1. The Science of Reading: Foundations of Evidence-Based Instruction
The science of reading refers to the extensive body of converging research from multiple disciplines—cognitive psychology, neuroscience, linguistics, and education—that reveals how the brain learns to read. Unlike many educational trends that emerge from ideology or tradition, the science of reading is grounded in decades of empirical evidence about what actually works in teaching children to decode and comprehend text. For the TExES Science of Teaching Reading exam, understanding this research base is foundational to every other competency.
The movement toward science-based reading instruction gained significant momentum following the National Reading Panel (NRP) Report of 2000, which was commissioned by the U.S. Congress to evaluate the effectiveness of various approaches to reading instruction. The panel analyzed thousands of studies using rigorous meta-analytic methods and identified five essential components of effective reading instruction, often referred to as the Five Pillars of Reading.
1.1 The Five Pillars of Reading (National Reading Panel)
| Pillar | Definition | Key Instructional Practices |
|---|---|---|
| Phonemic Awareness | The ability to hear, identify, and manipulate individual sounds (phonemes) in spoken words | Blending, segmenting, substitution activities; Elkonin boxes; oral manipulation tasks |
| Phonics | Understanding the systematic and predictable relationships between written letters and spoken sounds | Systematic, explicit instruction in letter-sound correspondences; decodable texts; word-building activities |
| Fluency | The ability to read with speed, accuracy, and proper expression (prosody) | Repeated reading, choral reading, partner reading, reader's theater, timed readings |
| Vocabulary | Knowledge of word meanings and the ability to use words effectively in communication | Direct instruction, context clues, morphemic analysis, wide reading, semantic mapping |
| Comprehension | The ability to understand, interpret, and analyze text to construct meaning | Strategy instruction (predicting, questioning, summarizing, monitoring), graphic organizers, text structure analysis |
1.2 Explicit and Systematic Instruction
Explicit instruction is a hallmark of effective reading teaching. It means the teacher directly explains, models, and demonstrates skills rather than expecting students to discover them on their own. Explicit instruction follows a clear sequence: the teacher states the objective, models the skill ("I do"), guides practice with feedback ("We do"), and then releases students to independent practice ("You do"). This gradual release of responsibility model ensures students are supported at every stage of learning.
Systematic instruction means skills are taught in a carefully planned, logical sequence that moves from simpler to more complex. In phonics, for example, systematic instruction begins with the most common consonant and short vowel sounds before progressing to consonant blends, digraphs, long vowel patterns, and multisyllabic words. A systematic scope and sequence prevents gaps in knowledge and ensures all essential skills are covered.
Research consistently shows that explicit, systematic instruction produces significantly better outcomes than incidental or embedded approaches, particularly for students who are at risk for reading difficulties. This does not mean instruction must be scripted or joyless—effective teachers use explicit methods within engaging, purposeful literacy activities.
1.3 The Simple View of Reading
The Simple View of Reading (SVR), proposed by Gough and Tunmer (1986), provides an elegant framework for understanding reading ability. The formula is:
Reading Comprehension = Decoding × Language Comprehension
This model makes clear that reading comprehension is not a single skill but the product of two distinct but equally important abilities. Decoding refers to the ability to translate printed text into speech (word recognition). Language comprehension refers to the ability to understand the meaning of spoken language. Both must be present for reading comprehension to occur—if either factor is zero, reading comprehension is zero.
The SVR helps teachers diagnose reading difficulties by identifying which component is weak. A student who decodes well but has poor comprehension needs vocabulary and background knowledge support. A student who understands spoken language but cannot decode needs phonics and word recognition instruction. Students weak in both need comprehensive intervention across all areas.
1.4 Scarborough's Reading Rope
Hollis Scarborough's Reading Rope (2001) visualizes skilled reading as a rope woven from multiple strands. The upper strands represent language comprehension (background knowledge, vocabulary, language structures, verbal reasoning, literacy knowledge). The lower strands represent word recognition (phonological awareness, decoding, sight recognition). As readers develop, these strands become increasingly intertwined and automatic, producing fluent, skilled reading.
The Reading Rope is especially valuable because it shows that reading is not simply about "learning to decode." Even strong decoders need rich language comprehension instruction. Conversely, students with strong oral language still need explicit instruction in the code. Both sets of strands must be developed and integrated for proficient reading to emerge.
1.5 Structured Literacy and the Balanced Literacy Debate
Structured literacy is the instructional approach most aligned with the science of reading. It is characterized by explicit, systematic, sequential, and cumulative instruction in phonology, sound-symbol association, syllable types, morphology, syntax, and semantics. Structured literacy approaches include Orton-Gillingham, Wilson Reading System, and other programs that follow these principles. The International Dyslexia Association endorses structured literacy as the most effective approach for all students, not just those with dyslexia.
Balanced literacy, by contrast, is an approach that typically includes guided reading, independent reading, read-alouds, shared reading, and writing workshops. Critics argue that balanced literacy often relies heavily on the three-cueing system (meaning, structure, visual cues), which encourages students to guess words from context and picture clues rather than decode them. Research shows that skilled readers do not guess words—they decode every word rapidly and automatically. The three-cueing system can actually prevent students from developing the decoding automaticity that the science of reading identifies as essential.
1.6 Stages of Reading Development
Jeanne Chall's Stages of Reading Development (1983) describe how reading ability progresses over time:
| Stage | Age/Grade | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Stage 0: Pre-reading | Birth to age 6 | Pretend reading, learns letter names, some letter-sound knowledge |
| Stage 1: Initial Reading/Decoding | Grades 1-2 | Learns letter-sound relationships, begins decoding simple words |
| Stage 2: Confirmation/Fluency | Grades 2-3 | Consolidates decoding skills, gains fluency through practice with familiar texts |
| Stage 3: Reading to Learn | Grades 4-8 | Uses reading as a tool to gain new information; vocabulary and knowledge expand |
| Stage 4: Multiple Viewpoints | High School | Reads widely, considers multiple perspectives and layers of meaning |
| Stage 5: Construction/Reconstruction | College and beyond | Reads selectively, synthesizes information, creates new knowledge |
Linnea Ehri's Phases of Word Reading Development describe how children progress in recognizing words:
| Phase | Characteristics |
|---|---|
| Pre-Alphabetic | Recognizes words by visual features (golden arches for McDonald's), no letter-sound connections |
| Partial Alphabetic | Uses some letter-sound connections (first and last letters) to read words, but incomplete knowledge |
| Full Alphabetic | Can decode words by mapping all graphemes to phonemes; reads unfamiliar words by sounding out |
| Consolidated Alphabetic | Recognizes multi-letter units (chunks, syllable patterns, morphemes) as single units, reads fluently |
1.7 The Matthew Effect in Reading
The Matthew Effect, described by Keith Stanovich (1986), refers to the phenomenon where students who read well read more, gain more vocabulary and knowledge, and continue to improve—while struggling readers read less, fall further behind, and the gap widens over time. This concept comes from the biblical parable: "the rich get richer and the poor get poorer." The Matthew Effect underscores the critical importance of early, effective reading instruction. Students who do not develop strong decoding skills by the end of first or second grade face an increasingly uphill battle because their peers are gaining reading volume and knowledge at an accelerating rate.
1.8 Response to Intervention (RTI) and Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS)
The RTI/MTSS framework provides a structured approach for identifying and supporting struggling readers through increasingly intensive tiers of instruction:
| Tier | Description | Students Served |
|---|---|---|
| Tier 1 | High-quality, evidence-based core instruction in the general classroom; universal screening to identify at-risk students | All students (approximately 80% respond successfully) |
| Tier 2 | Targeted small-group intervention (3-5 students) in addition to core instruction; progress monitoring every 1-2 weeks | At-risk students (approximately 15% of students need this level) |
| Tier 3 | Intensive, individualized intervention (1:1 or very small group); frequent progress monitoring; may lead to special education referral | Students with significant difficulties (approximately 5% of students) |
Key principles of effective RTI/MTSS implementation include: using validated screening tools to identify at-risk students early, providing evidence-based interventions that are well-matched to student needs, monitoring student progress regularly with reliable measures, and making data-driven decisions about when to increase or decrease intensity of support. The goal is to prevent reading failure before it becomes entrenched, rather than waiting for students to fail before providing help.
2. Key Concepts for Exam Preparation
2.1 Connecting Theory to Practice
On the TExES exam, you will encounter questions that ask you to apply these theoretical frameworks to classroom scenarios. For instance, a question might describe a student who reads words accurately but has poor comprehension, and ask you to identify which component of the Simple View of Reading is the likely area of weakness (language comprehension). Or you might be asked to identify the most appropriate tier of intervention for a student who has not responded to small-group instruction (Tier 3).
Understanding the distinction between explicit/systematic instruction and approaches that rely on guessing or incidental learning is critical. The exam consistently favors answers that reflect direct, systematic teaching of reading skills with ongoing assessment and adjustment. When presented with answer options, look for choices that describe the teacher modeling skills, providing guided practice, using systematic sequences, and monitoring student progress with data.
2.2 Evidence-Based vs. Non-Evidence-Based Practices
| Evidence-Based Practice | Non-Evidence-Based Practice |
|---|---|
| Systematic phonics instruction with decodable texts | Three-cueing system (guessing from pictures/context) |
| Explicit teaching of phonemic awareness skills | Expecting phonemic awareness to develop naturally through exposure |
| Repeated reading for fluency development | Round-robin reading (students take turns reading aloud) |
| Direct vocabulary instruction with multiple exposures | Looking up definitions in the dictionary as primary vocabulary instruction |
| Strategy instruction with gradual release | Assigning comprehension questions without teaching strategies |
The science of reading has fundamentally reshaped our understanding of effective literacy instruction. Teachers who understand the research base—the NRP findings, the Simple View of Reading, Scarborough's Rope, Ehri's phases, and the RTI framework—are equipped to make informed instructional decisions that give every student the best chance of becoming a skilled, confident reader.