".<ref name="Refsnes-2019"/>

===Suggested reading instruction by grade level===
Some education researchers suggest the teaching of the various reading components by specific grade levels.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.readingrockets.org/article/what-should-be-emphasized-each-stage-reading-development|title=What Should Be Emphasized at Each Stage of Reading Development, Louisa Moats, Carol Tolman, Reading Rockets|date=24 April 2013}}</ref> The following is one example from Carol Tolman, Ed.D. and Louisa Moats, Ed.D. that corresponds in many respects with the United States [[Common Core State Standards Initiative]]:<ref name="auto1"/>

{| class="wikitable sortable"
! class="unsortable" |Reading instruction component
! class="unsortable" |Tolman & Moats
! class="unsortable" |US Common Core
|-
|Phonological awareness
|K–1
|K–1
|-
|Basic phonics
|K–1
|K–1
|-
|Vocabulary
|K–6+
|K–6+
|-
|Comprehension
|K–6+
|K–6+
|-
|Written expression
|1–6+
|K–6+
|-
|Fluency
|1–3
|1–5
|-
|Advanced phonics/decoding
|2–6+
|2–5
|}

===Foundational reading skill instruction practices, kindergarten through grade 12 ===

The percentage of US students who failed to perform at or above the [[National Assessment of Educational Progress|Nations Report Card]] '''basic reading level''' were grade 4 (37% in 2022), grade 8 (30% in 2022), and grade 12 (30% in 2019).<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/reading/nation/achievement/?grade=4|title=National Achievement-Level Results|year=2022}}</ref> As a result many secondary school teachers devote some class time to activities related to foundational reading skills.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/older-students-who-struggle-to-read-hide-in-plain-sight-what-teachers-can-do/2024/05?utm_source=nl&utm_medium=eml&utm_campaign=cm&M=9888172&UUID=6a0c64198acb1707042a63f7df9be9be&T=13064708|title=Older Students Who Struggle to Read Hide in Plain Sight. What Teachers Can Do, edweek.org|author=Elizabeth Heubeck|newspaper=Education Week |date=May 16, 2024}}</ref>

The following chart shows the percentage of K-12 English Language Arts teachers that engaged in foundational reading activities with students (i.e., engaging every student in a class in activities related to the foundational reading skills for more than a few minutes within the past five class lessons).<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/teachers-are-still-teaching-older-students-basic-reading-skills-survey-finds/2024/05|title=Teachers Are Still Teaching Older Students Basic Reading Skills, Survey Finds, edweek.org|author=Elizabeth Heubeck|newspaper=Education Week |date=May 1, 2024}}</ref>

{| class="wikitable sortable"
! class="unsortable" |Activities / Grades
! class="unsortable" |K-1
! class="unsortable" |2-5
! class="unsortable" |6-8
! class="unsortable" |9-12

|-
|Print concepts
|73%
|56%
|35%
|40%
|-
|Phonological awareness
|85%
|59%
|29%
|22%

|-
|Phonics
|92%
|61%
|25%
|22%

|-
|Fluency
|80%
|65%
|36%
|36%

|}

Secondary ELA teachers in states with reading legislation were significantly more likely to report frequently engaging their students in these activities than secondary ELA teachers in states without such legislation, even though only one-quarter of states with these laws include requirements around secondary ELA instruction.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA134-23.html|title=Exploring Foundational Reading Skill Instruction in K–12 Schools, Rand Corporation|last1=Shapiro|first1=Anna| last2=Lee|first2=Sabrina|last3=Woo|first3=Ashley|date=April 30, 2024}}</ref>

==Stages to skilled reading==
{{See also|Reading#Teaching reading}}

The path to skilled reading involves learning the [[alphabetic principle]], [[phonemic awareness]], [[phonics]], fluency, vocabulary and comprehension.<ref name="National Reading Panel, 2000, Summary"/>

British psychologist [[Uta Frith]] introduced a three-stage model to acquire skilled reading. Stage one is the ''logographic or pictorial stage'' where students attempt to grasp words as objects, an artificial form of reading. Stage two is the ''phonological stage'' where students learn the relationship between the graphemes (letters) and the phonemes (sounds). Stage three is the ''orthographic stage'' where students read familiar words more quickly than unfamiliar words, and word length gradually ceases to play a role.<ref>{{cite book|author=Stanislas Dehaene|title=Reading in the brain|pages=[https://archive.org/details/readinginbrainne0000deha/page/199 199–204]|publisher=Penguin Books|year=2010|isbn=978-0-14-311805-3|url=https://archive.org/details/readinginbrainne0000deha}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Ratz |first=Christoph |last2=Lenhard |first2=Wolfgang |date=2013-05-01 |title=Reading skills among students with intellectual disabilities |journal=Research in Developmental Disabilities |volume=34 |issue=5 |pages=1740–1748 |doi=10.1016/j.ridd.2013.01.021 |issn=0891-4222}}</ref>

Another recognized expert in this area is [[Harvard]] professor [[Jeanne Chall|Jeanne Sternlicht Chall]]. In 1983 she published a book entitled ''Stages of Reading Development'' that proposed six stages.<ref>{{cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=CPslAQAAIAAJ|title=Stages of Reading Development |isbn=978-0-07-010380-1|last1=Chall|first1=Jeanne Sternlicht|year=1983|publisher=McGraw-Hill }}</ref><ref>{{cite book|url=https://newlearningonline.com/literacies/chapter-15/chall-on-stages-of-reading-development|title=Chall on Stages of Reading Development|author= Chall, Jeanne|year=1983 |location=New York|publisher= McGraw Hill| pages= 10–24}}</ref>

Subsequently, in 2008 [[Maryanne Wolf]], [[UCLA Graduate School of Education and Information Studies]], published a book entitled ''Proust and the Squid'' in which she describes her view of the following five stages of reading development.<ref>{{cite book|url=https://www.harpercollins.com/products/proust-and-the-squid-maryanne-wolf?variant=32122454671394|title=Proust and the Squid|author=Maryanne Wolf|publisher=Harper Perennial|year=2008|isbn=978-0-06-093384-5}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.theliteracybug.com/stages|title=Five Stages of Reading Development|website=The Literacy Bug}}</ref> Normally, children will move through these stages at different rates; however, typical ages for children in the United States are shown below.

===Emerging pre-reader: 6 months to 6 years old===
[[File:School in Laos - Reading time.jpg|thumb|Reading time at a primary school in rural [[Laos|Lao PDR]], Southeast Asia. In 2017, approximately 70% of five-year-old children were not enrolled in Early Childhood Education programs, with those in hard-to-reach areas and from poor families being the most excluded.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.unicef.org/laos/education|title=Education|website=www.unicef.org}}</ref> The daily reading period shown here uses books provided by [[Big Brother Mouse]], a not-for-profit that promotes reading in Lao schools and villages.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.bigbrothermouse.com/index.html|title=Big Brother Mouse – Books in Laos|website=www.bigbrothermouse.com}}</ref>]]

The emerging pre-reader stage, also known as [[reading readiness]], usually lasts for the first five years of a child's life.<ref name="Wolf, 2007, 115–139">{{cite book |author1=Wolf, Maryanne |author2=Stoodley, Catherine J. |title=Proust and the squid: the story and science of the reading brain |publisher=Harper |location=New York |year=2007 |pages=[https://archive.org/details/proustsquidstory00wolf/page/115 115–139] |isbn=978-0-06-018639-5 |oclc=471015779 |url=https://archive.org/details/proustsquidstory00wolf/page/115 }}</ref> Children typically speak their first few words before their first birthday.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://theroadmap.ualberta.ca/vocalizings/parents/10-12|title=Handbook of Language and Literacy Development – A Roadmap from 0 to 60 Months – Vocalizing – Parent/Caregiver|website=theroadmap.ualberta.ca|access-date=2021-01-15|archive-date=2021-04-22|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210422211149/http://theroadmap.ualberta.ca/vocalizings/parents/10-12}}</ref> Educators and parents help learners to develop their skills in listening, speaking, reading and writing.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://education.ohio.gov/getattachment/Topics/Early-Learning/Early-Learning-Content-Standards/Birth-Through-Pre_K-Learning-and-Development-Stand/ELDS-Language-and-Literacy.pdf.aspx|title= Ohio's Early Learning & Development Standards: Birth to Kindergarten Entry|date=2021}}</ref>

Reading to children helps them to develop their vocabulary, a love of reading, and [[phonemic awareness]], i.e. the ability to hear and manipulate the individual sounds ([[phonemes]]) of oral language. Children will often "read" stories they have memorized. However, in the late 1990s, United States' researchers found that the traditional way of reading to children made little difference in their later ability to read because children spend relatively little time actually looking at the text. Yet, in a shared reading program with four-year-old children, teachers found that directing children's attention to the letters and words (e.g. verbally or pointing to the words) made a significant difference in early reading, spelling and comprehension.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2012/05/29/153927743/small-change-in-reading-to-preschoolers-can-help-disadvantaged-kids-catch-up|title=Small Change In Reading To Preschoolers Can Help Disadvantaged Kids Catch Up|agency=NPR|author=Alix Spegel|date=2012-05-29|access-date=2012-07-17}}</ref><ref name="Piasta-2012"/><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.readingrockets.org/article/simple-yet-powerful-things-do-while-reading-aloud|title=Simple Yet Powerful Things to Do While Reading Aloud, Reading Rockets|date=19 June 2016}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=http://theroadmap.ualberta.ca/readings/parents/49-60|title=Handbook of Language and Literacy Development – A Roadmap from 0 to 60 Months – Reading – Parent/Caregiver|website=theroadmap.ualberta.ca|access-date=2021-01-15|archive-date=2021-08-02|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210802181228/http://theroadmap.ualberta.ca/readings/parents/49-60}}</ref>

===Novice reader: 6 to 7 years old===
Novice readers continue to develop their phonemic awareness, and come to realize that the letters ([[graphemes]]) connect to the sounds ([[phonemes]]) of the language; known as decoding, [[phonics]], and the [[alphabetic principle]].<ref>{{cite book|url=https://www.harpercollins.com/products/proust-and-the-squid-maryanne-wolf?variant=32122454671394|title=Proust and the Squid|pages=115–126|author=Maryanne Wolf|publisher=Harper Perennial|isbn=978-0-06-093384-5|year=2008}}</ref> They may also memorize the most common letter patterns and some of the high-frequency words that do not necessarily follow basic phonological rules (e.g. ''have and who''). However, it is a mistake to assume a reader understands the meaning of a text merely because they can decode it. Vocabulary and oral language comprehension are also important parts of text comprehension as described in the [[#Simple view of reading|Simple view of reading]], [[#Scarborough's reading rope|Scarborough's reading rope]], and [[#The active view of reading model|The active view of reading model]]. Reading and speech are codependent: reading promotes vocabulary development and a richer vocabulary facilitates skilled reading.<ref>{{cite book |title=Language at the speed of light|date=2017|pages=113–117|author=Mark Seidenberg|publisher=Basic Books |isbn=978-0-465-08065-6}}</ref>

===Decoding reader: 7 to 9 years old===
The transition from the novice reader stage to the decoding stage is marked by a reduction of painful pronunciations and in its place the sounds of a smoother, more confident reader.<ref>{{cite book|url=https://www.harpercollins.com/products/proust-and-the-squid-maryanne-wolf?variant=32122454671394|title=Proust and the Squid|pages=126–133|author=Maryanne Wolf|publisher=Harper Perennial|isbn=978-0-06-093384-5|year=2008}}</ref> In this phase the reader adds at least 3,000 words to what they can decode. For example, in the English language, readers now learn the variations of the vowel-based [[Syllable#Rime|rimes]] (e.g. s''at'', m''at'', c''at'')<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.readingrockets.org/strategies/onset_rime|title=Rimes, Reading Rockets|date=19 March 2013}}</ref> and [[vowel]] pairs (also [[Digraph (orthography)|digraph]]) (e.g. r''ai''n, pl''ay'', b''oa''t)<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.readingrockets.org/teaching/reading101-course/modules/phonics/phonics-practice|title=Phonics, Reading Rockets|date=25 April 2014|access-date=15 January 2021|archive-date=15 January 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210115141649/https://www.readingrockets.org/teaching/reading101-course/modules/phonics/phonics-practice}}</ref>

As readers move forward, they learn the makeup of [[morphemes]] (i.e. stems, roots, [[prefixes]] and [[suffixes]]). They learn the common morphemes such as "s" and "ed" and see them as "sight chunks". "The faster a child can see that ''beheaded'' is ''be + head + ed"'', the faster they will become a more fluent reader.

At the beginning of this stage, a child will often be devoting so much mental capacity to the process of decoding that they will have no understanding of the words being read. It is nevertheless an important stage, allowing the child to achieve their ultimate goal of becoming fluent and automatic.

It is in the decoding phase that the child will get to what the story is really about, and learn to re-read a passage when necessary to truly understand it.

===Fluent, comprehending reader: 9 to 15 years old===
The goal of this stage is to "go below the surface of the text", and in the process the reader will build their knowledge of spelling substantially.<ref>{{cite book|url=https://www.harpercollins.com/products/proust-and-the-squid-maryanne-wolf?variant=32122454671394|title=Proust and the Squid|pages=136–143|author=Maryanne Wolf|publisher=Harper Perennial|isbn=978-0-06-093384-5|year=2008}}</ref>

Teachers and parents may be tricked by fluent-sounding reading into thinking that a child understands everything that they are reading. As the content of what they can read becomes more demanding, good readers will develop knowledge of [[figurative language]] and [[irony]] which helps them to discover new meanings in the text.

Children improve their comprehension when they use a variety of tools such as connecting prior knowledge, predicting outcomes, drawing inferences, and monitoring gaps in their understanding. One of the most powerful moments is when fluent comprehending readers learn to enter into the lives of imagined heroes and heroines.

When teaching comprehension, the [[educational psychologist]], [[G. Michael Pressley]], says a strong case can be made for instruction in decoding, vocabulary, word knowledge, active comprehension strategies, and self-monitoring.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.ldonline.org/ld-topics/ieps/comprehension-instruction-what-works|title=Comprehension Instruction: What Works, LD Online|date=2005}}</ref>

At the end of this stage, many processes are starting to become automatic, allowing the reader to focus on meaning. With the decoding process almost automatic by this point, the brain learns to integrate more [[metaphorical]], inferential, [[analogical]], background, and [[experiential knowledge]]. This stage in learning to read will often last until early adulthood.<ref name="Wolf143">{{cite book |author1=Wolf, Maryanne |author2=Stoodley, Catherine J. |title=Proust and the squid: the story and science of the reading brain |publisher=Harper |location=New York |year=2007 |pages=[https://archive.org/details/proustsquidstory00wolf/page/139 139–143] |isbn=978-0-06-018639-5 |oclc=471015779 |url=https://archive.org/details/proustsquidstory00wolf}}</ref>

===Expert reader: 16 years and older===
At the expert stage, it will usually only take a reader one-half second to read almost any word.<ref>{{cite book|url=https://www.harpercollins.com/products/proust-and-the-squid-maryanne-wolf?variant=32122454671394|title=Proust and the Squid|pages=143–162|author=Maryanne Wolf|publisher=Harper Perennial|isbn=978-0-06-093384-5|year=2008}}</ref> The degree to which expert reading will change throughout an [[adult|adult's]] life depends on what they read and how much they read.

==Science of reading==
{{main|Science of reading}}
[[File:Brain pathways for mirror discrimination learning during literacy acquisition.jpg|thumb|upright=1.35|Writing is only about 5,500 years old, unlike [[Language|human speech]] which is thought to be from 50,000 years to 2 million years old.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.science.org/content/article/human-language-may-have-evolved-help-our-ancestors-make-tools|title=Human language may have evolved to help our ancestors make tools, Science Magazine|date=January 13, 2015}}</ref>

So, unlike speech, the brain did not evolve to read naturally. As a result, the brain adapts to the challenge of reading. The process of reading involves most of the brain, particularly an interconnection between visual areas and language areas, as well as neural systems related to action, emotion, decision-making, and memory.<ref>{{cite book|title=Reading in the brain|page=63|author=Stanislas Dehaene|publisher=Penguin books|date=2009|isbn=978-0-670-02110-9}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|title=Language at the speed of light|date=2017|page=4|author=Mark Seidenberg|publisher=Basic Books |isbn=978-0-465-08065-6}}</ref>]]

Science of Reading (SOR) is an interdisciplinary body of scientifically based research about reading. It draws on many fields, including cognitive science, developmental psychology, education, educational psychology, special education, and more.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.thereadingleague.org/what-is-the-science-of-reading/|title=What is the science of reading}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://literacyworldwide.org/get-resources/making-sense-of-the-science-of-reading|title=Making Sense of the Science of Reading|website=literacyworldwide.org}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/right-to-read-inquiry-report/executive-summary|title=Executive summary, Right to Read inquiry report, OHRC|date=January 27, 2022}}</ref> Foundational skills such as [[phonics]], decoding, and [[phonemic awareness]] are considered to be important parts of the science of reading, but they are not the only ingredients. SOR includes any [[Evidence-based education|research and evidence]] about how humans learn to read, and how reading should be taught. This includes areas such as oral reading fluency, vocabulary, [[Morphology (linguistics)|morphology]], reading comprehension, text, spelling and pronunciation, thinking strategies, oral language proficiency, working memory training, and written language performance (e.g., cohesion, sentence combining/reducing).<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.readingrockets.org/blogs/shanahan-literacy/what-science-reading|title=What Is the Science of Reading, Timothy Shanahan, Reading Rockets|date=2019-05-29}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/science-of-reading-advocates-underscore-its-not-just-about-phonics/2025/04?utm_source=nl&utm_medium=eml&utm_campaign=popweek&M=13415316&UUID=6a0c64198acb1707042a63f7df9be9be&T=17544989|title=Science of Reading Advocates Underscore: It’s Not Just About Phonics, Sarah Schwartz, edweek.org|date=2025-04-24}}</ref>

In cognitive science, there is likely no area that has been more successful than the study of reading. Yet, in many countries reading levels are considered low. In the United States, the 2019 ''Nation's Report Card'' reported that 34% of grade-four public school students performed at or above the [[NAEP]] ''proficient level'' (solid academic performance) and 65% performed at or above the ''basic level'' (partial mastery of the proficient level skills).<ref name="NAEP-2019">{{Cite web|url=https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/subject/publications/stt2019/pdf/2020014NP4.pdf|title=NAEP 2019 grade 4 reading report}}</ref> As reported in the [[PIRLS]] study, the United States ranked 15th out of 50 countries, for reading comprehension levels of fourth-graders.<ref name="PIRLS-2016"/><ref name="Barclays-2017"/> In addition, according to the 2011–2018 [[PIAAC]] study, out of 39 countries the United States ranked 19th for literacy levels of adults 16 to 65; and 16.9% of adults in the United States read at or below level one (out of five levels).<ref name="OECD-2019">{{Cite book|url=https://www.oecd.org/skills/piaac/publications/Skills_Matter_Additonal_Results_from_the_Survey_of_Adult_Skills_ENG.pdf|title= Skills Matter: Additional Results from the Survey of Adult Skills|series= OECD Skills Studies|publisher= OECD Skills Studies|date=2019 |doi=10.1787/1f029d8f-en| page= 44|isbn= 978-92-64-60466-7|s2cid= 243226424}}</ref><ref name="OECD-2013"/>

Many researchers are concerned that low reading levels are due to how reading is taught. They point to three areas:
# Contemporary reading science has had very little impact on educational practice—mainly because of a "two-cultures problem separating science and education".
# Current teaching practice rests on outdated assumptions that make learning to read harder than it needs to be.
# Connecting [[Evidence-based education|evidence-based practice]] to educational practice would be beneficial， but is extremely difficult to achieve due to a lack of adequate training in the science of reading among many teachers.<ref>{{cite journal|title=The Science of Reading and Its Educational Implications|date=2013-08-26|pmc=4020782|last1=Seidenberg|first1=M. S.|journal=Language Learning and Development |volume=9|issue=4|pages=331–360|doi=10.1080/15475441.2013.812017|pmid=24839408}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|author=Stanislas Dehaene|title=Reading in the brain|pages=[https://archive.org/details/readinginbrainne0000deha/page/218 218–234]|publisher=Penguin Books|year=2010|isbn=978-0-14-311805-3|url=https://archive.org/details/readinginbrainne0000deha}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|title=Handbook of Reading Research, Volume IV|page=[https://archive.org/details/handbookofreadin0003unse/page/630 630]|date=2011|publisher=Routledge|author1=Kamil, Michael L.|author2=Pearson, P. David|author3=Moje, Elizabeth Birr|author4=Afflerbach, Peter|isbn=978-0-8058-5342-1|url=https://archive.org/details/handbookofreadin0003unse}}</ref><ref name="Teaching Reading Is Rocket Science"/>

===Simple view of reading===
{{Main|Simple view of reading}}
[[File:Simple View of Reading quadrant visualisation.jpg|350px|right|The Simple View of Reading proposes four broad categories of developing readers: typical readers; poor readers; dyslexics; and hyperlexics.]]
''The simple view of reading'' is a scientific theory about reading comprehension.<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.sedl.org/reading/framework/overview.html |author1=Hoover, Wesley A. |author2=Gough, Philip B. |title=Overview – The Cognitive Foundations of Learning to Read: A Framework |work=The Cognitive Foundations of Learning to Read: A Framework }}</ref> According to the theory, to comprehend what they are reading students need both ''decoding skills'' and ''oral language (listening) comprehension ability''. Neither is enough on their own.<ref name="auto">{{cite journal |last1=Castles |first1=Anne |last2=Rastle |first2=Kathleen |last3=Nation |first3=Kate |title=Ending the Reading Wars: Reading Acquisition From Novice to Expert |journal=Psychological Science in the Public Interest |date=11 June 2018 |volume=19 |issue=1 |page=27 |doi=10.1177/1529100618772271|pmid=29890888 |doi-access=free }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.shanahanonliteracy.com/blog/what-kind-of-early-reading-intervention-should-we-provide|title=Early Reading Intervention &#124; Shanahan on Literacy|first=Hege|last=Refsnes|website=www.shanahanonliteracy.com}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Catts |first1=Hugh W. |last2=Hogan |first2=Tiffany P. |last3=Fey |first3=Marc E. |title=Subgrouping Poor Readers on the Basis of Individual Differences in Reading-Related Abilities |journal=Journal of Learning Disabilities |date=18 August 2016 |volume=36 |issue=2 |pages=151–164 |doi=10.1177/002221940303600208|pmid=15493430 |pmc=2848965 |url=http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1017&context=specedfacpub }}</ref>

It is expressed in this equation:
Decoding × Oral Language Comprehension = Reading Comprehension.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Kendeou |first1=Panayiota |last2=Savage |first2=Robert |last3=Broek |first3=Paul |title=Revisiting the simple view of reading |journal=British Journal of Educational Psychology |date=June 2009 |volume=79 |issue=2 |pages=353–370 |doi=10.1348/978185408X369020|pmid=19091164 }}</ref>

===Scarborough's reading rope===
[[Hollis Scarborough]] published the Reading Rope infographics in 2001 using strands of rope to illustrate the many ingredients involved in becoming a skilled reader. The upper strands represent ''language comprehension'' and reinforce one another. The lower strands represent ''word recognition'' and work together as the reader becomes accurate, fluent, and automatic through practice. The upper and lower strands all weave together to produce a skilled reader.<ref>{{cite journal|url=https://dyslexiaida.org/scarboroughs-reading-rope-a-groundbreaking-infographic/|title=Scarborough's Reading Rope: A Groundbreaking Infographic |journal=The Examiner |volume=7 |issue=2|date=April 2018}}</ref>
{| class="wikitable sortable"
! class="unsortable" |Language-comprehension (Upper strands)
|-
|Background knowledge (facts, concepts, etc.)
|-
|Vocabulary (breadth, precision, links, etc.)
|-
|Language structures (syntax, semantics, etc.)
|-
|Verbal reasoning (inference, metaphor, etc.)
|-
|Literacy knowledge (print concepts, genres, etc.)
|-
! class="unsortable" |Word-recognition (Lower strands)
|-
|Phonological awareness (syllables, phonemes, etc.)
|-
|Decoding (alphabetic principle, spelling-sound correspondence)
|-
|Sight recognition (of familiar words)
|-
|}

More recent research by [[Laurie Cutting|Laurie E. Cutting]] and Hollis S. Scarborough has highlighted the importance of [[Executive functions|executive function]] processes (e.g. working memory, planning, organization, self-monitoring, and similar abilities) to reading comprehension.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.shanahanonliteracy.com/blog/why-your-students-may-not-be-learning-to-comprehend#sthash.xqiX779C.H37PsA5q.dpbs|title=Why Your Students May Not Be Learning to Comprehend|author=Timothy Shanahan|date=2021-03-06}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|author1=Cutting, Laurie |author2=Scarborough, Hollis|date=2012|title=Multiple bases for comprehension difficulties: the potential of cognitive and neurobiological profiling for validation of subtypes and development of assessments, Reaching an understanding: Innovations in how we view reading assessment|pages=101–116}}</ref>

===Active view of reading model===

The active view of reading (AVR) model (May 7, 2021), [[Nell K. Duke]] and Kelly B. Cartwright,<ref>{{cite web|url=https://kellycartwright.com|title=Kelly B. Cartwright}}</ref> offers an alternative to the [[#Simple view of reading|simple view of reading]] (SVR), and a proposed update to [[#Scarborough's reading rope|Scarborough's reading rope]] (SRR). This model is more complete than the simple view of reading and does a better job of accommodating some of the knowledge about reading developed over the past several decades.

The following chart shows the ingredients in the authors' infographic. In addition, the authors point out that reading is also impacted by text, task, and [[Sociocultural linguistics|sociocultural context]].

{| class="wikitable sortable"
! class="unsortable" |Active Self Regulation
|-
|Motivation and engagement
|-
|[[Executive functions|Executive function skills]]
|-
|Strategy use (related to word recognition, comprehension, vocabulary, etc.)
|-
! class="unsortable" |Word recognition (WR)
|-
|[[Phonological awareness]] (syllables, phonemes, etc.)
|-
|[[Alphabetic principle]]
|-
|[[Phonics]] knowledge
|-
|[[Phonics|Decoding skills]]
|-
|[[Phonics#Sight words and sight vocabulary|Recognition of words at sight]]
|-
! class="unsortable" |Bridging processes (the overlapping of WR and LC)
|-
|Print concepts
|-
|Reading fluency
|-
|Vocabulary knowledge
|-
|[[Morphology (linguistics)|Morphological awareness]] (the structure of words and parts of words such as stems, root words, prefixes, and suffixes)
|-
|Graphophonological-semantic cognitive flexibility (letter-sound-meaning flexibility)
|-
! class="unsortable" |Language comprehension (LC)
|-
|Cultural and other content knowledge
|-
|Reading-specific background knowledge (genre, text, etc.)
|-
|Verbal reasoning (inference, metaphor, etc.)
|-
|Language structure (syntax, semantics, etc.)
|-
|[[Theory of mind]] (the ability to attribute mental states to ourselves and others)<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.simplypsychology.org/theory-of-mind.html|title=Theory of mind, Ruhl, C., Simply Psychology|date=2020-08-07}}</ref>
|}

===Automaticity===
{{main| Automaticity}}

In the field of psychology, automaticity is the ability to do things without occupying the mind with the low-level details required, allowing it to become an automatic response pattern or [[Habit|a habit]]. When reading is automatic, precious [[working memory]] resources can be devoted to considering the meaning of a text, etc.

The unexpected finding from cognitive science is that practice does ''not'' make perfect. For a new skill to become automatic, sustained practice beyond the point of mastery is necessary.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Samuels |first1=S. Jay |last2=Flor |first2=Richard F.|year=1997 |title=The importance of automaticity for developing expertise in reading|journal=Reading & Writing Quarterly, 13(2), 107–121|volume=13 |issue=2 |pages=107–121 |doi=10.1080/1057356970130202 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.aft.org/ae/spring2004/willingham|title=Ask the Cognitive Scientist: Practice Makes Perfect—But Only If You Practice Beyond the Point of Perfection|author=Daniel T. Willingham|year=2004}}</ref>

===How the brain reads===
Several researchers and neuroscientists have attempted to explain how the brain reads. They have written articles and books, and created websites and YouTube videos to help the average consumer.<ref name="YouTube-2013">{{Cite web|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25GI3-kiLdo&feature=youtu.be| archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/varchive/youtube/20211030/25GI3-kiLdo| archive-date=2021-10-30|title=Youtube, How the Brain Learns to Read – Prof. Stanislas Dehaene, October 25, 2013| website=[[YouTube]]| date=25 October 2013}}{{cbignore}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|title=Language at the speed of light|date=2017|author=Seidenberg, Mark|publisher=Basic Books |isbn=978-0-465-08065-6}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|author=Dehaene, Stanislas|title=Reading in the brain|publisher=Penguin Books|year=2010|isbn=978-0-14-311805-3|url=https://archive.org/details/readinginbrainne0000deha}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|title=The reading mind|author=Willingham, Daniel T.|publisher=Jossey-Bass|date=2017|isbn=978-1-119-30137-0}}</ref>

A study conducted at the [[Medical University of South Carolina]] (MUSC) in 2022 indicates that "greater left-brain asymmetry can predict both better and average performance on a foundational level of reading ability, depending on whether the analysis is conducted over the whole brain or in specific regions".<ref>{{cite news |title=How Left Brain Asymmetry Is Related to Reading Ability |url=https://neurosciencenews.com/left-brain-asymmetry-reading-20314/ |access-date=24 July 2022 |work=Neuroscience News |publisher=Dyslexia Data Consortium |date=5 April 2022}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|title=Cortical asymmetries at different spatial hierarchies relate to phonological processing ability|author1=Mark A. Eckert |author2=Kenneth I. Vaden Jr. |author3=Federico Iuricich|journal=PLOS Biology |date=5 April 2022|volume=20 |issue=4 |pages=e3001591 |doi=10.1371/journal.pbio.3001591|pmid=35381012 |pmc=8982829 |doi-access=free }}</ref>

Although it is not included in most meta-analytical studies, the [[Motor cortex|sensorimotor cortex]] of the brain is the most active region of the brain during reading.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Turkeltaub |first1=Peter E. |last2=Eden |first2=Guinevere F. |last3=Jones |first3=Karen M. |last4=Zeffiro |first4=Thomas A. |date=July 2002 |title=Meta-Analysis of the Functional Neuroanatomy of Single-Word Reading: Method and Validation |url=https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1053811902911316 |journal=NeuroImage |language=en |volume=16 |issue=3 |pages=765–780 |doi=10.1006/nimg.2002.1131|pmid=12169260 |s2cid=8122844 |url-access=subscription }}</ref>

The [[Occipital lobe|occipital]] and [[parietal lobe]]s, or more specifically [[fusiform gyrus]], include the brain's [[visual word form area]] (VWFA).<ref name="McCandliss-2003">{{Cite journal |last1=McCandliss |first1=Bruce D. |last2=Cohen |first2=Laurent |last3=Dehaene |first3=Stanislas |date=July 2003 |title=The visual word form area: expertise for reading in the fusiform gyrus |url=https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1364661303001347 |journal=Trends in Cognitive Sciences |language=en |volume=7 |issue=7 |pages=293–299 |doi=10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00134-7|pmid=12860187 |s2cid=8534353 }}</ref>

The two major regions of the brain associated with phonological skills are the temporal-parietal region and the Perisylvian Region.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Turkeltaub |first1=Peter E |last2=Gareau |first2=Lynn |last3=Flowers |first3=D Lynn |last4=Zeffiro |first4=Thomas A |last5=Eden |first5=Guinevere F |date=July 2003 |title=Development of neural mechanisms for reading |url=http://www.nature.com/articles/nn1065 |journal=Nature Neuroscience |language=en |volume=6 |issue=7 |pages=767–773 |doi=10.1038/nn1065 |pmid=12754516 |s2cid=1256871 |issn=1097-6256|url-access=subscription }}</ref>

The Perisylvian Region, which is the portion of the brain believed to connect Broca's and Wernicke's area,<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Catani |first1=Marco |last2=Jones |first2=Derek K. |last3=ffytche |first3=Dominic H. |date=January 2005 |title=Perisylvian language networks of the human brain |journal=Annals of Neurology |language=en |volume=57 |issue=1 |pages=8–16 |doi=10.1002/ana.20319 |pmid=15597383 |s2cid=17743067 |issn=0364-5134|doi-access=free }}</ref> is another region that is highly active during phonological activities where participants are asked to verbalize known and unknown words.<ref name="Rutten-2017">{{Cite book |last=Rutten |first=Geert-Jan |url=http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-319-54633-9 |title=The Broca-Wernicke Doctrine |date=2017 |publisher=Springer International Publishing |isbn=978-3-319-54632-2 |location=Cham |language=en |doi=10.1007/978-3-319-54633-9|s2cid=12820073 }}</ref> 

The inferior frontal region is a much more complex region of the brain, and its association with reading is not necessarily linear, for it is active in several reading-related activities.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Aparicio |first1=Mario |last2=Gounot |first2=Daniel |last3=Demont |first3=Elisabeth |last4=Metz-Lutz |first4=Marie-Noëlle |date=April 2007 |title=Phonological processing in relation to reading: An fMRI study in deaf readers |url=https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1053811906012432 |journal=NeuroImage |language=en |volume=35 |issue=3 |pages=1303–1316 |doi=10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.12.046|pmid=17329129 |s2cid=20053235 |url-access=subscription }}</ref>

The [[cerebellum]], which is not a part of the cerebral cortex, is also believed to play an important role in reading.<ref name="Li-2022">{{Cite journal |last1=Li |first1=Hehui |last2=Yuan |first2=Qiming |last3=Luo |first3=Yue-Jia |last4=Tao |first4=Wuhai |date=June 2022 |title=A new perspective for understanding the contributions of the cerebellum to reading: The cerebro-cerebellar mapping hypothesis |journal=Neuropsychologia |language=en |volume=170 |page=108231 |doi=10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2022.108231|pmid=35378104 |s2cid=247859931 |doi-access=free }}</ref>

===Eye movement and silent reading rate===
{{Main|Eye movement in reading}}
Reading is an intensive process in which the eye quickly moves to assimilate the text – seeing just accurately enough to interpret groups of symbols.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.readingrockets.org/article/eye-movements-and-reading|title=Eye Movements and Reading, Louisa Moats, Carol Tolman, Reading rockets|date=2009}}</ref> It is necessary to understand [[visual perception]] and [[eye movement in reading]] to understand the reading process.

When reading, the eye moves continuously along a line of text but makes short rapid movements (saccades) intermingled with short stops (fixations). There is considerable variability in fixations (the point at which a saccade jumps to) and saccades between readers, and even for the same person reading a single passage of text. When reading, the eye has a '''perceptual span''' of about 20 slots. In the best-case scenario and reading English, when the eye is fixated on a letter, four to five letters to the right and three to four letters to the left can be clearly identified. Beyond that, only the general shape of some letters can be identified.<ref>{{cite book |title=Language at the speed of light|date=2017|pages=61–66|author=Mark Seidenberg|publisher=Basic Books |isbn=978-0-465-08065-6}}</ref>

Research published in 2019 concluded that the '''silent reading rate''' of adults in English for ''non-fiction'' is in the range of 175 to 300 [[words per minute]] (wpm), and for ''fiction'' the range is 200 to 320 words per minute.<ref name="Research Digest-2019">{{Cite web|url=https://digest.bps.org.uk/2019/06/13/most-comprehensive-review-to-date-suggests-the-average-persons-reading-speed-is-slower-than-commonly-thought/|title=Average reading speed, Research Digest, The British Psychological Society|date=13 June 2019|access-date=20 January 2021|archive-date=5 February 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210205190527/https://digest.bps.org.uk/2019/06/13/most-comprehensive-review-to-date-suggests-the-average-persons-reading-speed-is-slower-than-commonly-thought/}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Brysbaert |first1=Marc |title=How many words do we read per minute? A review and meta-analysis of reading rate |journal=Journal of Memory and Language |date=December 2019 |volume=109 |page=104047 |doi=10.1016/j.jml.2019.104047 |s2cid=202267075 |url=https://psyarxiv.com/xynwg/ }}</ref>

===Dual-route hypothesis to reading aloud===
{{main|Dual-route hypothesis to reading aloud}}

In the early 1970s, the [[dual-route hypothesis to reading aloud]] was proposed, according to which there are two separate mental mechanisms involved in reading aloud, with output from both contributing to the pronunciation of written words.<ref name=coltheart1>{{cite journal|last=Coltheart|first=Max|author2=Curtis, Brent |author3=Atkins, Paul |author4= Haller, Micheal |title=Models of reading aloud: Dual-route and parallel-distributed-processing approaches|journal=Psychological Review|date=1 January 1993|volume=100|issue=4|pages=589–608|doi=10.1037/0033-295X.100.4.589}}</ref><ref name="Yamada 1990">{{cite journal |vauthors=Yamada J, Imai H, Ikebe Y |title=The use of the orthographic lexicon in reading kana words |journal= The Journal of General Psychology|volume=117 |issue=3 |pages=311–323 |date=July 1990 |pmid=2213002 }}</ref><ref name="Pritchard 2012">{{cite journal |vauthors=Pritchard SC, Coltheart M, Palethorpe S, Castles A |title=Nonword reading: comparing dual-route cascaded and connectionist dual-process models with human data |journal=J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform |volume=38 |issue=5 |pages=1268–1288 |date=October 2012 |pmid=22309087 |doi=10.1037/a0026703 }}</ref> One mechanism is the [[Dual-route hypothesis to reading aloud#lexical|lexical]] route whereby skilled readers can recognize a word as part of their [[Phonics#Sight words and sight vocabulary|sight vocabulary]]. The other is the [[Dual-route hypothesis to reading aloud#Nonlexical or Sublexical|nonlexical or sublexical]] route, in which the reader "sounds out" (decodes) written words.<ref name="Pritchard 2012" /><ref name="Zorzi Houghton 1998">{{cite journal|last1=Zorzi|first1=Marco|last2=Houghton|first2=George|last3=Butterworth|first3=Brian|title=Two routes or one in reading aloud? A connectionist dual-process model.|journal= Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance|volume=24| issue=4| year=1998| pages=1131–1161|issn=1939-1277|doi=10.1037/0096-1523.24.4.1131}}</ref>

===The production effect (reading out loud)===

There is robust evidence that saying a word out loud makes it more memorable than simply reading it silently or hearing someone else say it. This is because self-reference and self-control over speaking produce more engagement with the words. The memory benefit of "hearing oneself" is referred to as ''the production effect''.<ref>{{cite journal|journal= Psychonomic Bulletin & Review|title=I said, you said: the production effect gets personal|author=Colin M MacLeod|date=December 18, 2011|volume=18 |issue=6 |pages=1197–1202 |doi=10.3758/s13423-011-0168-8|pmid=21938642 |s2cid=11679593 |doi-access=free}}</ref>

===Evidence-based reading instruction===
{{See also|Evidence-based education}}

Evidence-based reading instruction refers to practices having research evidence showing their success in improving reading achievement.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://lincs.ed.gov/publications/pdf/EDVAE09C0042EBRILAUSD.pdf|title=What Is Evidence-Based Reading Instruction and How Do You Know It When You See It?, U.S. Department of Education, March 2012}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.ldatschool.ca/teaching-the-brain-to-read-strategies-for-enhancing-reading-decoding-fluency-and-comprehension/|title=Reading and the Brain, LD at school, Canada|date=15 May 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|title=Is Reading Instruction Evidence-Based?, Frontiers in psychology, 2018-02-01|year=2018|pmc=5800299|last1=Suárez|first1=N.|last2=Sánchez|first2=C. R.|last3=Jiménez|first3=J. E.|last4=Anguera|first4=M. T.|journal=Frontiers in Psychology|volume=9|page=7|doi=10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00007|pmid=29449818|doi-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.readingrockets.org/article/evidence-based-practices-school-guide-parents|title=Evidence based practices in schools, Reading Rockets|date=12 January 2013}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/the-most-popular-reading-programs-arent-backed-by-science/2019/12|title=The Most Popular Reading Programs Aren't Backed by Science, EdWeek|newspaper=Education Week|date=4 December 2019|last1=Schwartz|first1=Sarah}}</ref> It is related to [[evidence-based education]].

Research shows that evidenced-based phonics programs can produce dramatically better results. A report of a foundational skills curriculum created by the University of Florida Literacy Institute, and publish in 2025, led to a large effect (g=1.20 to g=2.04).<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/387694850_Effect_of_an_Instructional_Program_in_Foundational_Reading_Skills_on_Early_Literacy_Development_of_Students_in_Kindergarten_and_First_Grade|title=Effect of an Instructional Program in Foundational Reading Skills on Early Literacy Development of Students in Kindergarten and First Grade, Reading Research Quarterly|date=January 2025|DOI=10.1002/rrq.607|first1=Holly|last1=Lane|first2=Valentina |last2=Contesse|first3=Nicholas|last3=Gage|first4=Mathew|last4=Burns}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/researchers-created-a-phonics-program-with-dramatic-results-how-it-works/2025/01?utm_source=nl&utm_medium=eml&utm_campaign=popweek&M=12396998&UUID=6a0c64198acb1707042a63f7df9be9be&T=16254830|title=Researchers Created a Phonics Program With ‘Dramatic’ Results. How It Works|author=Sarah Schwartz|date=January 17, 2025}}</ref>

===Reading from paper vs. screens===
A systematic review and meta‐analysis was conducted on the advantages of reading from paper vs. screens. It found no difference in reading times; however, reading from paper has a small advantage in reading performance and [[metacognition]].<ref>{{cite journal|url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1467-9817.12269|title=Reading from paper compared to screens: A systematic review and meta-analysis|journal=Journal of Research in Reading |volume=42 |issue=2 |pages=288–325|date=2019-01-13|doi=10.1111/1467-9817.12269|last1=Clinton|first1=Virginia|s2cid=149835771|url-access=subscription}}</ref>

===Handwriting vs. typing practice in letter and word learning===
In May 2025, the [[Journal of Experimental Child Psychology]] published the results of a study that compared how well children learn letters and words by handwriting verses typing. The study concluded that children in the handwriting groups achieved more accuracy than those in the typing groups, suggesting that typing should complement but not replace handwriting.<ref>{{cite journal|first1=Gorka|last1=Ibaibarriaga|first2=Joana|last2=Acha|first3=Manuel| last3=Perea|journal=Journal of Experimental Child Psychology|volume=253|doi=10.1016/j.jecp.2025.106195|date=May 2025|title=The impact of handwriting and typing practice in children’s letter and word learning: Implications for literacy development}}</ref>

===Teacher training and legislation===
According to some researchers, having a highly qualified teacher in every classroom is an educational necessity, and a 2023 study of 512 classroom teachers in 112 schools showed that teachers' knowledge of language and literacy reliably predicted students' reading foundational skills scores, but not reading comprehension scores.<ref>{{cite journal|url=https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11145-023-10448-w|title=Effects of teacher knowledge of early reading on students' gains in reading foundational skills and comprehension |author=Susan B. Porter |author2=Timothy N. Odegard |author3=Emily A. Farris |author4=Eric L. Oslund |journal=Reading and Writing |date=2023-06-09|volume=37 |issue=8 |pages=2007–2023 |doi=10.1007/s11145-023-10448-w |s2cid=259619958 |url-access=subscription }}</ref> Yet, some teachers, even after obtaining a master's degree in education, think they lack the necessary knowledge and skills to teach all students how to read.<ref name="SOR Spotlight">{{Cite web|url=https://fs24.formsite.com/edweek/images/1-31_Science_of_Reading_Spotlight_-_Sponsored.pdf|title=Will the Science of Reading Catch On in Teacher Prep?| work= Education week |department= spotlight|pages=12–15|date=2020-03-12 }}</ref> A 2019 survey of K-2 and special education teachers found that only 11 percent said they felt "completely prepared" to teach early reading after finishing their preservice programs. And, a 2021 study found that most U.S. states do not measure teachers' knowledge of the 'science of reading'.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/most-states-fail-to-measure-teachers-knowledge-of-the-science-of-reading-report-says/2021/03|author=Sarah Schwartz|title=Most States Fail to Measure Teachers' Knowledge of the 'Science of Reading,' Report Says, Education Week|website=[[Education Week]] |date=March 23, 2021}}</ref> Some teachers, after receiving training in science-based reading instruction, say they were shocked at how ill-prepared they had been to properly teach reading.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/i-literally-cried-teachers-describe-their-transition-to-science-based-reading-instruction/2023/09|website=Education Week|title=I Literally Cried: Teachers Describe Their Transition to Science-Based Reading Instruction|author=Elizabeth Heubeck|date=September 15, 2023}}</ref>

A survey in the United States reported that 70% of teachers believe in a [[#Teaching reading|balanced literacy]] approach to teaching reading – however, balanced literacy "is not systematic, explicit instruction".<ref name="SOR Spotlight"/> In an Education Week Research Center survey of more than 530 professors of reading instruction, only 22 percent said their philosophy of teaching early reading centered on explicit, systematic phonics with comprehension as a separate focus.<ref name="SOR Spotlight"/>

As of October 2024, after [[Mississippi]] became the only state to improve reading results between 2017 and 2019,<ref name="NAEP Reading: State Average Scores">{{Cite web|url=https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/reading/states/scores/?grade=4|title=NAEP Reading: State Average Scores|website=www.nationsreportcard.gov}}</ref> 40 U.S. states and the District of Columbia have since passed laws or implemented new policies related to evidence-based reading instruction.<ref name="Sarah Schwartz">{{cite news|url=https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/which-states-have-passed-science-of-reading-laws-whats-in-them/2022/07|author=Sarah Schwartz|title=Which States Have Passed 'Science of Reading' Laws? What's in Them? Education Week|date=July 20, 2022}}</ref> As a result, many schools are moving away from balanced literacy programs that encourage students to guess a word, and are introducing phonics where they learn to "decode" (sound out) words.<ref>{{cite video|URL=https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2023/04/24/education-schools-reading-programs-literacy-jones-pkg-cnntm-cprog-vpx.cnn|title=School changes reading program after realizing students 'weren't actually learning to read', CNN national correspondent Athena Jones|date=2023-04-24}}</ref>

As more state legislatures seek to pass ''science of reading'' legislation, some teachers' unions are mounting opposition, citing concerns about mandates that would limit teachers' professional autonomy in the classroom, uneven implementation, unreasonable timelines, and the amount of time and compensation teachers receive for additional training.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/why-some-teachers-unions-oppose-science-of-reading-legislation/2023/03|title=Why Some Teachers' Unions Oppose 'Science of Reading' Legislation|author1=Sarah Schwartz |author2=Madeline Will |newspaper=Education Week |date=2023-03-28}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://edsource.org/2025/no-compromise-on-literacy-bill-as-hearing-deadline-looms/730431|title=No compromise on literacy bill as hearing deadline looms, edsource.org|date=April 16, 2025}}</ref>

On July 1, 2025, the State of California replaced its Reading Instruction Competence Assessment with a literacy performance assessment to ensure teachers are adequately prepared to teach reading. It has an increased focus on foundational reading skills such as phonics.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://edsource.org/2025/literacy-performance-assessment-teacher-candidates/735030?utm_source=EdSource&utm_campaign=084fda3f6a-EdSource+newsletter+June+24%2C+2025&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_a54dc0b8a6-084fda3f6a-287326126|title=California retires RICA; new teacher test to focus on phonics, edsource.org|date=June 14, 2025|author=Diana Lambert}}</ref>

In 2021, the [[Department of Education and Early Childhood Development (New Brunswick)|Department of Education and Early Childhood Development]] of [[New Brunswick]] appears to be the first in Canada to revise its K-2 reading curriculum based on "research-based instructional practice". For example, it replaced the various cueing systems with "mastery in the consolidated alphabetic to skilled reader phase".<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www2.gnb.ca/content/dam/gnb/Departments/ed/pdf/K12/curric/English/reading-and-viewing-k-2-gco.pdf|title=English viewing and reading, k-2, EECD, NB}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www2.gnb.ca/content/gnb/en/departments/education/k12/content/anglophone_sector/curriculum_anglophone.html|title=Curriculum Development (Anglophone Sector)|first=Canada|last=Government of New Brunswick|date=October 30, 2014|website=www2.gnb.ca}}</ref>

Some non-profit organizations, such as the Center for Development and Learning ([[Louisiana]]) and the Reading League ([[New York (state)|New York State]]), offer training programs for teachers to learn about the science of reading.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://mycll.org/|title=The Center for Literacy and Learning &#124; Literacy & Education Professional Development|website=The Center for Literacy & Learning}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.thereadingleague.org/|title=The Science of Reading|website=The Reading League}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.thereadingleague.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Science-of-Reading-eBook-2022.pdf|title=Science of reading eBook, The reading league}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.psychologytoday.com/ca/blog/raising-readers-writers-and-spellers/202007/science-early-literacy-learning-really-matters|title=Science for Early Literacy Learning Really Matters, Psychology Today|date=July 16, 2020}}</ref>

==Teaching reading for Alphabetic languages==
[[File:Reading_with_Children_%28Millais%29.png|thumb|right|Reading to children has many benefits; however, for most children it is not sufficient to teach them how to read. For that "all teaching should be initially focused on a single goal, the grasp of the alphabetic principle whereby each letter or grapheme represents a phoneme".<ref name="Stanislas Dehaene 228">{{cite book|author=Stanislas Dehaene|title=Reading in the brain|page=[https://archive.org/details/readinginbrainne0000deha/page/228 228]|publisher=Penguin Books|year=2010|isbn=978-0-14-311805-3|url=https://archive.org/details/readinginbrainne0000deha}}</ref>]]

Educators have debated for years about which method is best to teach reading for the English language. There are three main methods, [[phonics]], [[whole language]] and [[balanced literacy]]. There are also a variety of other areas and practices such as [[phonemic awareness]], fluency, reading comprehension, sight words and sight vocabulary, the three-cueing system (the searchlights model in England), [[guided reading]], [[shared reading]], and [[#Guided reading, reading workshop, shared reading, leveled reading, silent reading (and self-teaching)|leveled reading]]. Each practice is employed in different manners depending on the country and the specific school division.

In 2001, some researchers reached two conclusions: 1) "mastering the alphabetic principle is essential" and 2) "instructional techniques (namely, phonics) that teach this principle directly are more effective than those that do not". However, while they make it clear they have some fundamental disagreements with some of the claims made by whole-language advocates, some principles of whole-language have value such as the need to ensure that students are enthusiastic about books and eager to learn to read.<ref name="Rayner, 2001"/>

=== Phonics and related areas ===
{{Main|Phonics}}
[[File:Course of study in phonics .. (IA courseofstudyinp00john).pdf|thumb|A Course of Study in Phonics, San Francisco, U.S., 1912<ref>{{cite book|title=A Course of Study in Phonics|author1= Johnstone, Corinne H |author2=Burk, Frederic Lister|publisher=Sacramento, F.W. Richardson, Superintendent of State printing|date=1912|oclc=1042899593|author2-link=Frederic Lister Burk}}</ref>]]

[[Phonics]] emphasizes the [[alphabetic principle]] – the idea that letters ([[graphemes]]) represent the sounds of speech ([[phonemes]]).<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.nichd.nih.gov/sites/default/files/publications/pubs/nrp/Documents/report.pdf|title=National reading panel, p. 2-89, nichd.nih.gov (USA)}}</ref> It is taught in a variety of ways; some are systematic and others are unsystematic. Unsystematic phonics teaches phonics on a "when needed" basis and in no particular sequence. [[phonics#Systematic phonics|''Systematic'' phonics]] uses a planned, sequential introduction of a set of phonic elements along with ''explicit'' teaching and practice of those elements. The [[National Reading Panel]] (NRP) concluded that systematic phonics instruction is more effective than unsystematic phonics or non-phonics instruction.

Phonics approaches include analogy phonics, analytic phonics, embedded phonics with mini-lessons, phonics through spelling, and synthetic phonics.<ref name='Neural Representations'>{{cite journal |vauthors=Borowsky R, Esopenko C, Cummine J, Sarty GE |title=Neural representations of visual words and objects: a functional MRI study on the modularity of reading and object processing |journal= Brain Topogr |volume=20 |issue=2 |pages=89–96 |year=2007 |pmid=17929158 |doi=10.1007/s10548-007-0034-1|s2cid=1640138 }}</ref><ref name='Ventral and Dorsal Streams'>{{cite journal |vauthors=Borowsky R, Cummine J, Owen WJ, Friesen CK, Shih F, Sarty GE |title=FMRI of ventral and dorsal processing streams in basic reading processes: insular sensitivity to phonology |journal=Brain Topogr |volume=18 |issue=4 |pages=233–239 |year=2006 |pmid=16845597 |doi=10.1007/s10548-006-0001-2|s2cid=10815942 }}</ref><ref name='Chinese Ventral and Dorsal Streams'>{{cite journal |vauthors=Chan ST, Tang SW, Tang KW, Lee WK, Lo SS, Kwong KK |title=Hierarchical coding of characters in the ventral and dorsal visual streams of Chinese language processing |journal=NeuroImage |volume=48 |issue=2 |pages=423–435 |date = November 2009|pmid=19591947 |doi=10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.06.078|s2cid=23720865 |hdl=10397/24142 |hdl-access=free }}</ref><ref name="Rayner, 2001"/><ref name='Changes Reading Strategies'>{{cite journal |vauthors=Sanabria Díaz G, Torres Mdel R, Iglesias J, etal |title=Changes in reading strategies in school-age children |journal=Span J Psychol |volume=12 |issue=2 |pages=441–453 |date = November 2009|pmid=19899646 |doi=10.1017/S1138741600001827|s2cid=13821050 }}</ref>

According to a 2018 review of research related to ''English speaking poor readers'', phonics training is effective for improving literacy-related skills, particularly the fluent reading of words and non-words, and the accurate reading of irregular words.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=McArthur|first1=Genevieve|last2=Sheehan|first2=Yumi|last3=Badcock|first3=Nicholas A.|last4=Francis|first4=Deanna A.|last5=Wang|first5=Hua-Chen|last6=Kohnen|first6=Saskia|last7=Banales|first7=Erin|last8=Anandakumar|first8=Thushara|last9=Marinus|first9=Eva|last10=Castles|first10=Anne|date=14 November 2018|title=Phonics training for English-speaking poor readers|journal=The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews|volume=2018|issue=11|page=CD009115|doi=10.1002/14651858.CD009115.pub3|issn=1469-493X|pmc=6517252|pmid=30480759}}</ref>

In addition, phonics produces higher achievement for all beginning readers, and the greatest improvement is experienced by students who are at risk of failing to learn to read. While some children can infer these rules on their own, some need explicit instruction on phonics rules. Some phonics instruction has marked benefits such as the expansion of a student's vocabulary. Overall, children who are directly taught phonics are better at reading, spelling, and comprehension.<ref name="Seidenberg, Mark 2017">{{cite book |author=Seidenberg, Mark |title=Language at the speed of sight|publisher=Basic Books|location=New York|year=2017|isbn=978-1-5416-1715-5}}</ref>

A challenge in teaching phonics is that in some languages, such as English, complex letter-sound correspondences can confuse beginning readers. For this reason, it is recommended that teachers of English reading begin by introducing the "most frequent sounds" and the "common spellings", and save the less frequent sounds and complex spellings for later (e.g. the sounds /s/ and /t/ before /v/ and /w/; and the spellings c''a''ke before ''eigh''t and ''c''at before du''ck'').<ref name="Rayner, 2001"/><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Rayner|first1=Keith|author2=Barbara Foorman|author3=Charles Perfetti|author4=David Pesetsky|author5=Mark Seidenberg|title=How Should Reading be Taught?|journal=Scientific American|date=March 2002|volume=286|issue=3|pages=84–91|doi=10.1038/scientificamerican0302-84|pmid=11857904|bibcode=2002SciAm.286c..84R|s2cid=32588383|url=http://www.psychologicalscience.org/pdf/pspi/reading.pdf|archive-date=2017-04-20|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170420114649/http://www.psychologicalscience.org/pdf/pspi/reading.pdf}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.nysed.gov/common/nysed/files/programs/curriculum-instruction/nys-next-generation-ela-standards.pdf|title=NY English Language Arts Learning Standards, p. 22, 2017}}</ref>

Phonics is gaining [[Phonics#Practices by country or region|world-wide acceptance]].

==== Combining phonics with other literacy instruction ====

Phonics is taught in many different ways and it is often taught together with some of the following: oral language skills,<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/education-evidence/teaching-learning-toolkit/oral-language-interventions|title=Oral language interventions|website=EEF}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/219627/DFE-RR247-BCRP13.pdf|title=Exploring interventions for children and young people with speech, language and communication needs: A study of practice, UK Government}}</ref> concepts about print,<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.education.vic.gov.au:443/school/teachers/teachingresources/discipline/english/literacy/readingviewing/Pages/litfocusconceptsprint.aspx|title=Concepts of print|website=www.education.vic.gov.au}}</ref> [[phonological awareness]], [[phonemic awareness]], [[phonology]], oral reading [[fluency]], vocabulary, [[syllables]], [[reading comprehension]], [[spelling]], word study,<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/literacynumeracy/inspire/research/WW_Word_Study.pdf |title=Word Study Instruction: Enhancing Reading Comprehension |series=WHAT WORKS? Research into Practice |date=September 2010 |issue=Research Monograph 27  |website=www.edu.gov.on.ca|access-date=2021-01-15 |archive-date=2020-10-16 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201016032258/http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/literacynumeracy/inspire/research/WW_Word_Study.pdf }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.readingrockets.org/article/word-study-instruction-k-2-classroom|title=Word Study Instruction in the K–2 Classroom, Reading Rockets |date=5 January 2011}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/literacynumeracy/inspire/research/WW_Morphology.pdf |title=Morphology Works |series=WHAT WORKS? Research into Practice |date=June 2012 |issue=Research Monograph 41 |website=www.edu.gov.on.ca |access-date=2021-01-15 |archive-date=2020-12-17 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201217082459/http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/literacynumeracy/inspire/research/WW_Morphology.pdf }}</ref> [[cooperative learning]], [[multisensory learning]], and [[guided reading]]. And, phonics is often featured in discussions about [[#Science of reading|science of reading]],<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.alea.edu.au/documents/item/1869|title=Exploding some of the myths about learning to read, NSW Teachers Federation, AU|access-date=2021-01-15|archive-date=2020-06-25|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200625151738/https://www.alea.edu.au/documents/item/1869}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.readingrockets.org/blogs/shanahan-literacy/what-science-reading|title=What Is the Science of Reading? Timothy Shanahan, Reading Rockets 2019-05-29|date=29 May 2019}}</ref> and [[evidence-based education|evidence-based practices]].

The [[National Reading Panel]] (U.S. 2000) is clear that "systematic phonics instruction should be integrated with other reading instruction to create a balanced reading program".<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.nichd.nih.gov/sites/default/files/publications/pubs/nrp/Documents/report.pdf|title=National Reading Panel, NICHD, p. 2–97 and 2–1 – 4–1.}}</ref> It suggests that phonics be taught together with phonemic awareness, oral fluency, vocabulary and comprehension. [[Timothy Shanahan (educator)|Researcher and educator Timothy Shanahan]], a member of that panel, recommends that primary students receive 60–90 minutes per day of explicit, systematic, literacy instruction time; and that it be divided equally between a) words and word parts (e.g. letters, sounds, decoding and phonemic awareness), b) oral reading fluency, c) reading comprehension, and d) writing.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.shanahanonliteracy.com/blog/why-an-overemphasis-on-foundational-reading-skills-makes-kids-sick|title=Why An Overemphasis on Foundational Reading Skills Makes Kids Sick &#124; Shanahan on Literacy|website=www.shanahanonliteracy.com}}</ref> Furthermore, he states that "the phonemic awareness skills found to give the greatest reading advantage to kindergarten and first-grade children are ''segmenting and blending''".<ref name="Shanahan-2005">{{Cite web|url=https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED489535.pdf|title=The National Reading Panel Report: Practical Advice for Teachers|page= 9|author= Timothy Shanahan|publisher= University of Illinois at Chicago, Learning Point Associates |date=2005}}</ref>

The Ontario Association of Deans of Education (Canada) published research Monograph # 37 entitled ''Supporting early language and literacy'' with suggestions for parents and teachers in helping children prior to grade one. It covers the areas of letter names and letter-sound correspondence (phonics), as well as conversation, play-based learning, print, phonological awareness, shared reading, and vocabulary.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/literacynumeracy/inspire/research/ww_early_language.pdf |title=Supporting early language and literacy |series=WHAT WORKS? Research into Practice |date=October 2011 |issue=Research Monograph 37 |website=www.edu.gov.on.ca |access-date=2021-01-15 |archive-date=2021-02-07 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210207135736/http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/literacynumeracy/inspire/research/WW_Early_Language.pdf }}</ref>

==== Effectiveness of programs ====
Some researchers report that teaching reading without teaching phonics is harmful to large numbers of students, yet not all phonics teaching programs produce effective results. The reason is that the effectiveness of a program depends on using the right curriculum together with the appropriate approach to instruction techniques, classroom management, grouping, and other factors.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://robertslavinsblog.wordpress.com/2020/03/26/science-of-reading-can-we-get-beyond-our-30-year-pillar-fight/|title=Science of reading, Robert Slavin's blog.|date=26 March 2020}}</ref> Louisa Moats, a teacher, psychologist and researcher, has long advocated for reading instruction that is direct, explicit and systematic, covering phoneme awareness, decoding, comprehension, literature appreciation, and daily exposure to a variety of texts.<ref>{{Cite book|title=Speech to print: language essentials for teachers|author=Moats, Louisa|publisher=Paul H. Brookes Pub|year=2000|isbn=978-1-55766-387-0|location=Baltimore, MD|url-access=registration|url=https://archive.org/details/speechtoprintlan00loui}}</ref> She maintains that "reading failure can be prevented in all but a small percentage of children with serious learning disorders. It is possible to teach most students how to read if we start early and follow the significant body of research showing which practices are most effective".<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.aft.org/sites/default/files/moats.pdf|title=Teaching Reading Is Rocket Science, American Federation of Teachers, Washington, DC, USA, 2020|page=4|author=Louisa C. Moats}}</ref>

Interest in [[evidence-based education]] appears to be growing.<ref name=Events>{{Cite web|url=https://researched.org.uk/|title=researchED Events for Researchers, Teachers & Policy Makers|website=ResearchED}}</ref> In 2021, [[#Best Evidence Encyclopedia (BEE)|Best evidence encyclopedia]] (BEE) released a review of research on 51 different programs for struggling readers in elementary schools.<ref name="BEE 2021">{{cite journal|url=https://beib228303049.files.wordpress.com/2021/02/struggling-readers-master-for-bee-unblind-12-16-20.pdf|title=A Quantitative Synthesis of Research on Programs for Struggling Readers in Elementary Schools, Best Evidence Encyclopedia|date=2021-03-21|doi=10.1002/rrq.379 |journal=Reading Research Quarterly|s2cid=233850664}}</ref> Many of the programs used phonics-based teaching and/or one or more of the following: [[cooperative learning]], technology-supported adaptive instruction (see [[Educational technology]]), [[metacognitive]] skills, [[phonemic awareness]], word reading, [[fluency]], [[vocabulary]], [[multisensory learning]], [[spelling]], [[guided reading]], [[reading comprehension]], word analysis, structured [[curriculum]], and [[balanced literacy]] (non-phonetic approach).

The BEE review concludes that a) outcomes were positive for one-to-one tutoring, b) outcomes were positive, but not as large, for one-to-small group tutoring, c) there were no differences in outcomes between teachers and teaching assistants as tutors, d) technology-supported adaptive instruction did not have positive outcomes, e) whole-class approaches (mostly cooperative learning) and whole-school approaches incorporating tutoring obtained outcomes for struggling readers as large as those found for one-to-one tutoring, and benefitted many more students, and f) approaches mixing classroom and school improvements, with tutoring for the most [[at-risk students]], have the greatest potential for the largest numbers of struggling readers.<ref name="BEE 2021"/>

Robert Slavin, of BEE, goes so far as to suggest that states should "hire thousands of tutors" to support students scoring far below grade level – particularly in elementary school reading. Research, he says, shows "only tutoring, both one-to-one and one-to-small group, in reading and mathematics, had an [[effect size]] larger than +0.10&nbsp;... averages are around +0.30", and "well-trained teaching assistants using structured tutoring materials or software can obtain outcomes as good as those obtained by certified teachers as tutors".<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://robertslavinsblog.wordpress.com/2020/10/01/how-much-have-students-lost-in-the-covid-19-shutdowns/|title=How Much Have Students Lost in The COVID-19 Shutdowns?, Robert Slavin, 2020-10-01|date=October 2020}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://robertslavinsblog.wordpress.com/2021/03/25/proventutoring-org-getting-proven-tutoring-programs-into-widespread-practice/|title=ProvenTutoring.org: Getting Proven Tutoring Programs Into Widespread Practice, Robert Slavin|date=2021-03-21}}</ref>

[[Evidence-based education#What Works Clearinghouse (WWC)|What works clearinghouse]] allows you to see the effectiveness of specific programs. For example, as of 2020 they have data on 231 literacy programs. If you filter them by grade 1 only, all class types, all school types, all delivery methods, all program types, and all outcomes you receive 22 programs. You can then view the program details and, if you wish, compare one with another.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/FWW/Results?filters=,Literacy|title=Results: Literacy|website=ies.ed.gov}}</ref>

[[Evidence-based education#Evidence for ESSA|Evidence for ESSA]]<ref name="Evidence for ESSA">{{Cite web|url=https://www.evidenceforessa.org/|title=Home – Evidence for ESSA|website=Evidence for ESSA – Find Evidence-Based PK-12 Programs}}</ref> (Center for Research and Reform in Education)<ref name="education.jhu.edu">{{Cite web|url=https://education.jhu.edu/crre/|title=Center for Research and Reform in Education|date=13 September 2023 }}</ref> offers free up-to-date information on current PK–12 programs in reading, writing, math, science, and others that meet the standards of the [[Every Student Succeeds Act]] (U.S.).<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.ed.gov/essa?src=rn|title=Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) &#124; U.S. Department of Education|website=www.ed.gov}}</ref>

''ProvenTutoring.org''<ref name="Proven tutoring">{{Cite web|url=https://proventutoring.org/|title=Home|website=ProvenTutoring.Org}}</ref> a non-profit organization, is a resource for educators interested in research-proven tutoring programs. The programs it lists are proven effective in rigorous research as defined in the 2015 Every Student Succeeds Act. The Center for Research and Reform in Education at Johns Hopkins University provides the technical support to inform program selection.<ref name="education.jhu.edu"/>

==== Systematic phonics ====
[[File:REPORT OF THE NATIONAL READING PANEL (IA gov.gpo.fdsys.CHRG-106shrg66481).pdf|thumb|The National Reading Panel concluded that systematic phonics instruction is more effective than unsystematic phonics or non-phonics instruction.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.nichd.nih.gov/sites/default/files/publications/pubs/nrp/Documents/report.pdf|title=National Reading Panel, NICHD, p. 2-92}}</ref>]]
''Systematic phonics'' is not one specific method of teaching phonics; it is a term used to describe phonics approaches that are taught ''explicitly'' and in a structured, systematic manner. They are ''systematic'' because the letters and the sounds they relate to are taught in a specific sequence, as opposed to incidentally or on a "when needed" basis.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://literacyworldwide.org/docs/default-source/where-we-stand/ila-explaining-phonics-instruction-an-educators-guide.pdf|title=Explaining Phonics Instruction, An Educator's Guide, International Literacy Association, p.1, 2018}}</ref>

The [[National Reading Panel]] (NRP) in the U.S. concluded that systematic phonics instruction is more effective than unsystematic phonics or non-phonics instruction. The NRP also found that systematic phonics instruction is effective (with varying degrees) when delivered through one-to-one tutoring, small groups, and teaching classes of students; and is effective from kindergarten onward, the earlier the better. It helps significantly with word-reading skills and reading comprehension for kindergartners and 1st graders as well as for older struggling readers and reading-disabled students. Benefits to spelling were positive for kindergartners and 1st graders but not for older students.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.nichd.nih.gov/sites/default/files/publications/pubs/nrp/Documents/report.pdf|title=National Reading Panel, NICHD, p. 2-92 ... 2–96.}}</ref>

Systematic phonics is sometimes mischaracterised as "skill and drill" with little attention to meaning. However, researchers point out that this impression is false. Teachers can use engaging games or materials to teach letter-sound connections, and it can also be incorporated with the reading of meaningful text.<ref name="Ehri-Linnea C. 2020">{{cite journal|last=Ehri|first=Linnea C.|title=The science of learning to read words: A case for systematic phonics instruction|journal=Reading Research Quarterly|volume=55S1|issue=334|year=2020|page=S57|doi=10.1037/0022-0663.83.4.451}}</ref>

Phonics can be taught systematically in a variety of ways, such as analogy phonics, analytic phonics, phonics through spelling, and synthetic phonics. However, their effectiveness varies considerably because the methods differ in such areas as the range of letter-sound coverage, the structure of the lesson plans, and the time devoted to specific instructions.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://publications.teachernet.gov.uk/eOrderingDownload/0201-2006PDF-EN-01.pdf|archive-url=http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100512233640/http://publications.teachernet.gov.uk/eOrderingDownload/0201-2006PDF-EN-01.pdf|archive-date=2010-05-12|title=Independent review of the teaching of early reading, Rose report, 2006, UK, p. 2–89|access-date=2021-01-15}}</ref>

Systematic phonics has gained increased acceptance in different parts of the world since the completion of three major studies into teaching reading; one in the US in 2000,<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www1.nichd.nih.gov/publications/pubs/nrp/Documents/report.pdf|title=Complete report – National Reading Panel}}</ref><ref name="NICHD, 2006"/> another in Australia in 2005,<ref name="Teaching Reading">{{Cite web |url=http://research.acer.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?filename=2&article=1004&context=tll_misc&type=additional |title=Teaching Reading |format=PDF |work= Australian Government Department of Education, Science and Training. }}</ref> and the other in the UK in 2006.<ref name="Rose-2006a"/>

In 2009, the [[Department for Education]] in the UK published a [[National Curriculum for England|curriculum]] review for England that added support for systematic phonics.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://publications.teachernet.gov.uk/eOrderingDownload/Primary_curriculum_Report.pdf|archive-url=http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100205061400/http://publications.teachernet.gov.uk/eOrderingDownload/Primary_curriculum_Report.pdf|archive-date=2010-02-05|title=Independent Review of the Primary Curriculum|access-date=2021-01-15}}</ref> In fact, systematic phonics in the UK is known as [[synthetic phonics]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.education.gov.uk/publications/eOrderingDownload/0201-2006pdf-EN-01.pdf |archive-url=http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130401151715/http://www.education.gov.uk/publications/eOrderingDownload/0201-2006pdf-EN-01.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-date=2013-04-01 |title=Independent review of the teaching of early reading |year=2006|access-date=2014-06-16}}</ref>

Beginning as early as 2014, several states in the United States have changed their curriculum to include systematic phonics instruction in elementary school.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.mydigitalchalkboard.org/cognoti/content/file/resources/documents/8c/8cf4adf5/8cf4adf587da2b191c07b09831798d521bc05adc/FrameworkFINALJuly2015.pdf|title=English Language Development Framework for California Public Schools K–12|date=July 9, 2014|access-date=January 15, 2021|archive-date=October 9, 2022|archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/https://www.mydigitalchalkboard.org/cognoti/content/file/resources/documents/8c/8cf4adf5/8cf4adf587da2b191c07b09831798d521bc05adc/FrameworkFINALJuly2015.pdf}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.nysed.gov/curriculum-instruction/english-language-arts-ela-literacy-standards|title=ELA Standards|website=New York State Education Department}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://education.ohio.gov/Topics/Operating-Standards/Table-of-Contents/Instruction/Phonics|title=Rules for Phonics, Ohio, 2015}}</ref><ref name="1b">{{Cite web|url=http://www.arkansased.gov/divisions/learning-services/r.i.s.e.-arkansas|title=Reading Initiative for Student Excellence, arkansased.gov/divisions/learning-services, 2018|access-date=2021-01-15|archive-date=2019-07-30|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190730065851/http://www.arkansased.gov/divisions/learning-services/r.i.s.e.-arkansas}}</ref>

In 2018, the State [[Government of Victoria]], Australia, published a website containing a comprehensive Literacy Teaching Toolkit including Effective Reading Instruction, Phonics, and Sample Phonics Lessons.<ref name="Effective Reading Instruction, Victoria, Australia">{{Cite web|url=https://www.education.vic.gov.au:443/school/teachers/teachingresources/discipline/english/literacy/readingviewing/Pages/effectivereading.aspx|title=Effective reading instruction|website=www.education.vic.gov.au}}</ref>

==== Analytic phonics and analogy phonics ====
{{Main|Analytic phonics}}

''[[Analytic phonics]]'' does not involve pronouncing individual sounds (phonemes) in isolation and blending the sounds, as is done in synthetic phonics. Rather, it is taught at the word level and students learn to analyze letter-sound relationships once the word is identified. For example, students analyze letter-sound correspondences such as the ''ou'' spelling of {{IPAc-en|aʊ}} in shr''ou''ds. Also, students might be asked to practice saying words with similar sounds such as ''b''all, ''b''at and ''b''ite. Furthermore, students are taught consonant blends (separate, adjacent consonants) as units, such as ''br''eak or ''shr''ouds.<ref name="NRP"/><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.ldaustralia.org/utgp.html|title=Understanding Terminology of Grammar and Phonics|access-date=2021-01-15|archive-date=2020-06-05|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200605124753/https://www.ldaustralia.org/utgp.html}}</ref>

''Analogy phonics'' is a particular type of ''analytic phonics'' in which the teacher has students analyze phonic elements according to the speech sounds ([[Phonogram (linguistics)|phonogram]]s) in the word. For example, a type of phonogram (known in linguistics as a [[syllable rime|rime]]) is composed of the vowel and the consonant sounds that follow it (e.g. in the words ''cat, mat and sat,'' the rime is ''"at"''.) Teachers using the analogy method may have students memorize a bank of phonograms, such as ''-at'' or ''-am'', or use ''word families'' (e.g. c''an'', r''an'', m''an'', or m''ay'', pl''ay'', s''ay'').<ref name="Analogy based phonics, LD Online">{{Cite web|url=http://www.ldonline.org/glossary/Analogy-based_phonics|title=Analogy based phonics, LD Online|access-date=2021-01-15|archive-date=2021-04-17|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210417212110/http://www.ldonline.org/glossary/Analogy-based_phonics}}</ref><ref name="NRP">{{Cite web |url=https://www1.nichd.nih.gov/publications/pubs/nrp/Documents/report.pdf|title=National Reading Panel| pages= 2–89}}</ref>

There have been studies on the effectiveness of instruction using analytic phonics vs. synthetic phonics. Johnston et al. (2012) conducted experimental research studies that tested the effectiveness of phonics learning instruction among 10-year-old boys and girls.<ref name=":2_2">{{Cite journal |last1=Johnston |first1=R. S |last2=McGeown |first2=S |last3=Watson |first3=J. E. |date=2012 |title=Long-term effects of synthetic versus analytic phonics teaching on the reading and spelling ability of 10-year-old boys and girls. |journal=Reading and Writing |volume=v25 n6 |issue=6 |pages=1365–1384 |doi=10.1007/s11145-011-9323-x |s2cid=55324494 |url=https://hull-repository.worktribe.com/file/464897/1/Long.pdf }}</ref>  They used comparative data from the Clackmannanshire Report and chose 393 participants to compare synthetic phonics instruction and analytic phonics instruction.<ref name="auto6">{{Cite web |url=http://www.gov.scot/Publications/2005/02/20682/52383|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150222153240/http://www.gov.scot/Publications/2005/02/20682/52383|archive-date=2015-02-22|title=Clackmannanshire Report, a seven-year study that was published in 2005, webarchive.org.uk }}</ref><ref name=":2_2" />  The boys taught by the synthetic phonics method had better word reading than the girls in their classes, and their spelling and reading comprehension was as good. On the other hand, with analytic phonics teaching, although the boys performed as well as the girls in word reading, they had inferior spelling and reading comprehension. Overall, the group taught by synthetic phonics had better word reading, spelling, and reading comprehension. And, synthetic phonics did not lead to any impairment in the reading of irregular words.<ref name=":2_2" />

==== Embedded phonics with mini-lessons ====
''Embedded phonics'', also known as ''incidental phonics'', is the type of phonics instruction used in [[whole language]] programs. It is not ''systematic phonics''.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://lincs.ed.gov/publications/pdf/PRFbooklet.pdf|title=Put reading first booklet, Partnership for reading, National institute for literacy, 3rd ed.|page=12}}</ref> Although phonics skills are de-emphasised in whole language programs, some teachers include phonics "mini-lessons" when students struggle with words while reading from a book. Short lessons are included based on phonics elements the students are having trouble with, or on a new or difficult phonics pattern that appears in a class reading assignment. The focus on meaning is generally maintained, but the mini-lesson provides some time for focus on individual sounds and the letters that represent them. Embedded phonics is different from other methods because instruction is always in the context of literature rather than in separate lessons about distinct sounds and letters; and skills are taught when an opportunity arises, not systematically.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://literacytrust.org.uk/information/what-is-literacy/what-phonics/|title=What is phonics?|website=National Literacy Trust}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.ldaustralia.org/utgp.html|title=Understanding Terminology of Grammar and Phonics, Learning difficulties, Australia|access-date=2021-01-15|archive-date=2020-06-05|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200605124753/https://www.ldaustralia.org/utgp.html}}</ref>

==== Phonics through spelling ====
For some teachers, this is a method of teaching spelling by using the sounds (phonemes).<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.readingrockets.org/article/phonics-instruction|title= Phonics instruction, Reading Rockets|date= 24 April 2013}}</ref> However, it can also be a method of teaching reading by focusing on the sounds and their spelling (i.e. phonemes and syllables). It is taught systematically with guided lessons conducted in a direct and explicit manner including appropriate feedback. Sometimes [[mnemonic]] cards containing individual sounds are used to allow the student to practice saying the sounds that are related to a letter or letters (e.g. ''a'', ''e'', ''i'', ''o'', ''u''). Accuracy comes first, followed by speed. The sounds may be grouped by categories such as vowels that sound short (e.g. c-''a''-t and s-''i''-t). When the student is comfortable recognizing and saying the sounds, the following steps might be followed: a) the tutor says a target word and the student repeats it out loud, b) the student writes down each individual sound (letter) until the word is completely spelled, saying each sound as it is written, and c) the student says the entire word out loud. An alternate method would be to have the student use mnemonic cards to sound-out (spell) the target word.

Typically, the instruction starts with sounds that have only one letter and simple CVC words such as ''sat'' and ''pin''. Then it progresses to longer words, and sounds with more than one letter (e.g. h''ea''r and d''ay''), and perhaps even syllables (e.g. wa-ter). Sometimes the student practices by saying (or sounding-out) cards that contain entire words.<ref>{{cite journal|title=Response to Phonics Through Spelling Intervention in Children With Dyslexia |journal=Reading & Writing Quarterly |issn=1057-3569 |date=2020-01-13|doi=10.1080/10573569.2019.1707732|s2cid=212828096|last1=Van Rijthoven |first1=Robin |last2=Kleemans |first2=Tijs |last3=Segers |first3=Eliane |last4=Verhoeven |first4=Ludo |volume=37 |pages=17–31 |doi-access=free |hdl=2066/219397 |hdl-access=free }}</ref>

==== Synthetic phonics ====
{{Main|Synthetic phonics}}
''[[Synthetic phonics]]'', also known as blended phonics, is a systematic phonics method employed to teach students to read by ''sounding out'' the letters and then ''blend'' the sounds to form the word. This method involves learning how letters or letter groups represent individual sounds, and that those sounds are blended to form a word. For example, ''shrouds'' would be read by pronouncing the sounds for each spelling, ''sh, r, ou, d, s'' (IPA {{IPAc-en|ʃ|,_|r|,_|aʊ|,_|d|,_|z}}), then blending those sounds orally to produce a spoken word, ''sh – r – ou – d – s = shrouds'' (IPA {{IPAc-en|ʃ|r|aʊ|d|z}}). The goal of a synthetic phonics instructional program is that students identify the sound-symbol correspondences and blend their phonemes automatically. Since 2005, synthetic phonics has become the accepted method of teaching reading (by phonics instruction) in England, Scotland and Australia.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Independent Review of the Primary Curriculum: Final Report|url=https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/eOrderingDownload/Primary_curriculum_Report.pdf|publisher=DCSF Publications|access-date=14 November 2011}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|title=Teaching Reading: Report and Recommendations|url=http://www.dest.gov.au/nitl/documents/report_recommendations.pdf|publisher=Commonwealth Copyright|access-date=14 November 2011|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110812024503/http://www.dest.gov.au/nitl/documents/report_recommendations.pdf|archive-date=12 August 2011}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|last=Johnston|first=Rhona|title=A Seven Year Study of the Effects of Synthetic Phonics Teaching on Reading and Spelling Attainment|url=http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2005/02/20682/52383|access-date=14 November 2011|author2=Joyce E Watson |date=11 February 2005}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.standardsinstitutes.org/sites/default/files/why_a_structured_phonics_program_is_effective_draft_1.pdf|title=Why a Structured Phonics Program is Effective, Standards Institutes|access-date=2021-03-17|archive-date=2021-01-15|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210115180041/https://www.standardsinstitutes.org/sites/default/files/why_a_structured_phonics_program_is_effective_draft_1.pdf}}</ref>

The 2005 [[Rose Report]] from the UK concluded that systematic [[synthetic phonics]] was the most effective method for teaching reading. It also suggests the "best teaching" includes a brisk pace, engaging children's interest with [[Multisensory learning|multi-sensory activities]] and stimulating resources, praise for effort and achievement; and above all, the full backing of the headteacher.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Independent Review of the Primary Curriculum: Final Report, pp. 16, 49|url=https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/eOrderingDownload/Primary_curriculum_Report.pdf|publisher=DCSF Publications|access-date=14 November 2011}}</ref>

It also has considerable support in some [[Phonics#United States|States]] in the U.S.<ref name="NICHD, 2006">{{Cite web |url=http://www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/nrp/findings.cfm |title=Findings and Determinations of the National Reading Panel by Topic Areas |work=NICHD Publications and Materials  |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080705194256/http://www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/nrp/findings.cfm |archive-date=2008-07-05 }}</ref> and some support from expert panels in [[Phonics#Canada|Canada]].<ref>{{Cite web|title=Early Reading Strategy: The Report of the Expert Panel on Early Reading in Ontario|url=http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/document/reports/reading/reading.pdf|publisher=Ministry of Education|access-date=14 November 2011|year=2003}}</ref>

In the US, a pilot program using the Core Knowledge Early Literacy program that used this type of phonics approach showed significantly higher results in K–3 reading compared with comparison schools.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.coreknowledge.org/mimik/mimik_uploads/documents/712/CK%20Early%20Literacy%20Pilot%203%2012%2012.pdf|title=Core Knowledge Early Literacy Pilot in NYC|access-date=2021-01-15|archive-date=2016-05-15|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160515173133/http://www.coreknowledge.org/mimik/mimik_uploads/documents/712/CK%20Early%20Literacy%20Pilot%203%2012%2012.pdf}}</ref> In addition, several States such as California, Ohio, New York and Arkansas, are promoting the principles of synthetic phonics (see [[Synthetic phonics#United States|synthetic phonics in the United States]]).

Resources for teaching phonics are available [[Phonics#Resources for phonics instruction|here]].

[[File:Lao schoolgirls reading books.jpg|thumb|right|[[Lao people|Laotian]] girls sit outside their school, reading books they received at a rural school book party.]]

==== Related areas ====

===== Phonemic awareness =====
{{main|Phonemic awareness}}
[[Phonemic awareness]] is the process by which the [[phonemes]] (sounds of oral language) are heard, interpreted, understood and manipulated – unrelated to their [[grapheme]] (written language). It is a sub-set of [[Phonological awareness]] that includes the manipulation of [[rhymes]], [[syllable]]s, and [[syllable onset|onsets]] and [[syllable rime|rimes]], and is most prevalent in alphabetic systems.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Ehri|first=Linnea|author2=Simone Nunes |author3=Dale Willows |author4=Barbara Valeska Schuster |author5=Zohreh Yaghoub-Zadeh |author6-link=Timothy Shanahan (educator)|author6= Timothy Shanahan (educator |title=Phonemic awareness instruction helps children learn to read: Evidence from the National Reading Panel's meta-analysis|journal=Reading Research Quarterly|date=July–September 2001|volume=36|issue=3|pages=250–287 |jstor=748111|doi=10.1598/RRQ.36.3.2}}</ref> The specific part of speech depends on the [[writing system]] employed. The [[National Reading Panel]] (NPR) concluded that phonemic awareness improves a learner's ability to learn to read. When teaching phonemic awareness, the NRP found that better results were obtained with focused and explicit instruction of one or two elements, over five or more hours, in small groups, and using the corresponding [[graphemes]] (letters).<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.nichd.nih.gov/sites/default/files/publications/pubs/nrp/Documents/report.pdf|title=National Reading Panel, 2000, NICHD |pages=2–4}}</ref> See also [[Speech perception]]. As mentioned earlier, some researchers feel that the most effective way of teaching phonemic awareness is through segmenting and blending, a key part of [[synthetic phonics]].<ref name="Shanahan-2005"/>

===== Vocabulary =====
A critical aspect of reading comprehension is vocabulary development.<ref name="Justice 2002 87–106"/> When a reader encounters an unfamiliar word in print and decodes it to derive its spoken pronunciation, the reader understands the word if it is in the reader's spoken vocabulary. Otherwise, the reader must derive the meaning of the word using another strategy, such as context. If the development of the child's vocabulary is impeded by things such as ear infections that inhibit the child from hearing new words consistently then the development of reading will also be impaired.<ref>{{cite book |author1=Wolf, Maryanne |author2=Stoodley, Catherine J. |title=Proust and the squid: the story and science of the reading brain |publisher=Harper |location=New York |year=2007 |pages=[https://archive.org/details/proustsquidstory00wolf/page/104 104–105] |isbn=978-0-06-018639-5 |oclc=471015779 |url=https://archive.org/details/proustsquidstory00wolf/page/104 }}</ref>

===== Sight vocabulary vs. sight words =====
[[Sight word]]s (i.e. high-frequency words), sometimes called the '''look-say''' or '''whole-word method'''<!--boldface per [[WP:R#PLA]]-->, are ''not'' a part of the phonics method.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.understood.org/en/articles/what-are-sight-words|title=What Are Sight Words?|website=www.understood.org|date=30 August 2019 }}</ref> They are usually associated with [[whole language]] and [[balanced literacy]] where students are expected to memorize high-frequency words such as those on the [[Dolch word list]] and the Fry word list (e.g. a, be, call, do, eat, fall, gave, etc.).<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.uen.org/k-2educator/word_lists.shtml|title=High Frequency Words – UEN|website=www.uen.org}}</ref><ref>{{Cite press release|url=https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/mcgraw-hill-education-acknowledges-enduring-contributions-of-reading-and-language-arts-scholar-author-and-innovator-ed-fry-102954189.html|title=McGraw-Hill Education Acknowledges Enduring Contributions of Reading and Language Arts Scholar, Author and Innovator Ed Fry|first=McGraw-Hill|last=Education|website=www.prnewswire.com}}</ref> The supposition (in whole language and balanced literacy) is that students will learn to read more easily if they memorize the most common words they will encounter, especially words that are not easily decoded (i.e. exceptions).

On the other hand, using sight words as a method of teaching reading in English is seen as being at odds with the [[alphabetic principle]] and treating English as though it was a [[logographic]] language (e.g. [[Chinese language|Chinese]] or [[Japanese language|Japanese]]).<ref>{{Cite book |title=The Underground History of American Education |last=Gatto |first=John Taylor |publisher=The Oxford Village Press |year=2006 |isbn=0-945700-04-0 |location=Oxford, NY |pages=70–72 |chapter=Eyless in Gaza}}</ref>

In addition, according to research, whole-word memorization is "labor-intensive", requiring on average about 35 trials per word.<ref name="Bruce Murray 2019">{{cite journal|last1=Murray|first1=Bruce|last2=McIlwain|first2=Jane|title=How do beginners learn to read irregular words as sight words|journal=Journal of Research in Reading|volume=42|issue=1|year=2019|pages=123–136|issn=0141-0423|doi=10.1111/1467-9817.12250|s2cid=150055551|doi-access=free}}</ref> Also, phonics advocates say that most words are decodable, so comparatively few words have to be memorized. And because a child will over time encounter many low-frequency words, "the phonological recoding mechanism is a very powerful, indeed essential, mechanism throughout reading development".<ref name="Rayner, 2001"/> Furthermore, researchers suggest that teachers who withhold phonics instruction to make it easier on children "are having the opposite effect" by making it harder for children to gain basic word-recognition skills. They suggest that learners should focus on understanding the principles of phonics so they can recognize the phonemic overlaps among words (e.g. have, had, has, having, haven't, etc.), making it easier to decode them all.<ref>{{cite book |author=Seidenberg, Mark |title=Language at the speed of sight|page=147|publisher=Basic Books|location=New York|year=2017|isbn=978-1-5416-1715-5}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.readingrockets.org/article/new-model-teaching-high-frequency-words|title=A New Model for Teaching High-Frequency Words, Reading Rockets|date=2019}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=http://education.ohio.gov/getattachment/Topics/Learning-in-Ohio/Literacy/Striving-Readers-Comprehensive-Literacy-Grant/Literacy-Academy/2-07-Teaching-Sight-Words-According-to-Science.pdf.aspx?lang=en-US|title=Teaching Sight Words According to Science, OHIO Department of Education|date=2019}}</ref>

'''Sight vocabulary'''<!--boldface per [[WP:R#PLA]]--> is a part of the phonics method. It describes words that are stored in long-term memory and read automatically. Skilled fully-alphabetic readers learn to store words in long-term memory without memorization (i.e. a mental dictionary), making reading and comprehension easier. "Once you know the sound-based way to decode, your mind learns what words look like, even if you're not especially trying to do so".<ref>{{cite book|title=The reading mind|page=68|author=Willingham, Daniel T.|publisher=Jossey-Mind|date=2017|isbn=978-1-119-30137-0}}</ref> The process, called ''[[Orthography|orthographic]] mapping'', involves ''decoding, crosschecking, mental marking and rereading''. It takes significantly less time than memorization. This process works for fully-alphabetic readers when reading simple decodable words from left to right through the word. ''Irregular words'' pose more of a challenge, yet research in 2018 concluded that "fully-alphabetic students" learn irregular words more easily when they use a process called ''hierarchical decoding''. In this process, students, rather than decode from left to right, are taught to focus attention on the irregular elements such as a vowel-digraph and a silent-e; for example, break (b – r – ''ea'' – k), height (h – ''eigh'' – t), touch (t – ''ou – ch''), and make (m – ''a'' – k''e''). Consequentially, they suggest that teachers and tutors should focus on "teaching decoding with more advanced vowel patterns before expecting young readers to tackle irregular words". Others recommend including high-frequency words (i.e. Fry word list) while teaching the "sound-symbol relations" (i.e. phonics).<ref name="Bruce Murray 2019"/><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.readingrockets.org/research-by-topic/orthographic-mapping-acquisition-sight-word-reading-spelling-memory-and-vocabulary|title=Orthographic mapping, Reading rockets|date=19 September 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.shanahanonliteracy.com/blog/should-we-still-teach-sight-vocabulary|title=Should We Still Teach Sight Vocabulary|date=2023-11-11|author=[[Timothy Shanahan (educator)]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/does-teaching-sight-words-contradict-the-science-of-reading/2025/01?utm_source=nl&utm_medium=eml&utm_campaign=popweek&utm_content=list&M=12330353&UUID=6a0c64198acb1707042a63f7df9be9be&T=16172142|title=Does Teaching ‘Sight Words’ Contradict the Science of Reading, edweek.org|author= Sarah Schwartz|date=January 10, 2025}}</ref>

===== Fluency =====
{{main|Fluency}}
[[Fluency]] is the ability to read orally with speed, accuracy, and [[vocal]] expression. The ability to read fluently is one of several critical factors necessary for reading comprehension. If a reader is not fluent, it may be difficult to remember what has been read and to relate the ideas expressed in the text to their background knowledge. This accuracy and [[automaticity]] of reading serves as a bridge between decoding and comprehension.<ref name="Rasinski, T"/>

One way to improve fluency is ''rereading'' (the student rereads a passage aloud several times with vocal expression). Another is ''assisted reading'' (the student visually reads a text while simultaneously hearing someone else fluently read the same text).<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/opinion-reading-fluency-the-neglected-key-to-reading-success/2024/04|title=Reading Fluency: The Neglected Key to Reading Success, Education Week|author=Timothy Rasinski|newspaper=Education Week |date=April 24, 2024}}</ref>

===== Reading comprehension =====
{{main|Reading comprehension}}

The NRP describes reading comprehension as a complex [[cognitive]] process in which a reader intentionally and interactively engages with the text. The [[#Science of reading|science of reading]] says that reading comprehension is heavily dependent on word recognition (i.e., phonological awareness, decoding, etc.) and oral language comprehension (i.e., background knowledge, vocabulary, etc.).<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Kendeou P, Savage R, van den Broek P |title=Revisiting the simple view of reading |journal= British Journal of Educational Psychology|volume=79 |issue=Pt 2 |pages=353–370 |date=June 2009 |pmid=19091164 |doi=10.1348/978185408X369020 }}</ref> Phonological awareness and rapid naming predict reading comprehension in second grade but oral language skills account for an additional 13.8% of the variance.<ref>{{cite book|title=Handbook of Reading Research, Volume IV|page=[https://archive.org/details/handbookofreadin0003unse/page/142 142]|date=2011|publisher=Routledge|author1=Kamil, Michael L.|author2=Pearson, P. David|author3=Moje, Elizabeth Birr|author4=Afflerbach, Peter|isbn=978-0-8058-5342-1|url=https://archive.org/details/handbookofreadin0003unse}}</ref>

It has also been found that sustained content literacy intervention instruction that gradually builds thematic connections may help young children transfer their knowledge to related topics, leading to improved comprehension.<ref>{{cite journal | last1=Kim | first1=James S. | last2=Burkhauser | first2=Mary A. | last3=Relyea | first3=Jackie Eunjung | last4=Gilbert | first4=Joshua B. | last5=Scherer | first5=Ethan | last6=Fitzgerald | first6=Jill | last7=Mosher | first7=Douglas | last8=McIntyre | first8=Joseph | title=A longitudinal randomized trial of a sustained content literacy intervention from first to second grade: Transfer effects on students' reading comprehension | journal=Journal of Educational Psychology | publisher=American Psychological Association | date=2022-06-09 | volume=115 | pages=73–98 | issn=1939-2176 | doi=10.1037/edu0000751 | s2cid=249556974 }}</ref>

The American educator, [[E. D. Hirsch|Eric "E. D." Donald Hirsch Jr.]], suggests that students need to learn about something in order to read well.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/what-is-background-knowledge-and-how-does-it-fit-into-the-science-of-reading/2023/01|title=What Is Background Knowledge, and How Does It Fit Into the Science of Reading|author=Sarah Schwartz, Educationweek|website=[[Education Week]] |date=January 30, 2023}}</ref> However, some researchers say reading comprehension instruction has become "content agnostic", focused on skill practice (such as "finding the main idea"), to the detriment of learning about science, history, and other disciplines. Instead, they say teachers should find ways to integrate content knowledge with reading and writing instruction. One approach is to merge the two – to embed literacy instruction into social studies and science. Another approach is to build content knowledge into reading classes, often called "high-quality or "content-rich" curricula.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.sree.org/assets/conferences/2020s/abstract/paper/156_identified.pdf|title=Experimental effects of a model of reading engagement on first and second grade students|year=2000 |author=James Kim |author2=Jackie Relyea |author3=Mary Burkhauser |author4=Ethan Scherer}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|url=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/2372732219893385|title=How Reading Motivation and Engagement Enable Reading Achievement |author=Ana Taboada Barber |author2=Susan Lutz Klauda |journal=Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences |year=2020|volume=7 |issue=1 |pages=27–34 |doi=10.1177/2372732219893385 |s2cid=216348392 }}</ref> However, according to [[Natalie Wexler]], in her book ''The Knowledge Gap'', "making the shift to knowledge is as much about changing teachers' beliefs and daily practice as about changing the materials they're supposed to use".<ref>{{cite book|title=The knowledge gap|date=2020|isbn=978-0-7352-1356-2|page=244|author=Natalie Wexler|publisher=Penguin }}</ref>

[[Timothy Shanahan (educator)|Researcher and educator Timothy Shanahan]] believes the most effective way to improve reading comprehension skills is to teach students to summarize, develop an understanding of text structure, and paraphrase.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.shanahanonliteracy.com/blog/why-main-idea-is-not-the-main-idea-or-how-best-to-teach-reading-comprehension|title=Why Main Idea is Not the Main Idea – Or, How Best to Teach Reading Comprehension|date=December 2, 2023|author=Timothy Shanahan}}</ref>

===== Reading and spelling (writing) =====
Evidence supports the strong synergy between reading (decoding) and [[spelling]] (encoding), especially for children in kindergarten or grade one and elementary school students at risk for literacy difficulties. Students receiving encoding instruction and guided practice that included using (a) manipulatives such as letter tiles to learn phoneme-grapheme relationships and words and (b) writing phoneme-grapheme relationships and words made from these correspondences significantly outperformed contrast groups not receiving encoding instruction.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.nichd.nih.gov/sites/default/files/publications/pubs/nrp/Documents/report.pdf|title=National reading panel, section 2, p. 94|date=2000}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|title=Using Encoding Instruction to Improve the Reading and Spelling Performances of Elementary Students At Risk for Literacy Difficulties|journal=Review of Educational Research|volume=81|number=2|pages=170–200|date=2011|doi=10.3102/0034654310396719|last1=Weiser|first1=Beverly|last2=Mathes|first2=Patricia|s2cid=146167964}}</ref>

===== Using embedded pictures, and mnemonic alphabet cards when teaching phonics =====
Research supports the use of embedded, picture [[mnemonic]] (memory support) alphabet cards when teaching letters and sounds, but not words.<ref>{{cite journal|journal=Scientific Studies of Reading|title=Orthographic Mapping in the Acquisition of Sight Word Reading, Spelling Memory, and Vocabulary Learning|last=Ehri|first=L.C.|date=2014|volume=18|pages=5–21|doi=10.1080/10888438.2013.819356|s2cid=62200040}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|journal=Journal of Educational Psychology|last1=Ehri|first1=L. C.|last2=Deffner|first2=N. D.|last3=Wilce|first3=L. S.|date=1984|title=Pictorial mnemonics for phonics|volume=76|issue=5|pages=880–893|doi=10.1037/0022-0663.76.5.880}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|journal=Scientific Studies of Reading|last1=Shmidman|first1=A.|last2=Ehri|first2=L.|date=2010|title=Embedded picture mnemonics to learn letters|volume=14|issue=2|pages=159–182|doi=10.1080/10888430903117492|s2cid=62629566}}</ref>

=== Whole language ===
{{Main|Whole language}}
[[File:Bookandpencil.png|thumb|right|Although widely used, whole-word methods are not supported by science.<ref name="Stanislas Dehaene 222–228"/><ref name="Rayner, 2001"/>]]

[[Whole language]] has the reputation of being a meaning-based method of teaching reading that emphasizes literature and text comprehension. It discourages any significant use of phonics, if at all.<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://archive.org/stream/UnderstandingReading-FrankSmith/frank-smith-reading_djvu.txt|title=Understanding Reading|author= Smith, Frank|year=2004}}</ref> Instead, it trains students to focus on words, sentences and paragraphs as a whole rather than letters and sounds. Students are taught to use context and pictures to "guess" words they do not recognize, or even just skip them and read on. It aims to make reading fun, yet many students struggle to figure out the specific rules of the language on their own, which causes the student's decoding and spelling to suffer.

The following are some features of the whole language philosophy:
* Children are expected to learn to read and write as they learned to talk, that is gradually, without a great deal of direct instruction. (However, researchers and neuroscientists say that learning to read, unlike learning to talk, is not a natural process and many learners require explicit instruction. They point out that millions of adults can speak their language just fine, yet they cannot read their language.)<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.edweek.org/ew/issues/how-do-kids-learn-to-read.html|title=How Do Kids Learn to Read? What the Science Says|website=[[Education Week]]|date=2 October 2019|last1=Schwartz|first1=Sarah|last2=Sparks|first2=Sarah D.}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Gough|first1=Philip B.|last2= Hillinger|first2=Michael L.|title= Learning to Read: An Unnatural Act|journal=Bulletin of the Orton Society|year=1980|volume=30|pages=179–196|doi=10.1007/BF02653717|jstor=23769975|s2cid=143275563}}</ref><ref name="Rayner, 2001"/>
* Learning is emphasized more than teaching. It is assumed that the students will learn to read and write, and the teacher facilitates that growth.
* Students read and write every day in a variety of situations.
* Reading, writing, and spoken language are not considered separate components of the curriculum or merely ends in themselves; rather they permeate everything the students are doing.
* There is no division between first ''learning to read'' and later ''reading to learn''.<ref>{{cite book|title=Understanding Whole Language: From Principles to Practice|author=Weaver, Constance|date=1990|publisher=Heinemann Educational Books, Inc., Portsmouth, NH|isbn=0-435-08535-2|url=https://archive.org/details/understandingwho0000weav}}</ref><ref name="Stanovich">{{cite journal|last1=Stanovich|first1=Keith|date=1994|title=Romance and reality|journal=The Reading Teacher|volume=47|pages=280–291}}</ref>

As of 2020, whole language is widely used in the US and Canada (often as ''balanced literacy''); however, in some US States and many other [[Phonics#Practices by country or region|countries]], such as Australia and the United Kingdom, it has lost favor or been abandoned because it is not supported by evidence.<ref name="Seidenberg">{{cite journal |last1=Seidenberg |first1=Mark |title=The Science of Reading and Its Educational Implications |journal=Language Learning and Development |date=2013 |volume=9 |issue=4 |pages=331–360 |pmc=4020782 |pmid=24839408 |doi=10.1080/15475441.2013.812017 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://educhatter.wordpress.com/category/early-reading-instruction/|title=Early Reading Instruction|website=Educhatter}}</ref><ref name="auto5">{{Cite web|url=http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy/RF/introduction/|title=English Language Arts Standards » Reading: Foundational Skills » Introduction for K–5 &#124; Common Core State Standards Initiative|website=www.corestandards.org|access-date=2021-01-15|archive-date=2020-05-14|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200514204551/http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy/RF/introduction/}}</ref> Some notable researchers have clearly stated their disapproval of ''whole language'' and ''whole-word'' teaching. In his 2009 book, ''Reading in the brain'', cognitive neuroscientist, [[Stanislas Dehaene]], said "cognitive psychology directly refutes any notion of teaching via a 'global' or 'whole language' method". He goes on to talk about "the myth of whole-word reading", saying it has been refuted by recent experiments. "We do not recognize a printed word through a holistic grasping of its contours, because our brain breaks it down into letters and graphemes".<ref name="Stanislas Dehaene 222–228">{{cite book|author=Stanislas Dehaene|title=Reading in the brain|pages=[https://archive.org/details/readinginbrainne0000deha/page/222 222–228]|publisher=Penguin Books|year=2010|isbn=978-0-14-311805-3|url=https://archive.org/details/readinginbrainne0000deha}}</ref> In addition, cognitive neuroscientist [[Mark Seidenberg]], in his 2017 book ''Language at the speed of light'', refers to whole language as a "theoretical zombie" because it persists despite a lack of supporting evidence.<ref>{{cite book |title=Language at the speed of light|date=2017|page=271|author=Mark Seidenberg|publisher=Basic Books |isbn=978-0-465-08065-6|quote=The persistence of the [whole language] ideas despite the mass of evidence against them is most striking at this point. In normal science, a theory whose assumptions and predictions have been repeatedly contradicted by data will be discarded. That is what happened to the Smith and Goodman theories within reading science, but in education they are theoretical zombies that cannot be stopped by conventional weapons such as empirical disconfirmation, leaving them free to roam the educational landscape}}</ref><ref name="Seidenberg-2023">{{Cite web|url=https://seidenbergreading.net/|title=Reading Matters|website=Reading Matters}}</ref><ref name="Seidenberg"/>

=== Balanced literacy ===
{{Main|Balanced literacy}}

[[Balanced literacy]] is not well defined; however, it is intended as a method that combines elements of both phonics and whole language.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://hechingerreport.org/four-things-you-need-to-know-about-the-new-reading-wars/|title=Four things you need to know about the new reading wars, Jill Barshay, The Hechinger Report, #2|date=30 March 2020}}</ref> According to a survey in 2010, 68% of elementary school teachers in the United States profess to use balanced literacy.<ref name="Education Week-2010">{{cite news|url=https://www.edweek.org/media/ed%20week%20reading%20instruction%20survey%20report-final%201.24.20.pdf|title=Early reading instruction survey, EdWeek Research Center|website=[[Education Week]]|date=2010}}</ref> However, only 52% of teachers in the United States include ''phonics'' in their definition of ''balanced literacy''.

The National Reading Panel concluded that phonics must be integrated with instruction in phonemic awareness, vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension. And, some studies indicate that "the addition of language activities and tutoring to phonics produced larger effects than any of these components in isolation". They suggest that this may be a constructive way to view balanced reading instruction.<ref>{{cite book|title=Handbook of Reading Research, Volume IV|page=[https://archive.org/details/handbookofreadin0003unse/page/138 138]|date=2011|publisher=Routledge|author1=Kamil, Michael L.|author2=Pearson, P. David|author3=Moje, Elizabeth Birr|author4=Afflerbach, Peter|isbn=978-0-8058-5342-1|url=https://archive.org/details/handbookofreadin0003unse}}</ref>

However, balanced literacy has received criticism from researchers and others suggesting that, in many instances, it is merely ''whole language'' by another name.<ref>''Whole Language Lives On: The Illusion of "Balanced" Reading Instruction'', 2008, Forward, Louisa Cook Moats, {{ISBN|978-1-4379-0236-5}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.sciencenews.org/article/balanced-literacy-phonics-teaching-reading-evidence|title=It's time to stop debating how to teach kids to read and follow the evidence, Emily Sohn, Science news, 2020-04-26.|date=26 April 2020}}</ref><ref name="Shanahanon-2014">{{Cite web|url=https://www.shanahanonliteracy.com/blog/unbalanced-comments-on-balanced-literacy|title=Unbalanced Comments on Balanced &#124; Shanahan on Literacy|website=www.shanahanonliteracy.com}}</ref><ref>''The Death and Life of the Great American School System'', 2016, p. 39, Diane Ravitch, {{ISBN|978-0-465-09799-9}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.sciencenews.org/article/balanced-literacy-phonics-teaching-reading-evidence|title=It's time to stop debating how to teach kids to read and follow the evidence, ScienceNews|date=2020-04-26}}</ref>

According to phonics advocate and cognitive neuroscientist [[Mark Seidenberg]], balanced literacy allows educators to defuse the [[Phonics#The Reading Wars – phonics vs. whole language|reading wars]] while not making specific recommendations for change.<ref name="Seidenberg, Mark 2017"/> He goes on to say that, in his opinion, the high number of struggling readers in the United States is the result of how teachers are taught to teach reading.<ref>{{cite journal|author=Seidenberg, Mark S.|date=2013|title=The Science of Reading and Its Educational Implications|journal=Language Learning and Development|volume=9|issue=4|pages=331–360|doi=10.1080/15475441.2013.812017|pmid=24839408|pmc=4020782}}</ref><ref name="auto3"/><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/|title=NAEP Report Cards – Home|website=www.nationsreportcard.gov}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.oecd.org/pisa/PISA%202018%20Insights%20and%20Interpretations%20FINAL%20PDF.pdf|title=PISA 2018 Age 15 International scores in reading, math and science}}</ref> He also says that struggling readers should not be encouraged to skip a challenging word, nor rely on pictures or semantic and syntactic cues to "guess at" a challenging word. Instead, they should use [[Evidence-based education|evidence-based]] decoding methods such as [[Phonics#Systematic phonics|systematic phonics]].<ref name="Language at the speed of sight, pag"/><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.readingrockets.org/blogs/shanahan-literacy/it-good-idea-teach-three-cueing-systems-reading|title=Is it a Good Idea to Teach the Three Cueing Systems in Reading?, Timothy Shanahan, Reading Rockets, 2019-04-01|date=April 2019}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.nifdi.org/news-latest-2/blog-hempenstall/402-the-three-cueing-system-in-reading-will-it-ever-go-away|title=The three-cueing system in reading: Will it ever go away?|website=www.nifdi.org}}</ref>

=== Structured literacy ===

Structured literacy has many of the elements of [[#Teaching reading|systematic phonics]] and few of the elements of balanced literacy.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://iowareadingresearch.org/blog/structured-and-balanced-literacy|title=An Explanation of Structured Literacy, and a Comparison to Balanced Literacy, Iowa Reading Research Center|date=2019-04-09}}</ref> It is defined as explicit, systematic teaching that focuses on phonological awareness, word recognition, phonics and decoding, spelling, and syntax at the sentence and paragraph levels. It is considered to be beneficial for all early literacy learners, especially those with [[dyslexia]].<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED405673.pdf|title=The Use of a Structured Literacy Program to Facilitate the Inclusion of Martinal and Special Education Students into Regular Classes|publisher= School of Education Macquarie University|location= Sydney, NSW, Australia|author1=Center, Yola |author2=Freeman, Louela|date=1996}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|title=Structured Literacy and Typical Literacy Practices|author=Spear-Swerling, Louise|date=2019-01-23|doi=10.1177/0040059917750160|s2cid=149516059 |journal=TEACHING Exceptional Children}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|title=An Explanation of Structured Literacy, and a Comparison to Balanced Literacy |website=Iowa Reading Research Center|url=https://iowareadingresearch.org/blog/structured-and-balanced-literacy|access-date=2021-05-09 |language=en}}</ref>

According to the [[International Dyslexia Association]], structured literacy contains the elements of [[phonology]] and [[phonemic awareness]], sound-symbol association (the [[alphabetic principle]] and [[phonics]]), [[syllables]], [[Morphology (linguistics)|morphology]], [[syntax]], and [[semantics]]. The elements are taught using methods that are systematic, cumulative, explicit, [[Multisensory learning|multisensory]], and use diagnostic assessment.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://dyslexiaida.org/what-is-structured-literacy/|title=What Is Structured Literacy, International Dyslexia Association|date=2016}}</ref>

=== Three cueing system (Searchlights model) ===
The three-cueing system (the searchlights model in England) is a theory that has been circulating since the 1980s, yet it is not supported by research.<ref name="Timothy Shanahan, Reading Rockets">{{Cite web|url=https://www.readingrockets.org/blogs/shanahan-literacy/it-good-idea-teach-three-cueing-systems-reading|title=Is It a Good Idea to Teach the Three Cueing Systems in Reading|date=2019-04-01|author=Timothy Shanahan, Reading Rockets}}</ref> Its roots are in the theories proposed in the 1960s by [[Ken Goodman]] and [[Marie Clay]] that eventually became [[whole language]], [[reading recovery]] and guided reading (e.g., [[Fountas and Pinnell]] early reading programs).<ref>{{cite journal|url=https://www.apmreports.org/episode/2019/08/22/whats-wrong-how-schools-teach-reading|title=How a flawed idea is teaching millions of kids to be poor readers|author=Emily Hanford|journal=APM Reports|date=2019-08-22}}</ref> As of 2010, 75% of teachers in the United States teach the three-cueing system.<ref name="Education Week-2010"/> It proposes that children who are stuck on a word should use various "cues" to figure it out and determine (guess) its meaning. The "meaning cues" are semantic ("does it make sense in the context?"), syntactic (is it a noun, verb, etc.?) and graphophonic (what are the letter-sound relationships?). It is also known as MSV (''M''eaning, ''S''entence structure/syntax and ''V''isual information such as the letters in the words).

According to some, three-cueing is not the most effective way for beginning readers to learn how to decode printed text.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://fs24.formsite.com/edweek/images/1-31_Science_of_Reading_Spotlight_-_Sponsored.pdf|title=Is This the End of 'Three Cueing, Science of Reading, Education week spotlight|pages=9–12|date=2020-03-12}}</ref> While a cueing system does help students to "make better guesses", it does not help when the words become more sophisticated; and it reduces the amount of practice time available to learn essential decoding skills. They also say that students should first decode the word, "then they can use context to figure out the meaning of any word they don't understand".

Consequently, researchers such as cognitive neuroscientists [[Mark Seidenberg]] and [[Timothy Shanahan (educator)|Timothy Shanahan]] do not support the theory. They say the three-cueing system's value in reading instruction "is a magnificent work of the imagination", and it developed not because teachers lack integrity, commitment, motivation, sincerity, or intelligence, but because they "were poorly trained and advised" about the [[#Science of reading|science of reading]].<ref name="Mark Seidenberg 2017 300–304">{{cite book |title=Language at the speed of light|date=2017|pages=300–304|author=Mark Seidenberg|publisher=Basic Books |isbn=978-0-465-08065-6}}</ref><ref name="Dr Kerry Hempenstall, Senior Industry Fellow, School of Education, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia">{{Cite web|url=https://www.nifdi.org/resources/hempenstall-blog/402-the-three-cueing-system-in-reading-will-it-ever-go-away|title=The three-cueing system in reading: Will it ever go away|author=Kerry Hempenstall|date=2017-10-29}}</ref> In England, the [[simple view of reading]] and [[synthetic phonics]] are intended to replace "the searchlights multi-cueing model".<ref name="Edu England-2006">{{Cite web|url=http://www.educationengland.org.uk/documents/pdfs/2006-primary-national-strategy.pdf|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130228062004/http://www.educationengland.org.uk/documents/pdfs/2006-primary-national-strategy.pdf|archive-date=February 28, 2013|page=18|title=Primary Framework for literacy and mathematics, Department for education and skills, England|year=2006}}</ref><ref name="Rose-2006">{{Cite web|url=http://publications.teachernet.gov.uk/eOrderingDownload/0201-2006PDF-EN-01.pdf|archive-url=http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100512233640/http://publications.teachernet.gov.uk/eOrderingDownload/0201-2006PDF-EN-01.pdf|archive-date=2010-05-12|title=Independent review of the teaching of early reading, 2006|access-date=2020-05-22}}</ref> On the other hand, some researchers suggest that "context" can be useful, not to guess a word, but to confirm a word after it has been phonetically decoded.<ref name="International Literacy Association">{{Cite web|url=https://literacyworldwide.org/get-resources/making-sense-of-the-science-of-reading|title=Making Sense of the Science of Reading|website=literacyworldwide.org}}</ref>

=== Three Ps (3Ps) – Pause Prompt Praise ===
The three Ps approach is used by teachers, tutors, and parents to guide oral reading practice with a struggling reader.<ref>{{cite book|title=Addressing Difficulties in Literacy Development|publisher= Routledge|author1= Reid, Gavin |author2=Soler, Janet |author3=Wearmouth, Janice|editor1-first= Gavin|editor1-last= Reid|editor2-first= Janet|editor2-last= Soler|editor3-first= Janice|editor3-last= Wearmouth|date=2002|isbn=978-1-315-01571-2|doi=10.4324/9781315015712}}</ref> For some, it is merely a variation of the above-mentioned ''three-cueing system''.

However, for others it is very different.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.readingrockets.org/blogs/shanahan-literacy/3p-versus-3-cueing-why-recommend-one-and-shun-other|title=3P versus 3-cueing, Timothy Shanahan, Reading Rockets, 2021-01-11|date=11 January 2021}}</ref> For example: when a student encounters a word they do not know or get it wrong, the three steps are: 1) pause to see if they can fix it themselves, even letting them read on a little, 2) prompt them with strategies to find the correct pronunciation, and 3) praise them directly and genuinely. In the ''prompt'' step, the tutor does not suggest the student skip the word or guess the word based on the pictures or the first sound. Instead, they encourage students to use their decoding training to sound out the word and use the context (meaning) to confirm they have found the correct word.

=== Guided reading, reading workshop, shared reading, leveled reading, silent reading (and self-teaching) ===
'''[[Guided reading]]''' is small group reading instruction that is intended to allow for the differences in students' reading abilities.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://teacher.scholastic.com/products/guidedreading/pdfs/GR_Research_Paper_2010.pdf|title=guidedreading/pdResearch Paper 2010.pdf|author1=Pinnell, Gay Su |author-link1=Gay Su Pinnell|author2-link=Irene Fountas|author2=Fountas, Irene C.|publisher=scholastic.com|date=2010|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121021100818/http://teacher.scholastic.com/products/guidedreading/pdfs/GR_Research_Paper_2010.pdf|archive-date=2012-10-21}}</ref> While they are reading, students are encouraged to use strategies from the three-cueing system, the searchlights model, or MSV.

It is no longer supported by the [[Primary National Strategy]] in England as [[synthetic phonics]] is the officially recognized method for teaching reading.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/national-curriculum|title=National curriculum|website=GOV.UK|date=2 December 2014 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.educationengland.org.uk/documents/pdfs/2006-primary-national-strategy.pdf|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130228062004/http://www.educationengland.org.uk/documents/pdfs/2006-primary-national-strategy.pdf|archive-date=February 28, 2013|title=Primary national strategy, UK|date=2006}}</ref>

In the United States, guided reading is part of the Reading Workshop model of reading instruction.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://learn.cli.org/|title=Home &#124; Learn – Children's Literacy Initiative|website=learn.cli.org}}</ref>

The '''reading workshop model''' provides students with a collection of books, allows them the choice of what to read, limits students' reading to texts that can be easily read by them, provides teaching through mini-lessons, and monitors and supports reading comprehension development through one-on-one teacher-student conferences. Some reports state that it is 'unlikely to lead to literacy success' for all students, particularly those lacking foundational skills.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/reading-workshop-unlikely-to-lead-to-literacy-success-researchers-say/2020/01|title=Reading Workshop 'Unlikely to Lead to Literacy Success,' Researchers Say|website=[[Education Week]]|date=2020-01-16|last1=Schwartz|first1=Sarah}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.readingrockets.org/blogs/shanahan-literacy/what-do-you-think-reading-workshop-or-how-not-teach-reading-comprehension|title=What Do You Think of the Reading Workshop?, Timothy Shanahan, Reading Rockets|date=2019-09-23}}</ref>

'''Shared (oral) reading''' is an activity whereby the teacher and students read from a shared text that is determined to be at the students' reading level.

'''Leveled reading''' involves students reading from "leveled books" at an appropriate reading level. A student who struggles with a word is encouraged to use a cueing system (e.g. three-cueing, searchlights model or MSV) to guess its meaning. Many systems purport to gauge the students' reading levels using scales incorporating numbers, letters, colors, and lexile readability scores.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://school.nelson.com/content/levelling-chart.pdf|title=Levelling Systems Comparison Chart|publisher=Nelson education}}</ref>

'''Silent reading (and self-teaching)''' is a common practice in elementary schools. A 2007 study in the United States found that, on average only 37% of class time was spent on active reading instruction or practice, and the most frequent activity was students reading silently. Based on the limited available studies on [[silent reading]], the [[National Reading Panel|NRP]] concluded that independent silent reading did not prove an effective practice when used as the only type of reading instruction to develop fluency and other reading skills – particularly with students who have not yet developed critical alphabetic and word reading skills.<ref>{{cite book|title=Handbook of Reading Research, Volume IV|page=[https://archive.org/details/handbookofreadin0003unse/page/137 137]|date=2011|publisher=Routledge|author1=Kamil, Michael L.|author2=Pearson, P. David|author3=Moje, Elizabeth Birr|author4=Afflerbach, Peter|isbn=978-0-8058-5342-1|url=https://archive.org/details/handbookofreadin0003unse}}</ref>

Other studies indicate that, unlike silent reading, "oral reading increases phonological effects".

According to some, the classroom method called DEAR (Drop everything and read) is not the best use of classroom time for students who are not yet fluent.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.aft.org/periodical/american-educator/summer-2006/drop-everything-and-read-how|title=For Students Who Are Not Yet Fluent, Silent Reading Is Not the Best Use of Classroom Time – American Federation of Teachers|date=2006}}</ref> However, according to the ''self-teaching hypothesis'', when fluent readers practice decoding words while reading silently, they learn what whole words look like (spelling), leading to improved fluency and comprehension.<ref>{{cite book|title=The reading mind|pages=68–69|author=Willingham, Daniel T.|publisher=Jossey-Mind|date=2017|isbn=978-1-119-30137-0}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|title=The Role of Self-Teaching in Learning Orthographic and Semantic Aspects of New Words|journal= Scientific Studies of Reading|pages=47–70|doi=10.1080/10888438.2011.536129|date=2011-01-18|volume=15|s2cid=35782556|url=http://centaur.reading.ac.uk/27892/1/selfteaching.pdf|last1= Ricketts|first1= Jessie|last2= Bishop|first2= Dorothy V. M.|last3= Pimperton|first3= Hannah|last4= Nation|first4= Kate}}</ref>

The suggestion is: "if some students are fluent readers, they could read silently while the teacher works with the struggling readers".

===Reading wars: phonics vs. whole language===
{{See also|Reading#History of learning to read}}

For decades, the merits of phonics vs. [[whole language]] have been debated. It is sometimes referred to as the ''reading wars''.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.psychologicalscience.org/publications/ending-the-reading-wars-reading-acquisition-from-novice-to-expert.html|title=Ending the Reading Wars: Reading Acquisition From Novice to Expert|website=Association for Psychological Science – APS}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06-30/australian-phonics-war-on-how-to-teach-kids-to-read-rages-on/11258944|title=Reading wars rage again as Australian Government pushes to introduce phonics test, abc.net.au, 2019-06-29|newspaper=ABC News|date=29 June 2019}}</ref>

Phonics was a popular way to learn reading in the 19th century. [[William Holmes McGuffey]] (1800–1873), an American educator, author, and Presbyterian minister who had a lifelong interest in teaching children, compiled the first four of the [[McGuffey Readers]] in 1836.<ref name="William McGuffey">{{Cite book|title=McGuffey's Eclectic Primer|author=William McGuffey|publisher=John Wiley & Sons|year=1999|isbn=0-471-29428-4}}</ref>

[[File:McGuffey's Primer 1836.jpg|thumb|center|upright=1.5|McGuffey's Primer 1836]]

In 1841 [[Horace Mann]], the Secretary of the [[Massachusetts Board of Education]], advocated for a whole-word method of teaching reading to replace phonics. Others advocated for a return to phonics, such as [[Rudolf Flesch]] in his book ''[[Why Johnny Can't Read]]'' (1955).

The whole-word method received support from [[Ken Goodman|Kenneth J. Goodman]] who wrote an article in 1967 entitled ''Reading: A psycholinguistic guessing game''. In it, he says efficient reading is the result of the "skill in selecting the fewest, most productive cues necessary to produce guesses which are right the first time".<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Goodman|first1=Kenneth J.|title=Reading: A psycholinguistic guessing game|journal=Journal of the Reading Specialist|volume=6|issue=4|year=1967|pages=126–135|doi=10.1080/19388076709556976}}</ref> Although not supported by scientific studies, the theory became very influential as the [[whole language]] method.<ref>{{cite book|title=Reading at the Speed of Light: How we Read, why so many can't, and what can be done about it|pages=247–281|date=2017|author=Mark Seidenberg|publisher=Basic Books |isbn=978-1-5416-1715-5}}</ref><ref name="Seidenberg-2023"/> At the same time, [[Marie Clay]], the creator of  the often criticized [[Reading recovery]] program suggested that young readers use "multiple clues from the text" as well as content to read.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/to-move-past-the-reading-wars-we-must-understand-where-they-started/2023/08|title=To Move Past the Reading Wars, We Must Understand Where They Started|author=Sarah Schwartz|date=August 31, 2023}}</ref> <ref name="udel report">{{cite report|url=https://www.cresp.udel.edu/research-project/efficacy-follow-study-long-term-effects-reading-recovery-i3-scale/|title=An Efficacy Follow-Up Study of the Long-Term Effects of Reading Recovery Under the i3 Scale-Up|publisher=Center for Research in Education and Social Policy at the University of Delaware|date=23 April 2022}}</ref> <ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.npr.org/2022/05/05/1096672803/reading-recovery-research-schools|title=A popular program for teaching kids to read just took another hit to its credibility, APM reports|date=May 5, 2022|first1=Emily|last1=Hanford|first2=Christopher|last2=Peak}}</ref>
Since the 1970s some whole language supporters such as [[Frank Smith (psycholinguist)|Frank Smith]], are unyielding in arguing that phonics should be taught little, if at all.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://archive.org/details/UnderstandingReading-FrankSmith|title=Understanding Reading|author= Frank Smith|via=Internet Archive}}</ref>

Yet, other researchers say instruction in phonics and [[phonemic awareness]] are "critically important" and "essential" to developing early reading skills.<ref name="Language at the speed of sight, pag">{{cite book |author=Seidenberg, Mark |title=Language at the speed of sight|pages=267, 300–304|publisher=Basic Books|location=New York|year=2017|isbn=978-1-5416-1715-5}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://robertslavinsblog.wordpress.com/2020/03/26/science-of-reading-can-we-get-beyond-our-30-year-pillar-fight/|title=Science of Reading: Can We Get Beyond Our 30-Year Pillar Fight|page=2|author=Robert Slavin|date=2020-03-26}}</ref><ref name="Rayner, 2001"/> In 2000, the [[National Reading Panel]] (U.S.) identified five ingredients of effective reading instruction, of which phonics is one; the other four are phonemic awareness, fluency, vocabulary and comprehension.<ref name="National Reading Panel, 2000, Summary"/> Reports from other countries, such as the Australian report on ''Teaching reading'' (2005)<ref name="Teaching Reading"/> and the U.K. [[Independent review of the teaching of early reading (Rose Report 2006)]] have also supported the use of phonics.

Some notable researchers such as [[Stanislas Dehaene]] and [[Mark Seidenberg]] have clearly stated their disapproval of ''whole language''.<ref name=Dehaene>{{cite book|author=Stanislas Dehaene|title=Reading in the brain|publisher=Penguin Books|year=2010|page=[https://archive.org/details/readinginbrainne0000deha/page/225 225–227]|quote=Direct experimentation confirms that the whole-language system does not perform effectively ... Its efficiency has also been disproved in the classroom|isbn=978-0-14-311805-3|url=https://archive.org/details/readinginbrainne0000deha}}</ref><ref name="Seidenberg-2017a">{{cite book|title=Language at the speed of light|date=2017|author=Mark Seidenberg|pages=268–271|publisher=Basic Books |quote=Goodman's guessing game theory was grievously wrong. Smith and Goodman's assumptions and predictions are theoretical zombies that cannot be stopped by conventional weapons such as empirical disconfirmation.|isbn=978-0-465-08065-6}}</ref>

Furthermore, a 2017 study in the UK that compared teaching with phonics vs. teaching whole written words concluded that phonics is more effective, saying "our findings suggest that interventions aiming to improve the accuracy of reading aloud and/or comprehension in the early stages of learning should focus on the systematicity present in print-to-sound relationships, rather than attempting to teach direct access to the meanings of whole written words".<ref>{{cite journal|url=https://doi.apa.org/fulltext/2017-17326-001.pdf|title=Comparing and Validating Methods of Reading Instruction Using Behavioural and Neural Findings in an Artificial Orthography|date=2017|doi=10.1037/xge0000301|last1=Taylor|first1=J. S. H.|last2=Davis|first2=Matthew H.|last3=Rastle|first3=Kathleen|journal=Journal of Experimental Psychology: General|volume=146|issue=6|pages=826–858|pmid=28425742|pmc=5458780|s2cid=3463052}}</ref>

More recently, some educators have advocated for the theory of [[balanced literacy]] purported to combine phonics and whole language yet not necessarily consistently or systematically. It may include elements such as word study and phonics mini-lessons, differentiated learning, cueing, leveled reading, shared reading, guided reading, independent reading, and sight words.<ref name="Zammit-2019">{{Cite web|url=http://theconversation.com/reading-is-more-than-sounding-out-words-and-decoding-thats-why-we-use-the-whole-language-approach-to-teaching-it-126606|title=Reading is more than sounding out words and decoding. That's why we use the whole language approach to teaching it|first=Katina|last=Zammit|website=The Conversation|date=11 November 2019 }}</ref><ref name="districtadministration.com">{{Cite web|url=https://districtadministration.com/teaching-phonics-builds-balanced-literacy|title=Teaching phonics builds balanced literacy, District administration, FL|date=24 June 2019}}</ref><ref name="Gonser-2020">{{Cite web|url=https://www.edutopia.org/article/3-ways-make-better-use-reading-science|title=3 Ways to Make Better Use of Reading Science|website=Edutopia}}</ref><ref name="4 reasons to use balanced literacy">{{Cite web|url=https://medium.com/inspired-ideas-prek-12/4-reasons-to-use-the-balanced-literacy-approach-4e6556ccb19a|title=4 reasons to use balanced literacy|date=27 May 2021}}</ref> According to a survey in 2010, 68% of K–2 teachers in the United States practice balanced literacy; however, only 52% of teachers included ''phonics'' in their definition of ''balanced literacy''. In addition, 75% of teachers teach the [[#Three cueing system (Searchlights model)|three-cueing system]] (i.e., meaning/structure/visual or semantic/syntactic/graphophonic) that has its roots in whole language.<ref name="Education Week-2010"/><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.apmreports.org/episode/2019/08/22/whats-wrong-how-schools-teach-reading|title=At a Loss for Words, AMP Reports, USA|date=2019-08-22| author=Emily Hanford}}</ref>

In addition, some phonics supporters assert that ''balanced literacy'' is merely ''whole language'' by another name.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.margaretkay.com/PDF%20files/Dyslexia%202010/Whole%20Language%20High%20Jinks%20by%20Louisa%20Moats.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101229134022/http://margaretkay.com/PDF%20files/Dyslexia%202010/Whole%20Language%20High%20Jinks%20by%20Louisa%20Moats.pdf  |archive-date=2010-12-29 |title=Whole language high jinks: How to tell when scientifically based reading instruction isn't|work=Louisa Moats on margaretkay.com}}</ref> And critics of whole language and sceptics of balanced literacy, such as neuroscientist [[Mark Seidenberg]], state that struggling readers should ''not'' be encouraged to skip words they find puzzling or rely on semantic and syntactic cues to guess words.<ref name="Language at the speed of sight, pag"/><ref name="Shanahanon-2014"/><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.ldonline.org/ld-topics/teaching-instruction/whole-language-lives-illusion-balanced-reading-instruction|title=Whole Language Lives On: The Illusion of Balanced Reading Instruction &#124; LD OnLine|website=www.ldonline.org}}</ref>

Over time a growing number of countries and states have put greater emphasis on phonics and other [[evidence-based practice]]s (see [[Phonics#Practices by country or region|Phonics practices by country or region]]).

==Teaching reading for Logographic languages==

[[File:Abydos-Bold-hieroglyph-A22.png|thumb|right|Hieroglyph, one of the earliest forms of writing]]
Languages such as [[Chinese language|Chinese]] and Japanese are normally written (fully or partly) in [[logograms]] ([[hanzi]] and [[kanji]], respectively), which represent a whole word or [[morpheme]] with a single character. There are a large number of characters, and the sound that each makes must be learned directly or from other characters that contain "hints" in them. For example, in Japanese, the [[On reading#On'yomi (Chinese reading)|On-reading]] of the kanji 民 is ''min'' and the related kanji 眠 shares the same On-reading, ''min'': the right-hand part shows the character's pronunciation. However, this is not true for all characters. [[Kun reading]]s, on the other hand, have to be learned and memorized as there is no way to tell from each character.

[[Ruby character]]s are used in textbooks to help children learn the sounds that each logogram makes. These are written in a smaller size, using an alphabetic or [[Syllabary|syllabic]] script. For example, [[hiragana]] is typically used in Japanese, and the [[pinyin]] [[romanization]] into Latin alphabet characters is used in Chinese.
{|
|
{|
|-
| style="line-height:1em; font-size:2em" | {{lang|ja|漢}}
| style="line-height:1em; font-size:0.8em" | {{lang|ja|か<br />ん}}
|-
| style="line-height:1em; font-size:2em" | {{lang|ja|字}}
| style="line-height:1em; font-size:0.8em" | {{lang|ja|じ}}
|}
| style="padding:0 1.5em" | or ||
{|
| style="line-height:1em; font-size:0.8em; text-align:center" | {{lang|ja|かん}}
| style="line-height:1em; font-size:0.8em; text-align:center" | {{lang|ja|じ}}
|-
| style="line-height:1em; font-size:2em" | {{lang|ja|漢}}
| style="line-height:1em; font-size:2em" | {{lang|ja|字}}
|}
|}

The examples above each spell the word ''kanji'', which is made up of two kanji characters: 漢 (''kan'', written in hiragana as かん), and 字 (''ji'', written in hiragana as じ).

Textbooks are sometimes edited as a cohesive set across grades so that children will not encounter characters they are not yet expected to have learned.

==Requirements for proficient reading==
[[File:Boeken Kringloop Woerden 03.JPG|thumb|A person reading a book, in a second-hand store.]]

According to the report by the US [[National Reading Panel]] (NRP) in 2000,<ref name="National Reading Panel, 2000, Summary">{{Cite web|url=https://www.nichd.nih.gov/sites/default/files/publications/pubs/nrp/Documents/report.pdf|title=National Reading Panel (NRP) – Summary Report (2000)}}</ref><ref name="National Reading Panel, 2000, Subgroups">{{Cite web |url=http://www.nationalreadingpanel.org/publications/subgroups.htm |title=National Reading Panel (NRP) – Reports of the Subgroups |work=National Reading Panel, 2000 (NRP) – Publications and Materials  |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100611011153/http://www.nationalreadingpanel.org/publications/subgroups.htm |archive-date=2010-06-11 }}</ref> the elements required for proficient reading of [[alphabet]]ic languages are [[phonemic awareness]], [[phonics]], [[fluency]],<ref name="Rasinski, T">{{Cite web |url=http://www.prel.org/products/re_/assessing-fluency.htm |title=Assessing Reading Fluency |author=Rasinski, T. |publisher=Pacific Resources for Education and Learning |access-date=2007-10-21 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050123144839/http://www.prel.org/products/re_/assessing-fluency.htm |archive-date=2005-01-23  }}</ref> [[vocabulary]],<ref name="Justice 2002 87–106">{{cite journal|last1=Justice|first1=Laura M. |title=Word Exposure Conditions and Preschoolers' Novel Word Learning During Shared Storybook Reading|journal=Reading Psychology|volume=23|issue=2|year=2002|pages=87–106|issn=0270-2711|doi=10.1080/027027102760351016|s2cid=144874700 }}</ref> and [[reading comprehension|text comprehension]]. In non-Latin languages, proficient reading does not necessarily require [[phonemic awareness]], but rather an awareness of the individual parts of speech, which may also include the whole word (as in Chinese characters) or syllables (as in Japanese) as well as others depending on the writing system being employed.

The [[Independent review of the teaching of early reading (Rose Report 2006)|Rose Report]], from the [[Department for Education]] in England makes it clear that, in their view, [[phonics#Systematic phonics|systematic phonics]], specifically [[synthetic phonics]], is the best way to ensure that children learn to read; such that it is now the law.<ref name="Rose-2006a">{{Cite web|url=http://publications.teachernet.gov.uk/eOrderingDownload/0201-2006PDF-EN-01.pdf|archive-url=http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100512233640/http://publications.teachernet.gov.uk/eOrderingDownload/0201-2006PDF-EN-01.pdf|archive-date=2010-05-12|title=Independent review of the teaching of early reading, 2006|access-date=2021-01-15}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-curriculum-in-england-english-programmes-of-study/national-curriculum-in-england-english-programmes-of-study|title=National curriculum in England: English programmes of study|website=GOV.UK}}</ref><ref name="OFSTED-2014">{{Cite web|url=https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/379489/Getting_20them_20reading_20early.doc|title=Getting them Reading Early, OFSTED, 2014}}</ref><ref name="YouTube-2010">{{Cite web|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wGfNiweEkI| archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/varchive/youtube/20211030/5wGfNiweEkI| archive-date=2021-10-30|title=Synthetic Phonics, Mr. T's phonics, 2010| website=[[YouTube]]| date=19 September 2010}}{{cbignore}}</ref> In 2005 the government of [[Australia]] published a report stating "The evidence is clear&nbsp;... that direct systematic instruction in phonics during the early years of schooling is an essential foundation for teaching children to read".<ref name="Australia-2011">{{Cite web |url=http://www.dest.gov.au/nitl/documents/executive_summary.pdf |title=Executive Summary |work=Australian Government Department of Education, Science and Training  |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110422080804/http://www.dest.gov.au/nitl/documents/executive_summary.pdf |archive-date=2011-04-22 }}</ref> Phonics has been gaining acceptance in many other countries as can be seen from this page [[Phonics#Practices by country or region|Practices by country or region]].

Other important elements are: [[rapid automatized naming]] (RAN),<ref name="Lervåg">{{cite journal |vauthors=Lervåg A, Hulme C | year = 2009 | title = Rapid automatized naming (RAN) taps a mechanism that places constraints on the development of early reading fluency | journal =  Psychological Science| volume = 20 | issue = 8| pages = 1040–1048 | doi = 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02405.x | pmid = 19619178 | s2cid = 44971393 }}</ref><ref name="Denckla MB 1974">{{cite journal | pmid = 4844470 | volume=10 | issue=2 | title=Rapid "automatized" naming of pictured objects, colors, letters and numbers by normal children |date=June 1974 | journal=Cortex | pages=186–202 |vauthors=Denckla MB, Rudel R | doi=10.1016/s0010-9452(74)80009-2| doi-access=free }}</ref> a general understanding of the [[orthography]] of the language, and practice.
* [[Rapid automatized naming]], the ability to say quickly the names of letters, objects and colors, predicts an individual's ability to read. This might be linked to the importance of quick retrieval of [[phonological]] representations from [[long-term memory]] in reading and the importance of object-naming circuits in the left [[cerebral hemisphere]] that are recruited to underpin a learner's word-recognition abilities.<ref name="Lervåg"/><ref name="Denckla MB 1974"/>
* [[Orthography]] describes or defines the set of symbols used in a language, and the rules about how to write these symbols (i.e., the conventional spelling system of a language). Orthographic Development proceeds in increasing complexity as a person learns to read. Some of the first things to be learnt are the orthographic conventions such as the direction of reading and that there are differing typefaces and capitalization for each symbol. In general, this means that to read proficiently, the reader has to understand the elements of a written language. In the United States, a limited amount of spelling is taught up to grade four, and beyond that "we gain orthographic expertise by reading"; so the amount and variety of texts that children read is important.<ref>{{cite book|title=Language at the speed of light|year=2017|page=92|author=Mark Seidenberg}}</ref>
* Practice: Repeated exposure to print improves many aspects of learning to read and most importantly the knowledge of individual words. It increases the speed at which high-frequency words are recognized which allows for increased [[fluency]] in reading. It also supports orthographic development, [[reading comprehension]] and [[vocabulary development]]. Research suggests there is value in reading words both in isolation and in context. Reading words in isolation promotes faster reading times and better memory for spellings; whereas, reading words in context improves semantic knowledge and comprehension.<ref>{{cite journal |title=The Science of Learning to Read Words: A Case for Systematic Phonics Instruction |journal = Reading Research Quarterly |author=Linnea C. Ehri |date=2020-08-30 |volume = 55 |doi=10.1002/rrq.334|s2cid = 225251838 }}</ref>

==Reading difficulties==
Difficulties in reading typically involve difficulty with one or more of the following: decoding, reading rate, reading fluency, or reading comprehension.

===Decoding===
{{Main|Dyslexia}}
Brain activity in young and older children can be used to predict future reading skills. Cross-model mapping between the orthographic and phonologic areas in the brain is critical in reading. Thus, the amount of activation in the left dorsal inferior frontal gyrus while performing reading tasks can be used to predict later reading ability and advancement. Young children with higher phonological word characteristic processing have significantly better reading skills later on than older children who focus on whole-word orthographic representation.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=McNorgan C, Alvarez A, Bhullar A, Gayda J, Booth JR |title=Prediction of reading skill several years later depends on age and brain region: implications for developmental models of reading |journal=[[The Journal of Neuroscience]] |volume=31 |issue=26 |pages=9641–9648 |date=June 2011 |pmid=21715629 |pmc=3147303 |doi=10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0334-11.2011}}</ref>

Difficulty with decoding is marked by having not acquired the [[phoneme]]-[[grapheme]] mapping concept. One specific disability characterized by poor decoding is [[dyslexia]], a brain-based learning disability that specifically impairs a person's ability to read.<ref name="nih">{{Cite web|title=NINDS Dyslexia Information Page|url=http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/dyslexia/dyslexia.htm|publisher=[[National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke]]|access-date=November 12, 2011|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160727234247/http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/dyslexia/dyslexia.htm|archive-date=July 27, 2016}}</ref> These individuals typically read at levels significantly lower than expected despite having normal intelligence. It can also be inherited in some families, and recent studies have identified a number of genes that may predispose an individual to developing dyslexia. Although the symptoms vary from person to person, common characteristics among people with dyslexia are difficulty with spelling, phonological processing (the manipulation of sounds), and/or rapid visual-verbal responding.<ref name="nih"/> Adults can have either developmental dyslexia<ref name='Heim'>{{Cite journal |vauthors=Heim S, Tschierse J, Amunts K |title=Cognitive subtypes of dyslexia |journal=Acta Neurobiologiae Experimentalis |volume=68 |issue=1 |pages=73–82 |year=2008 |doi=10.55782/ane-2008-1674 |pmid=18389017 |s2cid=21021554 |url=http://www.ane.pl/linkout.php?pii=6809 |issn=0065-1400 |access-date=2012-06-28 |archive-date=2018-11-04 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181104050133/https://www.ane.pl/linkout.php?pii=6809  |doi-access=free }}</ref><ref name="Facoetti A 185–91">{{Cite journal |author=Facoetti A |title=Auditory and visual automatic attention deficits in developmental dyslexia |journal= Cognitive Brain Research|volume=16 |issue=2 |pages=185–191 |date=April 2003 |pmid=12668226 |doi=10.1016/S0926-6410(02)00270-7 |author2=Lorusso ML |author3=Paganoni P |last4=Cattaneo |first4=Carmen |last5=Galli |first5=Raffaella |last6=Umiltà |first6=Carlo |last7=Mascetti |first7=Gian Gastone}}</ref><ref name=anchoring>{{Cite journal |author=Ahissar M |title=Dyslexia and the anchoring-deficit hypothesis |journal= Trends in Cognitive Sciences|volume=11 |issue=11 |pages=458–465 |date=November 2007 |pmid= 17983834 |doi=10.1016/j.tics.2007.08.015 |s2cid=11682478 }}</ref><ref name="Chung KK">{{Cite journal |vauthors=Chung KK, Ho CS, Chan DW, Tsang SM, Lee SH |title=Cognitive profiles of Chinese adolescents with dyslexia |journal=Dyslexia |volume=16 |issue=1 |pages=2–23 |date=February 2010 |pmid=19544588 |doi=10.1002/dys.392 |url=http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/122462213/abstract|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100305112702/http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/122462213/abstract|archive-date=2010-03-05|url-access=subscription }}</ref> or [[Alexia (condition)|acquired dyslexia]] which occurs after a [[brain injury]], [[stroke]]<ref name="Cherney LR 2004 22–36">{{cite journal |author=Cherney LR |title=Aphasia, alexia, and oral reading |journal= Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation|volume=11 |issue=1 |pages=22–36 |year=2004 |pmid=14872397 |doi= 10.1310/VUPX-WDX7-J1EU-00TB|s2cid=218644618 }} *{{cite journal |author=Temple CM |title=Developmental and acquired dyslexias |url=https://archive.org/details/sim_cortex_2006-08_42_6/page/898 |journal=Cortex |volume=42 |issue=6 |pages=898–910 |date=August 2006 |pmid=17131596 |doi=10.1016/S0010-9452(08)70434-9 |s2cid=4490916 }}</ref><ref name="post-stroke language disorders">{{cite journal |vauthors=Sinanović O, Mrkonjić Z, Zukić S, Vidović M, Imamović K |title=Post-stroke language disorders |journal= Acta Clinica Croatica|volume=50 |issue=1 |pages=79–94 |date=March 2011 |pmid=22034787 }}</ref> or [[dementia]].<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Snowden JS, Kindell J, Thompson JC, Richardson AM, Neary D |title=Progressive aphasia presenting with deep dyslexia and dysgraphia |journal=Cortex |volume= 48|issue= 9|pages= 1234–1249|date=March 2012 |pmid=22465163 |doi=10.1016/j.cortex.2012.02.010 |s2cid=8401240 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Hurley RS, Paller KA, Rogalski EJ, Mesulam MM |title=Neural mechanisms of object naming and word comprehension in primary progressive aphasia |journal= Journal of Neuroscience|volume=32 |issue=14 |pages=4848–55 |date=April 2012 |pmid=22492040 |doi=10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5984-11.2012 |pmc=3335203}}</ref><ref name="Facoetti A 185–91"/><ref name="anchoring"/><ref name="Cherney LR 2004 22–36"/><ref name="post-stroke language disorders"/>

===Reading rate===
[[File:Reading speed by age.jpg|thumb|right|Average reading rate in ''words per minute'' (wpm) depending on age and measured with different tests in English, French and German]]
Individuals with reading rate difficulties tend to have accurate word recognition and normal comprehension abilities, but their reading speed is below grade level.<ref>{{cite book |author1=Catts, Hugh William |author2=Kamhi, Alan G. |title=The connections between language and reading disabilities |publisher=L. Erlbaum Associates |location=Hillsdale, NJ |year=2005 |isbn=978-0-8058-5001-7 |oclc=470295626 }}</ref> Strategies such as [[guided reading]] (guided, repeated oral-reading instruction), may help improve a reader's reading rate.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.nichd.nih.gov/sites/default/files/publications/pubs/nrp/Documents/report.pdf|title=National reading panel, p. 3-3, nichd.nih.gov (US)}}</ref>

Many studies show that increasing reading speed improves comprehension.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED523331.pdf|title=Reading Rate and Comprehension|last=Jodai|first=Hojat|date=August 2011|website=ERIC:ED523331}}</ref> Reading speed requires a long time to reach adult levels. According to Carver (1990), children's reading speed increases throughout the school years. On average, from grade 2 to college, the reading rate increases 14 standard-length words per minute each year (where one standard-length word is defined as six characters in text, including punctuation and spaces).<ref>{{Cite book|author=Carver, Ronald P. |title=Reading rate: a review of research and theory |publisher=Academic Press |location=Boston |year=1990 |isbn=978-0-12-162420-0}}</ref>

Scientific studies have demonstrated that [[speed reading]] – defined here as capturing and decoding words faster than 900 wpm – is not feasible given the limits set by the anatomy of the eye.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Bremer|first1=Rod|title=The Manual: A Guide to the Ultimate Study Method|publisher=Fons Sapientiae Publishing|isbn=978-0-9934964-0-0|edition=2|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=cEFKjwEACAAJ&q=ultimate+study+method|year=2016}}</ref>

===Reading fluency===
Individuals with reading fluency difficulties fail to maintain a fluid, smooth pace when reading. Strategies used for overcoming reading rate difficulties are also useful in addressing reading fluency issues.<ref name="National Reading Panel, 2000, Subgroups"/>

===Reading comprehension===
{{Main|Reading comprehension}}
Individuals with [[reading comprehension]] difficulties are commonly described as poor comprehenders.<ref>{{cite journal|doi=10.4074/S0003503314004072|pmid=25937640|title=Issues in identifying poor comprehenders|year=2014|last1=Keenan|first1=Janice M.|last2=Hua|first2=Anh N.|last3=Meenan|first3=Chelsea E.|last4=Pennington|first4=Bruce F.|last5=Willcutt|first5=Erik|last6=Olson|first6=Richard K.|journal=L'Année Psychologique|volume=114|issue=4|pages=753–777|pmc=4414263}}</ref> They have normal decoding skills as well as a fluid rate of reading, but have difficulty comprehending text when reading. The [[simple view of reading]] holds that reading comprehension requires both ''decoding skills'' and ''oral language comprehension'' ability.<ref name="readingrockets.org">{{Cite web|url=https://www.readingrockets.org/article/simple-view-reading|title=Simple view of reading, Reading rockets|date=6 June 2019}}</ref>

Increasing vocabulary knowledge, listening skills, and teaching basic comprehension techniques may help facilitate better reading comprehension. It is suggested that students receive brief, explicit instruction in reading comprehension strategies in the areas of vocabulary, noticing understanding, and connecting ideas.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.danielwillingham.com/uploads/5/0/0/7/5007325/willingham&lovette_2014_can_reading_comprehension_be_taught_.pdf|title=Can Reading Comprehension Be Taught – Teachers College Record|date=2014-09-26|last1=Willingham|first1=Daniel T.|last2=Lovette|first2=Gail}}</ref>

[[#Scarborough's reading rope|Scarborough's Reading Rope]] and [[#The active view of reading model|The active view of reading model]] also outline some of the essential ingredients of reading comprehension.

===Radio reading service===
In some countries, a [[radio reading service]] provides a service for [[Visual impairment|blind]] people and others who choose to hear [[newspaper]]s, books, and other printed material read aloud, typically by volunteers. An example is [[Australia]]'s [[Radio Print Handicapped Network]] with stations in capital cities and some other areas.

==Reading achievement: national and international reports==
The following organizations measure and report on reading achievement in the United States and internationally:

===NAEP===
{{Main|NAEP}}

In the United States, the National Assessment of Educational Progress or [[NAEP]] ("The Nation's Report Card") is the national assessment of what students know and can do in various subjects. Four of these subjects – reading, writing, mathematics, and science – are assessed most frequently and reported at the state and district level, usually for grades 4 and 8.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/|title=The Nation's Report Card|website=www.nationsreportcard.gov}}</ref>

In 2024, concerning the reading skills of the nation's grade-four public school students, 31% performed at or above the NAEP ''Proficient level'' (solid academic performance), and 60% performed at or above the NAEP ''Basic level'' (partial mastery of the proficient level skills). In both instances, this represents a 2% decrease from 2022.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/reports/reading/2024/g4_8/|title=Nations report card, reading|year=2024}}</ref>

In 2013, 32% of grade-four students were reading below the basic level, whereas by 2024 this had increased to 40%. It is believed that students who read below the basic level do not have sufficient support to complete their schoolwork.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.edweek.org/leadership/reading-scores-fall-to-new-low-on-naep-fueled-by-declines-for-struggling-students/2025/01|title=Reading Scores Fall to New Low on NAEP, Fueled by Declines for Struggling Students, edweek.org|author=Sarah Schwartz|date=January 29, 2025}}</ref>

The only state that made statistically significant progress in grade-four reading since 2019 was Louisiana. This was attributed to the State having curriculum reviews since 2015, providing incentives for districts to use material that is [[Evidence-based education|evidence-based]], together with professional training for teachers.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.edweek.org/leadership/reading-scores-fall-to-new-low-on-naep-fueled-by-declines-for-struggling-students/2025/01|title=Why Are Reading Scores Still Falling on the Nation’s Report Card, edweek.org|author=Sarah Schwartz|date=January 29, 2025}}</ref>

Reading scores for the individual States and Districts are available on the NAEP site. Between 2017 and 2019, [[Mississippi]] was the only State that had a grade-four reading score increase, and 17 States had a score decrease.<ref name="Hanford-2019">{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/05/opinion/mississippi-schools-naep.html|title=Opinion, Mississippi schools|website=[[The New York Times]]|date=5 December 2019|last1=Hanford|first1=Emily}}</ref>

The [[Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on education|COVID-19 pandemic]] had a significant impact on reading results in the United States. In 2022 the average basic-level reading score among elementary school children was 3 points lower compared to 2019 (the previous assessment year) and roughly equivalent to the first reading assessment in 1992. Students of all ethnic groups other than Asians saw their scores decline. However, "black, Hispanic, and American Indian/Alaska Native (AIAN) students and students in high-poverty schools were disproportionately impacted". (Other sources substantiated this).<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.nwea.org/uploads/2022/10/COVID-19-in-the-early-elementary-years.pdf|title=covid-19 in the early elementary years, nwea research|year=2022}}</ref> In 2022, no states had a reading score increase, and 30 states had a score decrease.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/reading/states/scores/?grade=4|title=Nation's Report Card, grade 4 reading scores by state|year=2022}}</ref> The results by race or ethnicity were as follows:<ref name="auto7"/>

{| class="wikitable sortable"
! class="unsortable" |Race / Ethnicity
! class="unsortable" |2019 – Proficient level
! class="unsortable" |2022 – Proficient level
! class="unsortable" |2019 – Basic level
! class="unsortable" |2022 – Basic level
|-
|Asian
|57%
|58%
|82%
|83%
|-
|Asian/Pacific Islander
|55%
|56%
|81%
|81%
|-
|White
|45%
|42%
|77%
|73%
|-
|Two or more races
|40%
|38%
|72%
|68%
|-
|'''National Average'''
|'''35%'''
|'''33%'''
|'''65%'''
|'''63%'''
|-
|Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander
|25%
|23%
|58%
|50%
|-
|Hispanic
|23%
|21%
|55%
|50%
|-
|American Indian/Alaska Native
|19%
|18%
|50%
|43%
|-
|Black
|18%
|17%
|48%
|44%
|-
|}

NAEP reading assessment results are reported as average scores on a 0–500 scale.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/guides/scores_achv.aspx|title=Scale Scores and Achievement Levels – Understanding Results &#124; NAEP|website=nces.ed.gov}}</ref> The Basic Level is 208 and the Proficient Level is 238.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/reading/achieve.aspx|title=NAEP Nation's Report Card – The NAEP Reading Achievement Levels by Grade|website=nces.ed.gov}}</ref> The average reading score for grade-four public school students was 219.<ref name="NCES-2022">{{Cite web|url=https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=147|title=The NCES Fast Facts Tool provides quick answers to many education questions (National Center for Education Statistics)|website=nces.ed.gov}}</ref> Female students had an average score that was 7 points higher than male students. Students who were eligible for the [[National School Lunch Act|National School Lunch Program (NSLP)]] had an average score that was 28 points lower than that for students who were not eligible.

===PIAAC===
{{Main|PIAAC}}

The Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies ([[PIAAC]]) is an international study by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development ([[OECD]]) of cognitive and workplace skills in 39 countries between 2011 and 2023.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.oecd.org/en/about/programmes/piaac.html|title=OECD-PIAAC|date=December 10, 2024}}</ref> The Survey measures adults' proficiency in key information-processing skills – literacy, numeracy, and problem-solving. The focus is on the working-age population between the ages of 16 and 65. For example, the study shows the ranking of 38 countries as to the ''literacy proficiency among adults''. According to the 2019 OECD report, the five countries with the highest ranking are Japan, Finland, the Netherlands, Sweden, and Australia; whereas Canada is 12th, England (UK) is 16th, and the United States is 19th.<ref name="OECD-2019"/> It is also worth noting that the PIAAC table A2.1 (2013) shows the percentage of adults reading ''at-or-below level one'' (out of five levels). Some examples are Japan 4.9%, Finland 10.6%, Netherlands 11.7%, Australia 12.6%, Sweden 13.3%, Canada 16.4%, England 16.4%, and the United States 16.9%.<ref name="OECD-2013"/>

===PIRLS===
{{Main|PIRLS}}

The Progress in International Reading Literacy Study ([[PIRLS]]) is an international study of reading (comprehension) achievement in fourth graders.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://pirls2021.org/results|title=PIRLS 2021 International Results in Reading|year=2021}}</ref> It is designed to measure children's reading literacy achievement, to provide a baseline for future studies of trends in achievement, and to gather information about children's home and school experiences in learning to read. The 2021 PIRLS report shows the 4th-grade reading achievement by country in two categories (literary and informational). The ten countries with the highest overall reading average (with scores) are Singapore (587), Ireland (577), Hong Kong SAR (573), Russian Federation (567), Northern Ireland (566), England (UK) (558), Croatia (557), Lithuania (552), Finland (549), and Poland (549). Some others are the United States (548) 11th and Australia (548) 13th. Among the benchmarking participants are the four Canadian provinces of Alberta (539), British Columbia (535), Newfoundland and Labrador (523), and Quebec (551).<ref>{{cite web|url=https://pirls2021.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/files/1-3_achievement-results-2.pdf|title=Exhibit 1.3: Average Reading Achievement and Scale Score Distributions, 4th grade PIRLS|year=2021}}</ref>

===PISA===
{{Main|PISA}}

The Programme for International Student Assessment ([[PISA]]) measures 15-year-old school pupils scholastic performance on mathematics, science, and reading.<ref name="About PISA"/> In 2018, of the 79 participating countries/economies, on average, students in Beijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu and Zhejiang (China), and Singapore outperformed students from all other countries in reading, mathematics, and science. 21 countries have reading scores above the OECD average scores and many of the scores are not statistically different.<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/pisa-2018-results-volume-i_5f07c754-en;jsessionid=pH-QRMWE0_DyThymmY_iiUcT5nVSmfdz21rlDARz.ip-10-240-5-158|title=PISA 2018 Results (Volume I): What Students Know and Can Do |year=2019 |publisher=Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development }}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|url=https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/5f07c754-en.pdf?expires=1604228204&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=136D4B897D4705F5991F0CB667578185|title=PISA 2018 results |year=2019 |format=PDF |pages=56–58|publisher=Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development }}</ref>
[[File:PISA Reading Scores (2018).png|center]]

Critics, however, say PISA is fundamentally flawed in its underlying view of education, its implementation, and its interpretation and impact on education globally.<ref name="Zhao, Y. 245–266"/> In 2014, more than 100 academics from around the world called for a moratorium on PISA.<ref name="washingtonpost.com"/><ref name="theguardian.com"/> According to a 2023 book, PISA is failing in its mission. It suggests that flatlined student outcomes and policy shortcomings have much to do with PISA's implicit ideological biases, structural impediments such as union advocacy, and conflicts of interest.<ref>{{cite book|title=Dire Straits: Education Reforms, Ideology, Vested Interests and Evidence|author1=Montserrat Gomendio |author2=José Ignacio Wert |doi=10.11647/OBP.0332|year=2023|isbn=978-1-80064-930-9 |s2cid=256890161 |doi-access=free }}</ref>

===EQAO===

The Education Quality and Accountability Office, [[EQAO]], is an agency of the government of Ontario, Canada that reports on the publicly funded school system.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.eqao.com/|title=EQAO Home Page|website=EQAO}}</ref> In 2022, it reported that 77% of grade three students in Ontario's English language schools met the provincial standard in reading in 2018–2019. This decreased to 73% in 2021–2022 and 2022–2023, and 71% in 2023-2024.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.eqao.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/infographic-provincial-results-2023-g3.pdf|title=EQAO's 2022–2023 assessment of reading, writing and mathematics, grade 3|year=2023}}</ref>
<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.eqao.com/results/|title=Grade three, Assessment of Reading, Writing and Mathematics, achievement results|year=2024}}</ref>
53% of grade three students with special needs met the standard in 2018–2019, and this reduced to 48% in 2021–2022, and 45% in 2023-2024.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.eqao.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/highlights-provincial-results-2024-g3.pdf|title=Highlights of provincial results|year=2024}}</ref>

==History==
[[File:Austria - Heiligenkreuz Abbey - 1726.jpg|thumb|upright=1.25|A [[Catholic monk]] reading in a monastery library]]
The history of reading dates back to the [[invention of writing]] during the 4th millennium BC. Although reading [[printing|print]] text is now an important way for the general population to access information, this has not always been the case. With [[Literacy#Classical and post-classical literacy|some exceptions]], only a small percentage of the population in many countries was considered [[literate]] before the [[Industrial Revolution]]. Some of the pre-modern societies with generally high literacy rates included [[classical Athens]] and the Islamic [[caliphate]].<ref>{{Cite book |last=Andrew J. Coulson |url=http://media.hoover.org/documents/0817928928_105.pdf |title=Education in the Twenty-first Century |publisher=[[Hoover Institution]] |editor-last=Lazear |editor-first=Edward P. |page=117 |chapter=Delivering Education |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110817054244/http://media.hoover.org/sites/default/files/documents/0817928928_105.pdf |archive-date=17 August 2011}}</ref>

Scholars assume that reading aloud (Latin {{lang|la|clare legere}}) was the more common practice in antiquity, and that reading silently ({{lang|la|legere tacite}} or {{lang|la|legere sibi}}) was unusual.<ref name="Carruthers">Carruthers, Mary. 2008. ''The Book of Memory: A Study of Memory in Medieval Culture''. 2nd. ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 212 ff.</ref> In his [[Confessions (St. Augustine)|''Confessions'']] ({{circa|400}}), [[Augustine of Hippo|Saint Augustine]] remarks on [[Ambrose|Saint Ambrose]]'s unusual habit of reading in silence.<ref name="Carruthers" /><ref>Jajdelska, Elspeth. 2007. ''Silent Reading and the Birth of the Narrator''. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, p. 5.</ref>

[[Michel de Certeau]] argued that while the [[Age of Enlightenment]] initially promoted the virtue of reading, writing was still considered a superior activity, due to a belief among social elites that writing was constructive and a sign of social initiative, while reading was straightforward consumption of what had already made; as such, readers were [[passive citizens]].<ref name="Certeau, Michel 1984">{{Cite book |last1=de Certeau |first1=Michel |title=The practice of everyday life |last2=Certeau |first2=Michel de |last3=Certeau |first3=Michel de |publisher=University of California Press |year=2000 |isbn=978-0-520-04750-1 |location=Berkeley |pages=165–176 |orig-date=1984 |chapter=Reading as Poaching}}</ref>

Before the mid-18th century, children's books in England usually focused on instruction or religious themes. Over time, a greater number of books were written with the intent of delighting children; for example, children's novels became increasingly popular over the 18th century. By 1800, the area of children's literature was flourishing, with perhaps as many as 50 books being printed every year in major cities.<ref>{{Cite web |title=British Library |url=https://www.bl.uk/romantics-and-victorians/articles/the-origins-of-childrens-literature |access-date=2022-04-22 |website=www.bl.uk |archive-date=2020-03-01 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200301053319/https://www.bl.uk/romantics-and-victorians/articles/the-origins-of-childrens-literature }}</ref>
[[File:Nicoline Tuxen - Portrait of a woman reading in bed.jpg|thumb|Nicoline Tuxen - Portrait of a woman reading in bed]]
In 18th-century Europe, some considered the then-new practice of reading alone in bed to be dangerous and immoral, for a time. As reading became a less communal, largely silent activity, some raised concerns that reading in bed presented various dangers, such as fires caused by bedside candles of people reading before sleep. Some modern critics speculate that these concerns were rooted partially in fear that readers – especially women readers – would shirk their obligations to their family and community, and even transgress moral boundaries via the private fantasy afforded by books.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Mavrody |first1=Nika |date=19 May 2017 |title=The Dangers of Reading in Bed |work=[[The Atlantic]] |url=https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2017/05/reading-in-bed/527388/ |access-date=23 May 2017}}</ref> Also during the 18th century in England, reading novels was often criticized as a time-wasting pastime, when contrasted with the cultural seriousness carried by reading history, classical literature or poetry.<ref name="British Library">{{Cite web |title=British Library |url=https://www.bl.uk/romantics-and-victorians/articles/victorian-readers |access-date=2022-04-22 |website=www.bl.uk |archive-date=2022-02-19 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220219045156/https://www.bl.uk/romantics-and-victorians/articles/victorian-readers }}</ref>

[[Chapbook]]s were small, cheap forms of literature for children and adults that were sold on the streets, and covered a range of subjects such as ghost stories, crime, fantasy, politics, and disaster updates. They provided simple reading matter and were commonplace across England from the 17th to the 19th century. They are known to have been passed down through the generations. Their readership would have been largely among the poor, and among children of the middle class.<ref>{{Cite web |title=British Library |url=https://www.bl.uk/romantics-and-victorians/articles/chapbooks |access-date=2022-04-22 |website=www.bl.uk |archive-date=2022-04-22 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220422024529/https://www.bl.uk/romantics-and-victorians/articles/chapbooks }}</ref>

Reading became even more pronounced in the 19th century with public notes, broadsides, catchpennies, and printed songs becoming common street literature, it informed and entertained the public before newspapers became readily available. Advertisements and local news, such as offers of rewards for catching criminals or for the return of stolen goods, appeared on public notices and handbills, while cheaply printed sheets – broadsheets and ballads – covered political or criminal news such as murders, trials, executions, disasters, and rescues.<ref>{{Cite web |title=British Library |url=https://www.bl.uk/romantics-and-victorians/articles/street-literature |access-date=2022-04-22 |website=www.bl.uk |archive-date=2022-04-22 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220422020111/https://www.bl.uk/romantics-and-victorians/articles/street-literature }}</ref>

Technological improvements during the Industrial Revolution in printing and paper production; and new distribution networks enabled by improved roads and rail helped push an increased demand for printed (reading) matter. Besides this, social and educational changes (such as wider schooling rates) along with increasing literacy rates, particularly among the middle and working classes, helped boost a new mass market for printed material.<ref>{{Cite web |title=British Library |url=https://www.bl.uk/romantics-and-victorians/articles/print-culture |access-date=2022-04-22 |website=www.bl.uk |archive-date=2022-04-22 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220422020109/https://www.bl.uk/romantics-and-victorians/articles/print-culture }}</ref> The arrival of gas and electric lighting in private homes meant that reading after dark no longer had to take place by oil lamp or candlelight.<ref name="British Library"/>

In 19th-century [[Russia]], reading practices were highly varied, as people from a wide range of social statuses read Russian and foreign-language texts ranging from high literature to the peasant [[lubok]].<ref>Damiano Rebecchini and Raffaella Vassena, eds. ''Reading Russia: A History of Reading in Modern Russia.'' Vol. 2 (Milan, 2020). [https://www.ledizioni.it/stag/wp-content/uploads/woocommerce_uploads/2020/08/RR_volume2_DEF_web.pdf]</ref> Provincial readers such as Andrei Chikhachev give evidence of the omnivorous appetite for fiction and non-fiction alike among middling landowners.<ref>Tatiana Golovina, "Belles-Lettres and the Literary Interests of Middling Landowners: A Case Study from the Archive of the Dorozhaevo Homstead," in Damiano Rebecchini and Raffaella Vassena, eds. ''Reading Russia: A History of Reading in Modern Russia.'' Vol. 2 (2020), 409–441 online [https://www.ledizioni.it/stag/wp-content/uploads/woocommerce_uploads/2020/08/RR_volume2_DEF_web.pdf]; Katherine Pickering Antonova, ''An Ordinary Marriage: The World of a Gentry Family in Provincial Russia'' (Oxford, 2013); Susan Smith-Peter, ''Imagining Russian Regions: Subnational Identity and Civil Society in Nineteenth-Century Russia'' (Leiden, 2018), 139–143.</ref>

In the 20th and 21st centuries, the use of audiobooks for reading has become increasingly popular. Although some contest the validity of audiobook usage as actual reading since it does not generally involve direct contact with written word but rather uses a mediating narrator, audiobooks are seen by many as a continuation of oral tradition as well as an accessibility measure for the visually impaired.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Is Audiobook Listening Considered “Reading”? {{!}} Library |url=https://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/library/branch-out/audiobook-listening-considered-reading |access-date=2025-01-12 |website=www.fairfaxcounty.gov |language=en}}</ref> The popularity of audiobooks in the 21st century in the US is possibly due to technological advances that make such materials widely available for download, often through public libraries.

==History of learning to read==
{{Main|History of learning to read}}

The history of learning to read dates back to the [[History of writing|invention of writing]] during the 4th millennium BC.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.bl.uk/history-of-writing/articles/where-did-writing-begin|title=British Library|website=www.bl.uk|access-date=2021-02-10|archive-date=2022-03-11|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220311085214/https://www.bl.uk/history-of-writing/articles/where-did-writing-begin}}</ref>

Concerning the English language in the United States, the [[phonics]] principle of teaching reading was first presented by [[John Hart (spelling reformer)|John Hart]] in 1570, who suggested the teaching of reading should focus on the relationship between what is now referred to as [[grapheme]]s (letters) and [[phoneme]]s (sounds).<ref>{{Cite book|last=Hart|first=John|date=1570|title=A method or comfortable beginning for all unlearned, whereby they may be taught to read English in a very short time, with pleasure: so profitable as strange, put in light, by I.H. Chester Heralt|url=https://lib.ugent.be/en/catalog/rug01:001517217}}</ref>

In the [[Colonial history of the United States|colonial times]] of the United States, reading material was not written specifically for children, so instruction material consisted primarily of the Bible and some patriotic essays. The most influential early textbook was [[The New England Primer]], published in 1687. There was little consideration given to the best ways to teach reading or assess reading comprehension.<ref name="Adams, 1990">{{cite book |author=Adams, Marilyn Jager |title=Beginning to read: thinking and learning about print |publisher=MIT Press |location=Cambridge, MA |year=1990 |pages=[https://archive.org/details/beginningtoreadt00adam/page/21 21–25] |isbn=0-262-01112-3 |oclc=256731826 |url=https://archive.org/details/beginningtoreadt00adam/page/21 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.k12academics.com/reading-education-united-states/history-reading-education-us|title=History of Reading Education in the U.S. {{!}} K12 Academics|last=Glavin|first=Chris|date=2014-02-06|website=www.k12academics.com|language=en|access-date=2018-06-15}}</ref>

Phonics was a popular way to learn reading in the 1800s. [[William Holmes McGuffey]] (1800–1873), an American educator, author, and Presbyterian minister who had a lifelong interest in teaching children, compiled the first four of the [[McGuffey Readers]] in 1836.<ref name="William McGuffey"/>

The whole-word method was introduced into the English-speaking world by [[Thomas Hopkins Gallaudet]], the director of the [[American School for the Deaf]].<ref>{{Cite book |last=Gallaudet |first=Thomas Hopkins |url=http://donpotter.net/pdf/mothers_primer.pdf |title=The Mother's Primer to Teacher Her Child Its Letters, and How to Read |publisher=Daniel Burgess & Co |year=1835 |location=Hartford, Connecticut}}</ref> It was designed to educate deaf people by placing a word alongside a picture.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Gallaudet |first=Thomas Hopkins |url=https://curiosity.lib.harvard.edu/reading/catalog/42-990033002630203941 |title=The child's picture defining and reading book |publisher=H. & F.J. Huntington |year=1830 |location=Hartford, Connecticut}}</ref> In 1830, Gallaudet described his method of teaching children to recognize a total of 50 sight words written on cards.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.sightwords.com/sight-words/lessons/|title=Sight Words Teaching Strategy {{!}} Sight Words: Teach Your Child to Read|website=www.sightwords.com|date=12 November 2013 |language=en-US|access-date=2018-06-15}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.lifeprint.com/asl101/pages-layout/gallaudet-thomas-hopkins3.htm|title=Thomas Hopkins Gallaudet American Sign Language (ASL)|website=www.lifeprint.com|access-date=2018-06-15}}</ref> [[Horace Mann]], the Secretary of the Board of Education of Massachusetts, U.S., favored the method for everyone, and by 1837 the method was adopted by the [[Boston]] Primary School Committee.<ref name="pbs.org">{{Cite web|url=http://www.pbs.org/onlyateacher/horace.html|title=PBS Online: Only A Teacher: Schoolhouse Pioneers|website=www.pbs.org|access-date=2018-06-15}}</ref>

By 1844 the defects of the whole-word method became so apparent to Boston schoolmasters that they urged the Board to return to phonics.<ref>{{Cite web |date=1844 |author=T. H. Gallaudet |url=http://donpotter.net/pdf/mothers_primer.pdf |access-date=2022-10-25 |website=Don Potter|title= The First Step in the Destruction of America's Early Reading Supremacy |pages=49–78}}</ref> In 1929, [[Samuel Orton]], a [[Neuropathology|neuropathologist]] in [[Iowa]], concluded that the cause of children's reading problems was the new '''sight method'''<!--boldface per [[WP:R#PLA]]--> of reading. His findings were published in the February 1929 issue of the [[Journal of Educational Psychology]] in the article "The Sight Reading Method of Teaching Reading as a Source of Reading Disability".<ref>{{Cite web|last=Glavin|first=Chris|date=2014-02-06|title=Instructional Methods {{!}} K12 Academics|url=https://www.k12academics.com/reading-education-united-states/instructional-methods|access-date=2020-06-12|website=www.k12academics.com|language=en}}</ref>

The meaning-based curriculum came to dominate reading instruction by the second quarter of the 20th century. In the 1930s and 1940s, reading programs became very focused on comprehension and taught children to read whole words by sight. Phonics was taught as a last resort.<ref name="Adams, 1990"/>

[[Dolch word list|Edward William Dolch]] developed his list of [[sight words]] in 1936 by studying the most frequently occurring words in children's books of that era. Children are encouraged to memorize the words with the idea that it will help them read more fluently. Many teachers continue to use this list, although some researchers consider the theory of sight word reading to be a "myth". Researchers and literacy organizations suggest it would be more effective if students learned the words using a phonics approach.<ref name="Stanislas Dehaene 222–228"/><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.understood.org/en/articles/how-to-teach-sight-words|title=Literacy Strategy: How to Teach Sight Words|website=www.understood.org|date=16 December 2019 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.readingrockets.org/article/new-model-teaching-high-frequency-words|title=A New Model for Teaching High-Frequency Words, reading rockets.org|date=6 June 2019}}</ref>

In 1955, [[Rudolf Flesch]] published a book entitled ''Why Johnny Can't Read'', a passionate argument in favor of teaching children to read using phonics, adding to the reading debate among educators, researchers, and parents.<ref name="Flesch, R">{{cite book |author=Flesch, Rudolf Franz |title=[[Why Johnny Can't Read|Why Johnny can't read: and what you can do about it]] |publisher=Harper & Row |location=San Francisco |year=1986 |isbn=0-06-091340-1 |oclc=12837722 }}</ref>
[[File:Land on the Moon 7 21 1969-repair.jpg|thumb|An American girl reading a newspaper (1969)]]
Government-funded research on reading instruction in the United States and elsewhere began in the 1960s. In the 1970s and 1980s, researchers began publishing studies with evidence on the effectiveness of different instructional approaches. During this time, researchers at the [[National Institutes of Health]] (NIH) conducted studies that showed early reading acquisition depends on the understanding of the connection between sounds and letters (i.e. phonics). However, this appears to have had little effect on educational practices in public schools.<ref name="Adams, Marilyn Jager 1994">{{cite book |author=Adams, Marilyn Jager |title=Beginning to read: thinking and learning about print |publisher=MIT Press |location=Cambridge, MA|year=1994 |isbn=0-262-51076-6 |oclc=256731826 |url=https://archive.org/details/beginningtoread00mari }}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|url=https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/jameskim/files/bookch2.pdf|author=James S. Kim |title=Research and the Reading Wars, When Research Matters|page=89|access-date=2021-03-07}}</ref>

In the 1970s, the [[whole language]] method was introduced. This method de-emphasizes the teaching of phonics out of context (e.g. reading books), and is intended to help readers "guess" the right word.<ref>{{Cite journal |title=A psycholinguistic guessing game|journal=Journal of the Reading Specialist|volume=6|issue=4|pages=126–135|doi=10.1080/19388076709556976|year = 1967|last1 = Goodman|first1 = Kenneth S.}}</ref> It teaches that guessing individual words should involve three systems (letter clues, meaning clues from context, and the syntactical structure of the sentence). It became the primary method of reading instruction in the 1980s and 1990s. However, it is falling out of favor. The neuroscientist [[Mark Seidenberg]] refers to it as a "theoretical zombie" because it persists despite a lack of supporting evidence.<ref name="Seidenberg-2017a"/><ref name="auto5"/> It is still widely practiced in related methods such as [[#Sight vocabulary vs. sight words|sight words]], the [[#Three cueing system (Searchlights model)|three-cueing system]] and [[balanced literacy]].<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.apmreports.org/episode/2018/09/10/hard-words-why-american-kids-arent-being-taught-to-read|title=Why aren't kids being taught to read?|first=Emily|last=Hanford|website=www.apmreports.org}}</ref><ref name="Adams, Marilyn Jager 1994"/><ref name="LDOnline">{{Cite web |last1=Moats |first1=Louisa |title=Whole Language Lives On: The Illusion of Balanced Reading Instruction |url=http://www.ldonline.org/article/6394/ |website=LD Online |publisher=WETA Public Television |access-date=29 January 2019}}</ref>

In the 1980s the [[#three-cueing system|three-cueing system]] (the searchlights model in England) emerged. According to a 2010 survey 75% of teachers in the United States teach the three-cueing system.<ref name="Education Week-2010"/> It teaches children to guess a word by using "meaning cues" (semantic, syntactic and graphophonic). While the system does help students to "make better guesses", it does not help when the words become more sophisticated; and it reduces the amount of practice time available to learn essential decoding skills. Consequently, present-day researchers such as cognitive neuroscientists [[Mark Seidenberg]] and professor [[Timothy Shanahan (educator)|Timothy Shanahan]] do not support the theory.<ref name="Timothy Shanahan, Reading Rockets"/><ref name="Mark Seidenberg 2017 300–304"/><ref name="Dr Kerry Hempenstall, Senior Industry Fellow, School of Education, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia"/> In England, [[synthetic phonics]] is intended to replace "the searchlights multi-cueing model".<ref name="Edu England-2006"/><ref name="Rose-2006"/>

In the 1990s [[Balanced literacy]] arose. It is a theory of teaching reading and writing that is not clearly defined. It may include elements such as word study and phonics mini-lessons, differentiated learning, cueing, leveled reading, shared reading, guided reading, independent reading and sight words.<ref name="Zammit-2019"/><ref name="districtadministration.com"/><ref name="Gonser-2020"/><ref name="4 reasons to use balanced literacy"/> For some, balanced literacy strikes a balance between [[whole language]] and [[phonics]]. Others say balanced literacy in practice usually means the ''whole language'' approach to reading.<ref>''Reading at the Speed of Light: How we Read, why so many can't, and what can be done about it'', 2017, p. 248, Mark Seidenberg {{ISBN|978-1-5416-1715-5}}</ref> According to a survey in 2010, 68% of K–2 teachers in the United States practice balanced literacy. Furthermore, only 52% of teachers included ''phonics'' in their definition of ''balanced literacy''.<ref name="Education Week-2010"/>

In 1996 the [[California]] Department of Education took an increased interest in using phonics in schools.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/1996/05/22/us/california-leads-revival-of-teaching-by-phonics.html|title= California Leads Revival Of Teaching by Phonics|newspaper= The New York Times|date= 22 May 1996}}</ref> And in 1997 the department called for grade one teaching in concepts about print, phonemic awareness, decoding and word recognition, and vocabulary and concept development.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.cde.ca.gov/be/st/ss/documents/elacontentstnds.pdf|title=English–Language Arts Content Standards for California Public Schools}}</ref>

By 1998 in the U.K. whole language instruction and the searchlights model were still the norm; however, there was some attention to teaching phonics in the early grades, as seen in the National Literacy Strategies.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://rrf.org.uk/2018/07/30/phonics-developments-in-england-from-1998-to-2018-by-jenny-chew/|title=Phonics Developments in England from 1998 to 2018 by Jenny Chew, Reading reform foundation UK|year=2018}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/175408/DFE-00032-2011.pdf|title=The National Strategies 1997–2011, Department for Education, England|year=2011}}</ref>

===21st century===
[[File:Anonymous - Die Andacht ("The Devotion") - 1937.376.1 - Reading Public Museum.jpg|thumb|upright|In 2000 the [[National Reading Panel]] in the U.S. identified five ingredients of effective reading instruction: ''phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary and comprehension''.]]

Beginning in 2000, several reading research reports were published:
* 2000 – The [[National Reading Panel]] (U.S.) that identified five ingredients of effective reading instruction: ''phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary and comprehension''.<ref name="National Reading Panel, 2000, Summary"/>
* 2005 – The [[Australia]]n report on ''Teaching reading'' that supports the use of [[Systematic Phonics|systematic phonics]].<ref name="Teaching Reading"/>
* 2006 – The [[United Kingdom]] [[Independent review of the teaching of early reading (Rose Report 2006)]] that supports [[Phonics#Synthetic phonics|systematic synthetic phonics]].<ref>{{Cite web | url = https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/eOrderingDownload/0201-2006PDF-EN-01.pdf | title = Independent review of the teaching of early reading | access-date = 2011-08-24 | last = Rose | first = Jim | year = 2006 | work = Department for Education and Skills | archive-date = 2013-03-21 | archive-url = http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130321055757/https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/eOrderingDownload/0201-2006PDF-EN-01.pdf  }}</ref>

For more on this, see the main article [[History of learning to read]]

For more information on reading educational developments, see [[Phonics#Practices by country or region|Phonics practices by country or region]].

==Other terms==
* ''[[Subvocalization]]'' is the sense that a reader is combining silent reading with internal sounding of the words. Advocates of speed reading claim it can be a bad habit that slows reading and comprehension, but some researchers say this is a fallacy since there is no actual speaking involved. Instead, it may help skilled readers to read since they are utilizing the phonological code to understand words (''e.g.'', the difference between ''PERmit'' and ''perMIT'').<ref>{{cite book |author=Seidenberg, Mark|title=Language at the speed of sight|page=75|publisher=Basic Books|location=New York|year=2017|isbn=978-1-5416-1715-5}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|last=Moidel|first=Steve|title=Speed Reading for Business|publisher=Barron's Educational|location=Hauppauge, NY|pages=[https://archive.org/details/speedreadingforb00stev/page/23 23]–24|isbn=978-0-7641-0401-5|year=1998|url-access=registration|url=https://archive.org/details/speedreadingforb00stev}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|last=Rayner|first=Keith|others=Pollatsek, Alexander|title=The Psychology of Reading|publisher=Routledge|location=London|year=1995|pages=[https://archive.org/details/psychologyofread0000rayn_e6n1/page/192 192–194]|isbn=978-0-8058-1872-7|url=https://archive.org/details/psychologyofread0000rayn_e6n1}}</ref>
* ''[[Speed reading]]'' is the claim that you can increase reading speed without experiencing an unacceptable reduction in comprehension or retention. Methods include skimming or the [[chunking (psychology)|chunking]] of words in a body of text to increase the rate of reading. However, cognitive neuroscientists such as [[Stanislas Dehaene]] and [[Mark Seidenberg]] say that claims of reading up to 1,000 words per minute 'must be viewed with skepticism' and that 'people are as likely to read thousands of words per minute as they are to run faster than the speed of light'".<ref name="Stanislas Dehaene 222–228"/><ref>{{cite book|author=Mark Seidenberg|title=Language at the Speed of Sight: How We Read, Why So Many Can't, and What Can Be Done About It|pages=70–84|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=xTBnAgAAQBAJ|year= 2017|publisher=Basic Books|isbn=978-0-465-08065-6}}</ref> It is estimated that the average reading speed for adults in English is from 175 to 320 words per minute.<ref name="Research Digest-2019"/>
* ''[[Proofreading]]'' is a kind of reading for the purpose of detecting [[typographical error]]s. It is not reading in the usual sense, as they may largely suspend comprehension while doing so.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://writing.wisc.edu/handbook/grammarpunct/proofreading/|title=Proofreading|website=The Writing Center}}</ref>
* ''Rereading'' is reading a book more than once. "One cannot read a book: one can only reread it," [[Vladimir Nabokov]] once said.<ref>[[Patricia Meyer Spacks]] (2011). ''On Rereading'', [[Harvard University Press]]. {{ISBN|978-0-674-06222-1}}</ref>
* ''Analytical reading'', popularized by [[Mortimer Adler]] in ''[[How to Read a Book]]'', mainly for non-fiction works, in which one analyzes a writing according to three dimensions: 1) the structure and purpose of the work, 2) the logical propositions made, and 3) evaluation of the merits of the arguments and conclusions. This method involves [[Suspension of judgment|suspending judgment]] of the work or its arguments until they are fully understood.<ref>{{cite book|title=How to read a book|author1=Adler, Mortimer|author2=Van Doren, Charles|publisher=Simon and Schuster, New York|year=1972|isbn=1-56731-010-9|oclc=788925161|url=https://archive.org/details/howtoreadbook00adle}}</ref>
* ''Survey-question-read-recite-review'' ([[SQ3R]]) method, often taught in public schools, which involves reading so as to be able to teach what is read, and is appropriate for instructors preparing to teach material without referring to notes.<ref>{{cite book
|last = Robinson |first = Francis Pleasant|year = 1978|title = Effective Study|edition = 6th|publisher = Harper & Row|location = New York|isbn = 978-0-06-045521-7
}}</ref>
* ''[[Rapid serial visual presentation]]'' (RSVP) reading involves presenting the words in a sentence one word at a time at the same location on the display screen, at a specified eccentricity; for studying the timing of vision.<ref>{{Cite journal|vauthors=Legge GE, Mansfield JS, Chung ST |title=Psychophysics of reading. XX. Linking letter recognition to reading speed in central and peripheral vision |journal=Vision Research |volume=41 |issue=6 |pages=725–743 |date=March 2001 |pmid=11248262 |doi=10.1016/S0042-6989(00)00295-9|s2cid=17429516 |doi-access=free }}</ref>
* ''In-depth reading'' is a method that is used to gain deeper meaning and comprehension of a text, research detailed information for this assignment, and read very difficult sections of a text. Five strategies include the RAP strategy, the RIDA strategy, the Five S method, and SQ3R. This is also known as ''exploratory reading'', which allows multiple people a narrower purpose, to understand the concepts or arguments of a text.<ref>{{Cite web |title=In-depth reading – OWLL – Massey University |url=https://owll.massey.ac.nz/study-skills/in-depth-reading.php#:~:text=In-depth%20reading%20is%20used,difficult%20sections%20of%20a%20text |access-date=2022-09-27 |website=owll.massey.ac.nz}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |publisher=[[University of Wisconsin–Madison|UW-Madison]] |journal=ESL Program |title=In-Depth Reading |url=https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/esl117/chapter/focused-reading-and-note-taking/ |language=en }}</ref>

==Gallery==

=== Paintings ===
<gallery heights="200" mode="packed">
File:Fritz von Uhde - Das Bilderbuch I (1889).jpg|''Girl Reading'' (1889), by [[Fritz von Uhde]]. Oil paint on canvas.
File:George Goodwin Kilburne Young girl reading.jpg|''Young Girl Reading'' (1924) by [[George Goodwin Kilburne]]
File:Renoir - Young Girls Reading, 1891.jpg|Young Girls Reading (1891) by [[Pierre-Auguste Renoir|Auguste Renoir]]
File:Fragonard, The Reader.jpg|''[[A Young Girl Reading]]'' ({{circa|1770}}), oil painting by [[Jean-Honoré Fragonard]]
File:Lavery Maiss Auras.jpg|''Miss Auras'', by [[John Lavery]], depicts a woman reading a book.
File:Girl Reading page 308.jpg|A girl reading from the public domain image book, "What Shall We Do?" "Five Hundred Games and Pastimes" by Dorothy Canfield published in 1907 by Frederick A Stokes Company of New York
File:Riza-yi-Abbasi 008.jpg|''Youth reading'', [[Persian miniature]] by [[Reza Abbasi]] (1625–26)
File:Honoré Daumier 007.jpg|''Reader'', a painting by [[Honoré Daumier]]
</gallery>

=== Photographs ===
<gallery heights="200" mode="packed">
File:Three girls reading in 1880.jpg|Three girls reading (1880)
File:Girl Reading(GN08755).jpg|Girl reading a book featuring the title "The Children's Hour" and a photograph of a Hippopotamus in Thebarton Primary School, South Australia (1945)
File:Students reading in leisure time.jpg|Students reading in leisure time at Government Primary school Asir, [[Sirsa]], [[Haryana]] province of [[India]]
</gallery>

==See also==
{{Portal|Education|Linguistics|Psychology}}
{{div col}}
* [[Educational software]]
* [[Evidence-based education]]
* [[Phonics]]
* [[Primary education]]
* [[Reading comprehension]]
* [[Reading disability]]
* [[Reading for special needs]]
* [[Simple view of reading]]
* [[Women reading in art]]
{{div col end}}

==References==
{{Reflist|35em}}

==Further reading==
{{Refbegin|35em}}
* {{Cite book |author1=Bainbridge, Joyce |author2=Malicky, Grace |title=Constructing meaning: balancing elementary language arts |publisher=Harcourt |location=Toronto|year=2000 |isbn=978-0-7747-3660-2 |url=https://archive.org/details/constructingmean0000bain_02ed }}
* {{Cite journal|vauthors=Banai K, Hornickel J, Skoe E, Nicol T, Zecker S, Kraus N |title=Reading and subcortical auditory function |journal= Cerebral Cortex |volume=19 |issue=11 |pages=2699–2707 |date=November 2009 |pmid=19293398 |doi=10.1093/cercor/bhp024 |pmc=2758683 }}
* {{Cite conference | last1 = Bulling | first1 = Andreas | last2 = Ward | first2 = Jamie A. | last3 = Gellersen | first3 = Hans | last4 = Tröster | first4 = Gerhard | title = Robust Recognition of Reading Activity in Transit Using Wearable Electrooculography |editor=Jadwiga Indulska |editor2=Donald J. Patterson |editor3=Tom Rodden |editor4=Max Ott |book-title=Pervasive Computing: 6th International Conference, PERVASIVE 2008 | publisher = Springer |location=Berlin | year = 2008 | pages = 19–37 | doi = 10.1007/978-3-540-79576-6_2 | isbn = 978-3-540-79575-9| citeseerx = 10.1.1.718.5057 }}
* {{Cite book |author1=Burke, Peter |author2=Briggs, Asa |title=A social history of the media: from Gutenberg to the Internet |publisher=Polity |location=Cambridge, UK |year=2002 |isbn=978-0-7456-2375-7 |url-access=registration |url=https://archive.org/details/socialhistoryofm0000brig_k2q8 }}
* {{Cite journal|vauthors=Castles A, Coltheart M, Wilson K, Valpied J, Wedgwood J |title=The genesis of reading ability: what helps children learn letter-sound correspondences? |journal= Journal of Experimental Child Psychology|volume=104 |issue=1 |pages=68–88 |date=September 2009 |pmid=19268301 |doi=10.1016/j.jecp.2008.12.003}}
* Corbellini. S. (2015). ''Discovering the riches of the word: religious reading in late medieval and early modern Europe''. Brill
* {{cite book|author=Dehaene, Stanislas|title=Reading in the brain|publisher=Penguin Books|year=2010|isbn=978-0-14-311805-3|url=https://archive.org/details/readinginbrainne0000deha}}
* {{Cite journal|vauthors=Devlin JT, Jamison HL, Gonnerman LM, Matthews PM |title=The role of the posterior fusiform gyrus in reading |journal= Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience|volume=18 |issue=6 |pages=911–922 |date=June 2006 |pmid=16839299 |pmc=1524880 |doi=10.1162/jocn.2006.18.6.911}}
* {{cite journal |vauthors=Duncan LG, McGeown SP, Griffiths YM, Stothard SE, Dobai A | year = 2015 | title = Adolescent reading skill and engagement with digital and traditional literacies as predictors of reading comprehension | url = http://dro.dur.ac.uk/18499/1/18499.pdf| journal = British Journal of Psychology | volume = 107| issue = 2| pages = 209–238| doi = 10.1111/bjop.12134 | pmid = 26094956 | s2cid = 34397623 }}
* {{Cite journal|doi=10.1073/pnas.95.3.914 |vauthors=Fiez JA, Petersen SE |title=Neuroimaging studies of word reading |journal= Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America|volume=95 |issue=3 |pages=914–921 |date=February 1998 |pmid=9448259 |pmc=33816|bibcode=1998PNAS...95..914F |doi-access=free }}
* {{Cite journal|vauthors=Fiez JA, Tranel D, Seager-Frerichs D, Damasio H |title=Specific reading and phonological processing deficits are associated with damage to the left frontal operculum |journal=Cortex |volume=42 |issue=4 |pages=624–643 |date=May 2006 |pmid=16881271 |doi=10.1016/S0010-9452(08)70399-X |s2cid=4486571 }}
* {{Cite journal|vauthors=Gibson CJ, Gruen JR |title=The human lexinome: genes of language and reading |journal= Journal of Communication Disorders|volume=41 |issue=5 |pages=409–420 |year=2008 |pmid=18466916 |pmc=2488410 |doi=10.1016/j.jcomdis.2008.03.003|citeseerx=10.1.1.596.5120 }}
* {{Cite book |first=Joan P. |last=Gipe |title=Multiple Paths to Literacy: Corrective Reading Techniques for Classroom Teachers |publisher=Merrill Pub Co |year=1998 |isbn=978-0-13-785080-8 |url=https://archive.org/details/multiplepathstol0000gipe_j7d8 }}
* {{Cite journal|vauthors=Heim S, Friederici AD |title=Phonological processing in language production: time course of brain activity |journal=NeuroReport |volume=14 |issue=16 |pages=2031–2033 |date=November 2003 |pmid=14600492 |doi= 10.1097/00001756-200311140-00005|hdl=11858/00-001M-0000-0010-D0B5-7 |url=http://edoc.mpg.de/239260 |hdl-access=free }}
* {{cite journal | author = Hoover Wesley A. |author2=Gough Philip B. | year = 1990 | title = The simple view of reading | url = https://archive.org/details/sim_reading-and-writing_1990_2_2/page/127 | journal = Reading and Writing| volume = 2| issue = 2| pages = 127–160| doi = 10.1007/BF00401799 | s2cid = 144342092 }}
* {{Cite web|website=v-weisse.de|url=http://www.v-weiss.de/lehrl-full.html|author1= Lehrl, S. |author2=Fischer, B. |date=1990|title=Measuring of reading rate}}
* {{cite journal | author = Lesaux N. K. |author2=Lipka O. |author3=Siegel L. S. | year = 2006 | title = Investigating cognitive and linguistic abilities that influence the reading comprehension skills of children from diverse linguistic backgrounds | url = https://archive.org/details/sim_reading-and-writing_2006-02_19_1/page/99 | journal = Reading and Writing | volume = 19 | pages = 99–131 | doi = 10.1007/s11145-005-4713-6 | s2cid = 144753964 }}
* National Endowment for the Arts (June 2004). [https://web.archive.org/web/20040718091450/http://www.nea.gov/pub/ReadingAtRisk.pdf "Reading at Risk: A Survey of Literary Reading in America"] (pdf)
* {{Cite journal|vauthors=Noble KG, McCandliss BD |title=Reading development and impairment: behavioral, social, and neurobiological factors |journal= Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics |volume=26 |issue=5 |pages=370–378 |date=October 2005 |pmid=16222178 |doi= 10.1097/00004703-200510000-00006}}
* Purdy, Jessica G., and Rosamund Oates. ''Communities of Print: Books and Their Readers in Early Modern Europe.'' Edited by Jessica G. Purdy and Rosamund Oates. Leiden, Netherlands ;: Brill, 2021.
* {{Cite journal|vauthors=Ricketts J, Bishop DV, Nation K |title=Orthographic facilitation in oral vocabulary acquisition |journal= [[Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology]] |volume=62 |issue=10 |pages=1948–1966 |date=October 2009 |pmid=19301209 |doi=10.1080/17470210802696104|s2cid=5632111 |url=http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/2817/1/WRAP_Ricketts_0874238-cedar-120210-rickettsbishopnationqjep.pdf }}
* {{Cite journal|vauthors=Sahin NT, Pinker S, Cash SS, Schomer D, Halgren E |title=Sequential processing of lexical, grammatical, and phonological information within Broca's area |journal=Science |volume=326 |issue=5951 |pages=445–449 |date=October 2009 |pmid=19833971 |pmc=4030760 |doi=10.1126/science.1174481|bibcode=2009Sci...326..445S }}
* {{cite book |title=Language at the speed of light|date=2017|author= Seidenberg, Mark|publisher=Basic Books |isbn=978-0-465-08065-6}}
* {{Cite journal|vauthors=Shaywitz SE, Shaywitz BA |title=Paying attention to reading: the neurobiology of reading and dyslexia |journal=Development and Psychopathology |volume=20 |issue=4 |pages=1329–1349 |year=2008 |pmid=18838044 |doi=10.1017/S0954579408000631|citeseerx=10.1.1.607.9676 |s2cid=2369304 }}
* {{Cite journal|author=Pugh KR |title=Neurobiological studies of reading and reading disability |journal=Journal of Communication Disorders |volume=34 |issue=6 |pages=479–492 |year=2001 |pmid=11725860 |doi=10.1016/S0021-9924(01)00060-0|author2=Mencl WE|author3=Jenner AR|last4=Katz|first4=Leonard|last5=Frost|first5=Stephen J|last6=Lee|first6=Jun Ren|last7=Shaywitz|first7=Sally E|last8=Shaywitz|first8=Bennett A}}
* {{Cite web|url=http://academic.cuesta.edu/acasupp/AS/300INDEX.HTM|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100610120615/http://academic.cuesta.edu/acasupp/AS/300INDEX.HTM|archive-date=2010-06-10|title= Reading Comprehension Guide|website= [[Cuesta College]]}}
* {{Cite journal|doi=10.1056/NEJM199201163260301 |author2-link=Michael D. Escobar |vauthors=Shaywitz SE, Escobar MD, Shaywitz BA, Fletcher JM, Makuch R |title=Evidence that dyslexia may represent the lower tail of a normal distribution of reading ability |journal=The New England Journal of Medicine |volume=326 |issue=3 |pages=145–150 |date=January 1992 |pmid=1727544|doi-access=free }}
* {{cite book|author=Stebbins, R.A. |date=2013|title= The Committed Reader: Reading for Utility, Pleasure, and Fulfillment in the Twenty-First Century|location=Lanham, MD|publisher= Scarecrow}}
* {{Cite journal|vauthors=Tan LH, Spinks JA, Eden GF, Perfetti CA, Siok WT |title=Reading depends on writing, in Chinese |journal= Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America|volume=102 |issue=24 |pages=8781–8785 |date=June 2005 |pmid=15939871 |pmc=1150863 |doi=10.1073/pnas.0503523102|bibcode=2005PNAS..102.8781T |doi-access=free }}
* {{Cite journal|vauthors=Turkeltaub PE, Flowers DL, Lyon LG, Eden GF |title=Development of ventral stream representations for single letters |journal= Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences|volume=1145 |issue= 1|pages=13–29 |date=December 2008 |pmid=19076386 |doi=10.1196/annals.1416.026|bibcode=2008NYASA1145...13T|s2cid=20801906 }}
* {{Cite journal|vauthors=Valdois S, Habib M, Cohen L |title=[The reader brain: natural and cultural story] |language=fr |journal= Revue Neurologique|volume=164 |issue=Suppl 3 |pages=S77–S82 |date=May 2008 |pmid=18675051 |doi=10.1016/S0035-3787(08)73295-8}}
* {{cite book|title=The reading mind: a cognitive approach to understanding how the mind reads|author=Willingham, Daniel T.|publisher=Jossey-Bass|date=2017|isbn=978-1-119-30137-0}}
{{Refend}}

==External links==
{{Sister project links|Reading}}
* [https://www.literacyworldwide.org The International Literacy Association (ILA) official website]
* [https://www.thereadingleague.org The reading league]
* [https://amplify.com/science-of-reading-the-podcast/ Science of reading – the podcast]
* [https://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/edu/ ''Journal of Educational Psychology'']
* [https://journals.sagepub.com/home/rer ''Review of Educational Research'']
* [https://www.triplesr.org/index.php Society for the Scientific Study of Reading]

{{Language phonologies}}
{{Writing systems}}
{{Books}}
{{Communication studies}}
{{Dyslexia}}
{{Authority control}}

[[Category:Reading (process)| ]]
[[Category:Writing systems]]
[[Category:Orthography]]
[[Category:Applied linguistics]]
[[Category:Psycholinguistics]]
[[Category:Educational psychology]]