And when comprehension doesn’t improve, it’ll be used to discredit the shift to phonics instruction ... pendulum swings back to whole language approaches. Really it’s a win win to shift all of reading instruction into evidence backed practices and sad to see the science of reading folks treat it like an ideology instead of a method.
As an aside, I was listening to a podcast recently with Maryanne Wolf (Ezra Klein I think?) and they touch on the importance of broad, worldly knowledge to reading comprehension. It wasn’t the focus, they were more focused on digital tech and attention, but the whole time I was listening I was thinking “knowledge rich curricula!”
Your work has moved literacy awareness and started a public awareness campaign.
Mainstream public awareness about literacy was not exposed even five years ago. Many experienced literacy educators working with children every day clamored to administrators that our literacy course has been way off, resulting in many children who cannot read.
What I know after working with hundreds of children over three and half decades is that nearly 40% of students are left behind with our current literacy practices.
Yes, phonics has been neglected for a long time, but literacy acquisition awareness must occur in every school. Building background knowledge, vocabulary, and oral and receptive language are extremely important from the day a child is born.
I do not think people understand or pay attention to the important brain work during the reading process.
Stanislaus Dahaene , an important brain researcher, writes-
"Reading is not a natural task, and children are not biologically
prepared to it by evolution (unlike spoken language
acquisition).
Thus, teachers must be aware that many of the
reading steps that they take for granted because they are
expert readers and have a fully automated and non-conscious
the reading system are not at all obvious for young children.
Massive changes are needed at the phonological and at the
visual level, before children, master the skill of reading."
- Dehaene, 2011
Good teachers know that we cannot teach skills in isolation. Reading looks like the DNA helix- many processes go into reading acquisition.
Natalie- I picked up your book, The Knowledge Gap, in 2019 in a Barnes and Noble store in Florida. I became a fan of yours, and posted on social media about your book and ideas. Why?
As a literacy and dyslexia specialist, what you write is TRUTH. I believe in Core Knowledge and how real information can change children's lives. I practiced it and believe it.
Keep on, keeping on, Natalie.
Illuminati- Lighten- Thank you for your outstanding journalism.
Take courage, and don't let the haters bring you down.
I’m sorry to hear about such woes in the world of reading. I read (well listened on Audible) your book when it first came out. It left such a lasting impression on me and the way I teach. Although I am pushed by colleagues to drop things like Science and Social Studies in lieu of more time for reading instruction and small groups, I am aware of the importance of these subjects, especially in a class where 80% speak another language at home other than English. Even so, I find there’s just not enough time in the day for everything I have to fit in. My hope is that the Science of Reading community will look at the broader picture. Together we need to problem solve, look at all aspects (including phonics and comprehension and writing) until we find a solution that works for our children. As Louisa Moats says, “Teaching reading is rocket science.” She wasn’t kidding! Happy Thanksgiving and thank you for the work you do. I am grateful!
I am very grateful for your advocacy and writing. I deeply appreciate your science-based crusade for centering knowledge in schools. It has inspired me greatly and I'm a better educator because of your work. The comprehension problem in schools is more hidden like you say...and the solutions for schools require deeper commitments, teacher/leader training, and mindset shifts. It's not a quick fix but it's certainly worth fighting for every chance we get. I deeply appreciate your voice and your work.
So sorry m! I have to say I was shocked at the backlash and was disappointed by Emily Hanford’s response. There is something really scary happening - people no longer have the ability to debate and have conversations where one person is not in 100% agreement with another. Good faith criticism is a positive thing. Emily Hanford’s work is important and I absolutely loved Sold a Story. But phonics is just one part of reading. While most science of reading advocates know this already, not everyone else does.
I feel you are absolutely 100% rationale and correct in what you are saying. We need brave people to stand up to the 'that feels good/sounds right' brigade who defend non-rationale positions. I call it educational humanism that is more ideological and values based than rigorous. I enjoy your work!
It would seem that your detractors haven't paid attention to the equation in the Simple View of Reading, which implies that attention has to be given to both decoding and language comprehension. What you have done is highlight the fact that some are neglecting one element of the equation. I wish you well.
Multiple people (including Emily) have attempted to explain that Sold a Story is a podcast about three-cueing; where the idea came from, how it spread, and why it's endured. The podcast isn't about all of reading. It goes deep into one misguided theory about reading, from its inception to present day. It's fine to wish a journalist focused on a different topic, but knocking a piece because it isn't about the topic you most care about seems unfair. That would be like criticizing The Knowledge Gap for not addressing the shoddy math instruction most students receive.
Thank you! I have to thank you and other people who have taught me about the book "why Johnny Can't Read" by Rudolph Flesch. It's astounding that it was published in 1955 and debunked whole language yet in 2022 it still is educationally harming children in classrooms across the world. Lucy Calkins is currently working with apple tv + on a children's show called interrupting chicken. I fear that these people will run from reading programs into the arms of streaming platforms that also don't require evidence based reading instruction 😔. I am a twitter refugee on LinkedIn, Tumblr, and Pinterest. I couldn't do the negativity on Twitter anymore. I hope you will move to LinkedIn too and realize literacy and dyslexia advocates internationally support science of reading.
There is so much here to unpack. As a reading specialist working all week with struggling first and second graders and then once a week as part of a job share in a third grade classroom, I encountered the importance of both laying foundational skills and fostering comprehension in order for students to succeed. Here's how I wrote about it, including a reference to The Knowledge Gap, in From Play-doh to Plato: All students need to grapple with grade-level text, https://fordhaminstitute.org/national/commentary/play-doh-plato-all-students-need-grapple-grade-level-text
I so appreciate you bringing attention to this issue as this has been a concern of mine for years. Many people, including many who consider themselves aligned with the science of reading, say that the programs and practices that Emily Hanford took on are fine for teaching language comprehension. I love the podcasts but was disappointed that she didn’t spend a couple of minutes at least acknowledging that there is little to support that notion!!!
In my experience standards based grading compounds the issue with teaching comprehension like a set of skills. Teachers look for random passages to “teach” a particular standard. They look for passages to assess individual standards. No, no, no!!! It doesn’t work like that! I love the idea of standards based grading, but I’ve yet to see it implemented effectively.
I am grateful that you continue to bring attention to the problem of how language comprehension is being addressed. We will not improve reading comprehension until this is given deep, widespread attention. Every time I read your articles I am cheering you on! Thank you!
And when comprehension doesn’t improve, it’ll be used to discredit the shift to phonics instruction ... pendulum swings back to whole language approaches. Really it’s a win win to shift all of reading instruction into evidence backed practices and sad to see the science of reading folks treat it like an ideology instead of a method.
As an aside, I was listening to a podcast recently with Maryanne Wolf (Ezra Klein I think?) and they touch on the importance of broad, worldly knowledge to reading comprehension. It wasn’t the focus, they were more focused on digital tech and attention, but the whole time I was listening I was thinking “knowledge rich curricula!”
Your work has moved literacy awareness and started a public awareness campaign.
Mainstream public awareness about literacy was not exposed even five years ago. Many experienced literacy educators working with children every day clamored to administrators that our literacy course has been way off, resulting in many children who cannot read.
What I know after working with hundreds of children over three and half decades is that nearly 40% of students are left behind with our current literacy practices.
Yes, phonics has been neglected for a long time, but literacy acquisition awareness must occur in every school. Building background knowledge, vocabulary, and oral and receptive language are extremely important from the day a child is born.
I do not think people understand or pay attention to the important brain work during the reading process.
Stanislaus Dahaene , an important brain researcher, writes-
"Reading is not a natural task, and children are not biologically
prepared to it by evolution (unlike spoken language
acquisition).
Thus, teachers must be aware that many of the
reading steps that they take for granted because they are
expert readers and have a fully automated and non-conscious
the reading system are not at all obvious for young children.
Massive changes are needed at the phonological and at the
visual level, before children, master the skill of reading."
- Dehaene, 2011
Good teachers know that we cannot teach skills in isolation. Reading looks like the DNA helix- many processes go into reading acquisition.
Natalie- I picked up your book, The Knowledge Gap, in 2019 in a Barnes and Noble store in Florida. I became a fan of yours, and posted on social media about your book and ideas. Why?
As a literacy and dyslexia specialist, what you write is TRUTH. I believe in Core Knowledge and how real information can change children's lives. I practiced it and believe it.
Keep on, keeping on, Natalie.
Illuminati- Lighten- Thank you for your outstanding journalism.
Take courage, and don't let the haters bring you down.
Mary McCool Berry
I'm thankful for you, Natalie. Please keep up your great and important work.
I’m sorry to hear about such woes in the world of reading. I read (well listened on Audible) your book when it first came out. It left such a lasting impression on me and the way I teach. Although I am pushed by colleagues to drop things like Science and Social Studies in lieu of more time for reading instruction and small groups, I am aware of the importance of these subjects, especially in a class where 80% speak another language at home other than English. Even so, I find there’s just not enough time in the day for everything I have to fit in. My hope is that the Science of Reading community will look at the broader picture. Together we need to problem solve, look at all aspects (including phonics and comprehension and writing) until we find a solution that works for our children. As Louisa Moats says, “Teaching reading is rocket science.” She wasn’t kidding! Happy Thanksgiving and thank you for the work you do. I am grateful!
I am very grateful for your advocacy and writing. I deeply appreciate your science-based crusade for centering knowledge in schools. It has inspired me greatly and I'm a better educator because of your work. The comprehension problem in schools is more hidden like you say...and the solutions for schools require deeper commitments, teacher/leader training, and mindset shifts. It's not a quick fix but it's certainly worth fighting for every chance we get. I deeply appreciate your voice and your work.
I’m still listening, Natalie. That was a nicely measured article and response to what happened. “PLEASE DON’T STOP!”
You have to read, "The Coddling of the American Mind, " if you haven't read it yet.
The authors actually talk about this, a kind of 'witch hunt.' The problem is institutionalized disconfirmation. I deleted Twitter.
So sorry m! I have to say I was shocked at the backlash and was disappointed by Emily Hanford’s response. There is something really scary happening - people no longer have the ability to debate and have conversations where one person is not in 100% agreement with another. Good faith criticism is a positive thing. Emily Hanford’s work is important and I absolutely loved Sold a Story. But phonics is just one part of reading. While most science of reading advocates know this already, not everyone else does.
I’m so sorry you’re experiencing this personally and professionally distressing situation. It’s unwarranted and unacceptable.
The Sold a Story series of podcasts certainly has emotions running high. I’m witnessing the effects on Instagram.
It’s easy for listeners to forget that the science of reading is a large and ever evolving body of work encompassing various disciplines.
Phonics instruction, albeit vital, is neither the beginning nor the end of language comprehension…
I appreciate you and your work Natalie. KEEP on TRUCKIN'
I feel you are absolutely 100% rationale and correct in what you are saying. We need brave people to stand up to the 'that feels good/sounds right' brigade who defend non-rationale positions. I call it educational humanism that is more ideological and values based than rigorous. I enjoy your work!
It would seem that your detractors haven't paid attention to the equation in the Simple View of Reading, which implies that attention has to be given to both decoding and language comprehension. What you have done is highlight the fact that some are neglecting one element of the equation. I wish you well.
Multiple people (including Emily) have attempted to explain that Sold a Story is a podcast about three-cueing; where the idea came from, how it spread, and why it's endured. The podcast isn't about all of reading. It goes deep into one misguided theory about reading, from its inception to present day. It's fine to wish a journalist focused on a different topic, but knocking a piece because it isn't about the topic you most care about seems unfair. That would be like criticizing The Knowledge Gap for not addressing the shoddy math instruction most students receive.
Thank you! I have to thank you and other people who have taught me about the book "why Johnny Can't Read" by Rudolph Flesch. It's astounding that it was published in 1955 and debunked whole language yet in 2022 it still is educationally harming children in classrooms across the world. Lucy Calkins is currently working with apple tv + on a children's show called interrupting chicken. I fear that these people will run from reading programs into the arms of streaming platforms that also don't require evidence based reading instruction 😔. I am a twitter refugee on LinkedIn, Tumblr, and Pinterest. I couldn't do the negativity on Twitter anymore. I hope you will move to LinkedIn too and realize literacy and dyslexia advocates internationally support science of reading.
There is so much here to unpack. As a reading specialist working all week with struggling first and second graders and then once a week as part of a job share in a third grade classroom, I encountered the importance of both laying foundational skills and fostering comprehension in order for students to succeed. Here's how I wrote about it, including a reference to The Knowledge Gap, in From Play-doh to Plato: All students need to grapple with grade-level text, https://fordhaminstitute.org/national/commentary/play-doh-plato-all-students-need-grapple-grade-level-text
I so appreciate you bringing attention to this issue as this has been a concern of mine for years. Many people, including many who consider themselves aligned with the science of reading, say that the programs and practices that Emily Hanford took on are fine for teaching language comprehension. I love the podcasts but was disappointed that she didn’t spend a couple of minutes at least acknowledging that there is little to support that notion!!!
In my experience standards based grading compounds the issue with teaching comprehension like a set of skills. Teachers look for random passages to “teach” a particular standard. They look for passages to assess individual standards. No, no, no!!! It doesn’t work like that! I love the idea of standards based grading, but I’ve yet to see it implemented effectively.
I am grateful that you continue to bring attention to the problem of how language comprehension is being addressed. We will not improve reading comprehension until this is given deep, widespread attention. Every time I read your articles I am cheering you on! Thank you!