The Reading Instruction Show

The Science of Reading seems to refer to a general consensus related to the strategies and practices that lead to improved reading outcomes. These strategies and practices have been determined to be effective using experimental or quasi-experimental research and conducted in authentic learning environments. Also, this research has established a causal link between strategies or practices and student outcomes (reading achievement). Thus, the Science of Reading can be thought of as a process that uses these standards when making decisions related to reading instruction and policy. However, the SoR might best be described today as a movement that advocates these standards be used for making decisions related to reading policy and instruction.

Using Blanche DuBois’s tragic reliance on the "kindness of strangers" as a central metaphor, this article critiques the recurring cycle of corporate-driven reading mandates and the reduction of literacy instruction to rigid compliance. Drawing upon autobiographical reflections from early career teaching in 1983 and connecting them to current "Science of Reading" and structured literacy policies, the author demonstrates that contemporary commercial basal programs repackage historical scope-and-sequence routines under modern educational jargon. Rather than advancing teacher expertise, these prepackaged curricula deskill educators into mere direction-followers while serving corporate profit margins. The article synthesizes empirical and theoretical research to challenge the superiority of isolated, systematic phonics over balanced, meaning-centered approaches. It argues that reading instruction is fundamentally an intellectual endeavor requiring deep teacher knowledge of cognitive development, the reading process, and responsive pedagogy. Ultimately, the author urges educators to resist mandated fidelity to commercial scripts and instead reclaim their professional autonomy by adopting, adapting, and supplementing basals with authentic writing, self-selected reading, and dialogic engagement.

If you’re looking for accessible, research-based information that slices through the endless loads of overly worded baloney, I would encourage you to subscribe to my free Substack, The Reading Instruction Show.

Substack: The Reading Instruction Show

https://thereadinginstructionshow.substack.com/

Purpose statement: The reader will become more effective in evaluating online sources related to reading instruction.

Behavioral objective: Readers will be able to identify instances in which confirmation bias results in an over-use of quotations and a misrepresentation of authors’ original ideas.

Important Terms

• Word recognition – encountering a word in print and instantly knowing what it is.

• Word identification – encountering a word in print that is not recognized and using a strategy to figure out what it is.

• Decoding – identifying a word using letters and letter patterns.

• Strategy - a cognitive process that one consciously applies to a task.

• Skill - a cognitive process that has become automated.

• Penguin - a bird living in the Antarctic that is thought to be the cause of most reading problems.

• Confirmation bias – starting with a belief and selection only information that supports that predetermined belief.

• Academic discourse – sharing and evaluating ideas using reason and research.

• Context – something that matters.

If you’re looking for accessible, research-based information that slices through the endless loads of overly worded baloney, I would encourage you to subscribe to my free Substack, The Reading Instruction Show.

Substack: The Reading Instruction Show

https://thereadinginstructionshow.substack.com/

• Purpose: Readers will understand how the three cueing system is used to recognize words.

• Behavioral objective: After reading this chapter, the reader will throw a pie in the face of any clown who suggests that the three-cueing system (a) is a strategy, (b) is an approach to reading instruction, or (c) that it teaches students to guess at words.

The NAEP proficiency levels were arbitrarily defined (Bracey, 2008; Ravitch, 2012; Reinking, Hruby, & Risko, 2023). These levels should be interpreted with extreme caution (Vaulton, 2025). The National Center for Education Statistics website provides three reasons for this (NCES, 2025):

1. Proficiency levels are based on desired expectations. Meaning that these levels are aspirational not mathematical.

2. These proficiency levels are currently being used on a trial basis.

3. Further evidence is needed to determine if these proficiency levels are “reasonable, valid, and informative”.

If you’re looking for accessible, research-based information that slices through the endless loads of overly worded baloney, I would encourage you to subscribe to my free Substack, The Reading Instruction Show.

Substack: The Reading Instruction Show

https://thereadinginstructionshow.substack.com/

Reading is a thinking process, not a responding-to-stimuli process or a sounding-out-words process. And since cognitive psychology studies human thinking; it makes good sense to examine the reading process from a cognitive or thinking perspective using the information processing model.

• Purpose statement: The reader will develop a basic understanding of reading from a cognitive perspective.

• Behavioral objective: After reading this chapter, the reader will be able to explain why penguins continue to insist the Dr. Johnson doesn’t believe in direct and explicit phonics instruction.

https://thereadinginstructionshow.substack.com/p/reading-and-the-information-processing

Important Terms

• Round-robin reading – going around the table or around the room and having each student in turn read a section of text out loud. This is a teaching strategy that should very rarely (if ever) be used.

• Popcorn reading – a form of round-robin reading except that the teacher randomly selects students to read a section of text out loud. This is designed to keep all students paying attention and on their toes. This is a teaching strategy that should very rarely (if ever) be used.

• Metacognition – thinking about thinking. In the context of reading, it means to pause and check for understanding. Does it make sense? Does it fit in the paragraph?

• Word recognition – you see a word in print an instantly know what it is.

• Word identification – you see and word in print that you don’t recognize. You must consciously employ some strategy to recognize it.

• Clown – a humorous circus performer. In the context of reading, it’s the term used to denote one who thinks they know a great deal about something when in fact, they know very little.

• Penguin or phonics penguin - one who thinks that heavy phonics and decoding should be the primary focus of early reading instruction. Every reading problem becomes a phonics problem and every solution becomes a phonics solution because that’s all they know.

• Lexicon – the dictionary in your head. These are all the words in your vocabulary. These words are known at various levels.

If you’re looking for accessible, research-based information that slices through the endless loads of overly worded baloney, I would encourage you to subscribe to my free Substack, The Reading Instruction Show.

Substack: The Reading Instruction Show

https://thereadinginstructionshow.substack.com/