The Science of Reading Is Not a Silver Bullet

If we want to build proficient readers, we must first build proficient reading teachers. We need more than just a manual for a new program; we need a deep understanding of how the reading brain develops.

The Science of Reading: Knowing What to Do

The Science of Reading is our guide, pointing us toward the essential components:

Phonological Awareness and Phonics: 

We must understand how the brain processes sounds and how to teach the systematic link between sounds and letters—a nonnegotiable step for decoding.

Language Development: 

Everything from early oral language to semantics. Reading is about making meaning. Without a strong language foundation, sounding out words will not lead to comprehension. 

Literacy Development Stages: 

This expertise allows us to meet every student precisely where they are to travel the path to becoming a proficient reader. 

Diversity in Reading: 

We teach diverse learners; therefore, we must understand how to effectively support English learners and students with dyslexia, and how students with diverse linguistic and cultural backgrounds influence the reading process. 

Once we have a deep understanding of how the brain learns to read, we then need the skills. Teachers must be trained in a coherent, systematic approach that explicitly builds literacy, including explicit phonics instruction, fluency practice, integrating vocabulary and comprehension, as well as writing as a literacy tool. 

The Science of Reading: Knowing How to Do It

But here is where the rubber hits the road. Knowing what to do is one thing; knowing how to differentiate it for 30 unique learners, including five students with IEPs and four multilingual learners, is another challenge entirely. This is why the Science of Reading is so complex to implement correctly. It requires finesse, not just fidelity to a script. 

This brings me to my biggest frustration: the often narrow focus on academic data—test scores—without considering crucial contextual data.

In states that use high-stakes reading assessments for third-graders, the policies are designed to measure a child’s reading status at that point in time. Teachers are often judged solely on those scores. Yet, no one ever factors in the essential contextual data points:

• How many school days had that student actually been in the classroom?
• How many times had they moved districts or schools in a single year?
• How many times had they been retained in a grade?
• What was their actual attendance rate compared to their peers?

Teachers are asked to fix profound, systemic gaps in 180 days, often with students who have missed chunks of critical instruction for years. They are given a Band-Aid (a new curriculum) when the patient needs intensive, long-term instruction, coaching and resources.

To truly implement the Science of Reading, teachers need time, proper training and resources.

We need assessment and data literacy to use that information effectively to adjust instruction.

We need training on tiered support models for differentiation and inclusion to support multilingual learners and students with disabilities through scaffolded, culturally responsive teaching.

We need ongoing professional learning to embed evolving research in our pedagogy. This is the art and heart of teaching, born from deep training, understanding and implementation. 

And, dare I say, both teachers and students need equitable access to both literacy instruction and resources.

All this comes from a shift in mindset. We must believe that all students can learn to read, and we need the patience and persistence to support them. But administrators and policymakers must also show the patience and persistence to invest in their teachers.

The call for everyone making these high-stakes decisions is simple: Get in a classroom for a week. Spend time with teachers and actually listen to them. Experience the sheer complexity of implementing a comprehensive, research-based framework like the Science of Reading with a diverse classroom of 30 students.

We can’t solve an educational crisis with incomplete data and temporary fixes. The true silver bullet is not the Science of Reading itself, but the profound, sustained investment in the educators tasked with translating that science into individualized practice for every unique child. We must shift our focus from obsessing over the final data point to empowering the teachers who navigate the intricate, day-to-day reality of the classroom—the how, the who and the context. Ultimately, if we truly value literacy, we will stop demanding quick fixes and start investing in the time, training and respect our teachers need to build not just proficient readers, but a stronger, more equitable future.

Getting Support: Reading Professional Development

A powerful way to support our teachers is with the AFT’s reading professional development. My first experience with the AFT’s reading courses was profoundly transformational—it fundamentally shifted how I understood and approached reading instruction. Rooted in the Science of Reading, it offered not only instructional strategies but also a deep dive in the seminal and Tier Three research behind best practices and the how of implementation. Beyond the PD, the AFT also offers continued support with ongoing, job-embedded professional development. The entire collection of literacy courses has the power to reshape classroom instruction and student learning, and give rise to the evolution, and revolution, of reading instruction.