Language and Reading

Science of Reading Laws: Let’s Begin with the Facts

In the past five years, virtually every state has enacted legislation aimed at improving reading instruction—a wave of reform the Shanker Institute has been (and still is) following closely. The legislation is far from perfect. Some laws lack clarity or feel clunky — somewhat misaligned with the complexity of teaching and learning to read. Others are overly rigid, and have unenforceable mandates that do little to inspire educators' trust. 

These are all valid critiques—ones we at the Institute have raised ourselves. But because we’ve taken the time to read and code these laws, we also take issue with how some of the criticisms are framed. Often, sweeping generalizations dominate the public conversation, misrepresenting both the content and intent of these laws. In this commentary, we address several of the most common misconceptions.

But before jumping in, here is some context: a total of 118 laws in 23 states and the District of Columbia use the expression “science of reading” in at least one piece of legislation passed between 2019 and 2024. By contrast, language invoking the use of "evidence" and "research" appears in virtually all states. As we noted in our 2023 report, states vary significantly in how they define “science of reading” – a topic we may tackle separately. 

What is Next For the Science of Reading?

A unique gathering of educators, researchers, and advocates took place on March 1, 2025 at Planet Word in Washington, DC, as part of Emily Hanford’s Eyes On Reading series. This event featured Mark Seidenberg and Maryellen MacDonald under the provocative title, “What is Next for the Science of Reading?” The take-home message was undeniably powerful, though it may have left some educators searching for more specific connections to their classroom realities. I write this blog in the spirit of extending this conversation, as getting down to the specifics will depend on the joint work and ongoing dialogue between researchers and educators.

Out of School But in a Book: Leveraging the Socio-Cultural Aspects of Reading

So often, when we talk about reading, we focus on the technical or cognitive side of it – learning how students decode words and understand their meaning. While this makes sense because schools tend to prioritize the technical aspects of reading for beginning learners, the socio-cultural aspect of reading must not be forgotten. 

The socio-cultural aspect of reading refers to how our community, environment, and cultural background influence reading. The way that people learn to read, what they decide to read, and how they interpret what they read is largely influenced by their larger socio-cultural environment (Cartin, 2023). 

When you reflect on your experience learning to read, did just learning how to sound out words make you a strong reader? Or, did your environment play a role? Did learning how to sound out words in collaboration with your peers or the pride and joy from finishing your first book inspire you to keep reading? 

Only recently have some states – such as Minnesota, Michigan, and Florida – begun to include initiatives incorporating the community and environmental dimension of reading into their legislation. For example, Minnesota’s HF 2497 bill established a grant to support eligible after-school organizations in providing culturally affirming and enriching​ after-school programming that promotes positive learning activities, specifically including community engagement and literacy. Similarly, Michigan’s HB 4411 bill established an innovative community library fund to aid in furthering reading skills and address early childhood literacy gaps through the engagement and connection of students. Another example is Florida’s SB 2524 bill, which established a partnership with Just Read, Florida! to help distribute books at no cost to families to help instill a love of reading in students. Such initiatives can play a significant role in promoting childhood literacy and encourage young readers to view reading as a leisure and social activity. However, we need more states to adopt similar efforts to truly meet the needs of all students.

The Threat of Technology to Students' Reading Brains

As Maryland’s state leaders join their peers across the country to push forward with policy reforms grounded in the science of reading, we asked ourselves: by focusing primarily on instruction, are we addressing the full scope of challenges that impact reading proficiency? While improving the teaching of reading with evidence-based practices is critical, a significant issue remains underexplored: the impact of our digital culture on children’s ability to develop and maintain the capacity for sustained, focused, and reflective reading.

Some might question whether this type of reading is feasible in today’s fast-paced, distraction-filled digital world. However, as Maryanne Wolf persuasively argues, this level of deep engagement is both attainable and essential for developing critical thinking, empathy, and insight. Wolf describes deep reading as a journey into the "innermost sanctuary" of our hearts and minds. In that space, we don't just comprehend or absorb the author's words; we actively reflect on their ideas, going beyond them to develop our own. Deep reading nurtures the intellectual and emotional capacities that make us human. So, why is this form of reading most at risk today?

Reading science has shown that learning to read is not a natural process; it requires explicit, systematic instruction and practice (also here and here). Unlike spoken language, which humans instinctively acquire through exposure and interaction, reading is a skill that our brains are not biologically wired for. In other words, humans do not learn to read simply by being exposed to books or observing others reading. Therefore, the reading brain must be intentionally built repurposing and connecting areas of the brain; science of reading policy aims to ensure that all children receive the best instruction to achieve this goal. Yet, we are learning that structured literacy instruction in elementary school is not a one and done. To sustain and grow our reading capacity, we must actively nurture, use, and protect this magnificent infrastructure that is the reading brain. Because, as Wolf argues, the brain's plasticity is its greatest strength but also its Achilles' heel; what is built can be unbuilt. And that’s what our digital culture might be doing.

Demystifying the Science of Reading

Over the past year, the Albert Shanker Institute has been examining four years worth of literacy legislation — stay tuned for our report, which will be released soon. In discussing our findings with colleagues and friends, we often find ourselves starting from scratch, filling gaps, and debunking misconceptions. This post aims to address one question we frequently encounter.

What is the science of reading?

While organizations such as the Reading League have put out useful materials about what the science of reading is, we aim to keep it simple here. Essentially, the science of reading is synonymous with academic research on reading. It refers to the vast body of knowledge that scholars have accumulated over decades about how people learn to read. Thus, the phrase is a shorthand for work of hundreds of scholars in countless studies. This body of knowledge includes things that are known with certainty, those that we are just beginning to understand, and everything in between. Like any scientific field, reading science is dynamic and evolving. It is not settled.

Painting a Portrait of Professional Learning for the Science of Reading

Assumptions about homogeneity are baked into schools and schooling; grade levels are sorted by student age, classrooms by numbers of desks, and sets of standards specifying what to teach and when students will reach proficiency. While most people understand and would agree that students’ needs and rate of learning vary greatly, we seem to forget this when it comes to adult learning. Based upon this, we emphasize not all teachers need the same learning experiences and environments to develop expertise.

Teachers differ in the nature of their personal and professional experiences, in the assets and dispositions they bring to the job, in the role they play in their particular schools, and in their specific goals as educators. Thus, the professional learning opportunities available to them should not be one size fits all. This is easier said than done. Differentiating professional learning in any domain is complex, and reading is no exception. It is easier to book a speaker and order some materials than it is to design opportunities for professional learning that meet each educator where they are. Yet, for Science of Reading (SOR) based reforms to be implemented in ways that make a difference for students, coherent, contextualized, and engaging professional development on the SOR is crucial.  

As a wave of reading reform, legislation related to the SOR represents an attempt to focus instruction on the explicit teaching of foundational skills, based on research that affirms the importance of phonemic awareness and phonics in beginning reading. Many SOR reforms aim to boost the knowledge and skills of individual teachers, with less attention to the ecosystem of schooling where these teachers are embedded, or to how leaders and teachers collaborate to improve instruction. SOR reforms often mandate that districts adopt new curricula and teachers teach with these materials. But implementing SoR reforms is complex, as it simultaneously involves individual learning and organizational change. Therefore, as we have described here, here, and in this podcast, it is crucial to align professional development, curriculum, and leadership – the three pillars of the reading infrastructure. These pillars enable instructional improvement by creating organizational conditions for systemic change. In this post, we concentrate on the professional development pillar.  

Reading Opens The World

Our guest author today is Evelyn DeJesus, executive vice president of the American Federation of Teachers and a member of the board of directors of the Albert Shanker Institute.

Today I am going to be talking about a topic that is very close to my heart, reading instruction and literacy—the bedrock, the deepest foundation for what we do as educators. And I’ll also talk a bit about the AFT’s new, multimillion dollar, multi-year literacy campaign, Reading Opens the World

Literacy Instruction and the Science of Reading

Because strong reading and comprehension skills underlie everything else that we do in the classroom, the AFT has been “all in” on literacy for more than two decades. As President Randi Weingarten reminded us in her opening speech at TEACH last summer, “Over 20 years ago, the AFT first identified the need for educators—whatever their subject or level—to know more about research-based literacy.

A Recipe For Successful Literacy Instruction

As a former high school English teacher of nine years, I know how daunting it can be to tackle literacy instruction. You stress over the lack of resources. You crave more professional development. You worry about your assessment choices. You question your administrator’s support. On any given day, you have a stream of worries and concerns running through your mind. While many districts rely solely on the ever-changing state and federal literacy mandates to inform their instruction, there are many adjustments and services districts can provide within their own schools and classrooms to support students and teachers.

The infrastructure of school systems contributes heavily to literacy instruction and achievement (Gabriel & Woulfin, 2022). One effective way to support system-level literacy is through a district literacy plan. These plans serve as a way to bring together various stakeholders to form a committee intent on better supporting students and improving literacy practices. When preparing a district literacy plan, stakeholders must use a combination of ALL the following ingredients to create a recipe for successful literacy instruction that promotes student learning.

Vision Statement: A district literacy plan should open with and be centered around a vision statement for learning. The Glossary of Education Reform defines a vision statement as “a declaration that schools or other educational organizations use to describe their high-level goals for the future and what it hopes students will learn” (The Glossary of Education Reform, 2015). Essentially, a vision statement encompasses a district’s belief system about literacy and serves as a guide for their work.

Early Reading: Teacher Preparation

This is an updated excerpt from a publication I developed in 2000 while working for the AFT Educational Issues Department, “Putting Reading Front and Center: A Resource Guide for Union Advocacy.” By tapping the expertise of teachers of reading among members, local unions can use their collective voice to strengthen reading instruction.

New findings from 50 years of international research in such diverse feels as neuroscience, psychology, linguistics, cognitive science, and education have helped illuminate the process by which children learn to read. This research indicates that, although some children learn to read with relative ease, others will never learn unless they are taught in an organized, systematic way by a knowledgeable teacher using a well-designed instructional approach. And, although a large number of students come to school unprepared to achieve in reading, the reading difficulties of most at risk and struggling students could be prevented or ameliorated by literacy instruction that includes a range of research-based components and practices, unfortunately very few teachers of reading have been taught how to deliver such instruction.

Where We Are

Ask almost any elementary school teacher what he or she knew about the teaching of reading before entering the classroom, and the answer will be: “Not nearly enough.”