The Science of Reading
Deans for Impact (2019). The Science of Early Learning. Austin, TX: Deans for Impact
This document is intended to serve as a resource to anyone who is interested in our best scientific understanding of how young children develop control of their own behavior and intentions, how they learn to read and write proficiently, and how they develop the ability to think mathematically.
Hanford, E. (2018). Hard Words: Why Aren't Kids Being Taught to Read? APM Reports. Retrieved from: https://www.apmreports.org/story/2018/09/10/hard-words-why-american-kids-arent-being-taught-to-read
Writing is a code humans invented to represent speech sounds. Kids have to crack that code to become readers. Children don't crack the code naturally. They need to be taught how letters represent speech sounds. But by the time scientists had done all the studies to conclude this for sure, a different set of beliefs about reading was already deeply entrenched in many
American schools and colleges of education.
Moats, L. (2007). Whole-Language High Jinks: How to Tell When "Scientifically-Based Reading Instruction" Isn't. Thomas B. Fordham Institute. Columbus, OH. Retrieved from: https://fordhaminstitute.org/national/research/whole-language-high-jinks
. . . how educators, parents, and concerned citizens can spot ineffective reading programs that surreptitiously hide under the “scientifically-based” banner.
Moats, L. (1999). Teaching Reading IS Rocket Science: What Expert Teachers of Reading Should Know and Be Able To Do. American Federation of Teachers. Washington, D.C. Retrieved from: https://www.aft.org/sites/default/files/reading_rocketscience_2004.pdf
. . . a chasm exists between classroom instructional practices and the research knowledge-base on literacy development. . . . The tragedy here is that most reading failure is unnecessary. We now know that classroom teaching itself, when it includes a range of research-based components and practices, can prevent and ameliorate reading difficulty.