Educators have debated for years about which method is best to teach reading for the English language. There are three main methods,
phonics,
whole language and
balanced literacy. There are also a variety of other areas and practices such as
phonemic awareness, fluency, reading comprehension, sight words and sight vocabulary, the three-cueing system (the searchlights model in England),
guided reading,
shared reading, and
leveled reading. Each practice is employed in different manners depending on the country and the specific school division. In 2001, some researchers reached two conclusions: 1) "mastering the alphabetic principle is essential" and 2) "instructional techniques (namely, phonics) that teach this principle directly are more effective than those that do not". However, while they make it clear they have some fundamental disagreements with some of the claims made by whole-language advocates, some principles of whole-language have value such as the need to ensure that students are enthusiastic about books and eager to learn to read.
Phonics emphasizes the
alphabetic principle – the idea that letters (
graphemes) represent the sounds of speech (
phonemes). It is taught in a variety of ways; some are systematic and others are unsystematic. Unsystematic phonics teaches phonics on a "when needed" basis and in no particular sequence.
Systematic phonics uses a planned, sequential introduction of a set of phonic elements along with
explicit teaching and practice of those elements. The
National Reading Panel (NRP) concluded that systematic phonics instruction is more effective than unsystematic phonics or non-phonics instruction. Phonics approaches include analogy phonics, analytic phonics, embedded phonics with mini-lessons, phonics through spelling, structured literacy, and synthetic phonics. According to a 2018 review of research related to
English speaking poor readers, phonics training is effective for improving literacy-related skills, particularly the fluent reading of words and non-words, and the accurate reading of irregular words. In addition, phonics produces higher achievement for all beginning readers, and the greatest improvement is experienced by students who are at risk of failing to learn to read. While some children can infer these rules on their own, some need explicit instruction on phonics rules. Some phonics instruction has marked benefits such as the expansion of a student's vocabulary. Overall, children who are directly taught phonics are better at reading, spelling, and comprehension. A challenge in teaching phonics is that in some languages, such as English, complex letter-sound correspondences can confuse beginning readers. For this reason, it is recommended that teachers of English reading begin by introducing the "most frequent sounds" and the "common spellings", and save the less frequent sounds and complex spellings for later (e.g. the sounds /s/ and /t/ before /v/ and /w/; and the spellings c
ake before
eight and
cat before du
ck). Phonics is gaining
world-wide acceptance.
Combining phonics with other literacy instruction Phonics is taught in many different ways and it is often taught together with some of the following: oral language skills, concepts about print,
phonological awareness,
phonemic awareness,
phonology, oral reading
fluency, vocabulary,
syllables,
reading comprehension,
spelling, word study,
cooperative learning,
multisensory learning, and
guided reading. And, phonics is often featured in discussions about
science of reading, and
evidence-based practices. The
National Reading Panel (U.S. 2000) is clear that "systematic phonics instruction should be integrated with other reading instruction to create a balanced reading program". It suggests that phonics be taught together with phonemic awareness, oral fluency, vocabulary and comprehension.
Researcher and educator Timothy Shanahan, a member of that panel, recommends that primary students receive 60–90 minutes per day of explicit, systematic, literacy instruction time; and that it be divided equally between a) words and word parts (e.g. letters, sounds, decoding and phonemic awareness), b) oral reading fluency, c) reading comprehension, and d) writing. Furthermore, he states that "the phonemic awareness skills found to give the greatest reading advantage to kindergarten and first-grade children are
segmenting and blending". The Ontario Association of Deans of Education (Canada) published research Monograph # 37 entitled
Supporting early language and literacy with suggestions for parents and teachers in helping children prior to grade one. It covers the areas of letter names and letter-sound correspondence (phonics), as well as conversation, play-based learning, print, phonological awareness, shared reading, and vocabulary.
Effectiveness of programs Some researchers report that teaching reading without teaching phonics is harmful to large numbers of students, yet not all phonics teaching programs produce effective results. The reason is that the effectiveness of a program depends on using the right curriculum together with the appropriate approach to instruction techniques, classroom management, grouping, and other factors. Louisa Moats, a teacher, psychologist and researcher, has long advocated for reading instruction that is direct, explicit and systematic, covering phoneme awareness, decoding, comprehension, literature appreciation, and daily exposure to a variety of texts. She maintains that "reading failure can be prevented in all but a small percentage of children with serious learning disorders. It is possible to teach most students how to read if we start early and follow the significant body of research showing which practices are most effective". Interest in
evidence-based education appears to be growing. In 2021,
Best evidence encyclopedia (BEE) released a review of research on 51 different programs for struggling readers in elementary schools. Many of the programs used phonics-based teaching and/or one or more of the following:
cooperative learning, technology-supported adaptive instruction (see
Educational technology),
metacognitive skills,
phonemic awareness, word reading,
fluency,
vocabulary,
multisensory learning,
spelling,
guided reading,
reading comprehension, word analysis, structured
curriculum, and
balanced literacy (non-phonetic approach). The BEE review concludes that a) outcomes were positive for one-to-one tutoring, b) outcomes were positive, but not as large, for one-to-small group tutoring, c) there were no differences in outcomes between teachers and teaching assistants as tutors, d) technology-supported adaptive instruction did not have positive outcomes, e) whole-class approaches (mostly cooperative learning) and whole-school approaches incorporating tutoring obtained outcomes for struggling readers as large as those found for one-to-one tutoring, and benefitted many more students, and f) approaches mixing classroom and school improvements, with tutoring for the most
at-risk students, have the greatest potential for the largest numbers of struggling readers.
What works clearinghouse allows users to see the effectiveness of specific programs. For example, as of 2020 they have data on 231 literacy programs. If filtered by grade 1 only, 22 programs are returned (where other filter parameters are set as wide as possible). The WWC system provides more information about each program, as well as a comparison.
Evidence for ESSA (Center for Research and Reform in Education) offers free up-to-date information on current PK–12 programs in reading, writing, math, science, and others that meet the standards of the
Every Student Succeeds Act (U.S.).
ProvenTutoring.org a non-profit organization, is a resource for educators interested in research-proven tutoring programs. The programs it lists are proven effective in rigorous research as defined in the 2015 Every Student Succeeds Act. The Center for Research and Reform in Education at Johns Hopkins University provides the technical support to inform program selection.
Systematic phonics is not one specific method of teaching phonics; it is a term used to describe phonics approaches that are taught
explicitly and in a structured, systematic manner. They are
systematic because the letters and the sounds they relate to are taught in a specific sequence, as opposed to incidentally or on a "when needed" basis. The
National Reading Panel (NRP) in the U.S. concluded that systematic phonics instruction is more effective than unsystematic phonics or non-phonics instruction. The NRP also found that systematic phonics instruction is effective (with varying degrees) when delivered through one-to-one tutoring, small groups, and teaching classes of students; and is effective from kindergarten onward, the earlier the better. It helps significantly with word-reading skills and reading comprehension for kindergartners and 1st graders as well as for older struggling readers and reading-disabled students. Benefits to spelling were positive for kindergartners and 1st graders but not for older students. Systematic phonics is sometimes mischaracterised as "skill and drill" with little attention to meaning. However, researchers point out that this impression is false. Teachers can use engaging games or materials to teach letter-sound connections, and it can also be incorporated with the reading of meaningful text. Phonics can be taught systematically in a variety of ways, such as analogy phonics, analytic phonics, phonics through spelling, and synthetic phonics. However, their effectiveness varies considerably because the methods differ in such areas as the range of letter-sound coverage, the structure of the lesson plans, and the time devoted to specific instructions. Systematic phonics has gained increased acceptance in different parts of the world since the completion of four major studies into teaching reading; one in the US in 2000, another in the UK in 2006, and another in Canada in 2022. In fact, systematic phonics in the UK is known as
synthetic phonics. Beginning as early as 2014, several states in the United States have changed their curriculum to include systematic phonics instruction in elementary school. In 2018, the State
Government of Victoria, Australia, published a website containing a comprehensive Literacy Teaching Toolkit including Effective Reading Instruction, Phonics, and Sample Phonics Lessons.
Analytic phonics and analogy phonics Analytic phonics does not involve pronouncing individual sounds (phonemes) in isolation and blending the sounds, as is done in synthetic phonics. Rather, it is taught at the word level and students learn to analyze letter-sound relationships once the word is identified. For example, students analyze letter-sound correspondences such as the
ou spelling of in shr
ouds. Also, students might be asked to practice saying words with similar sounds such as
ball,
bat and
bite. Furthermore, students are taught consonant blends (separate, adjacent consonants) as units, such as
break or
shrouds.
Analogy phonics is a particular type of
analytic phonics in which the teacher has students analyze phonic elements according to the speech sounds (
phonograms) in the word. For example, a type of phonogram (known in linguistics as a
rime) is composed of the vowel and the consonant sounds that follow it (e.g. in the words
cat, mat and sat, the rime is
"at".) Teachers using the analogy method may have students memorize a bank of phonograms, such as
-at or
-am, or use
word families (e.g. c
an, r
an, m
an, or m
ay, pl
ay, s
ay). There have been studies on the effectiveness of instruction using analytic phonics vs. synthetic phonics. Johnston et al. (2012) conducted experimental research studies that tested the effectiveness of phonics learning instruction among 10 year old boys and girls. They used comparative data from the Clackmannanshire Report and chose 393 participants to compare synthetic phonics instruction and analytic phonics instruction. Although phonics skills are de-emphasised in whole language programs, some teachers include phonics "mini-lessons" when students struggle with words while reading from a book. Short lessons are included based on phonics elements the students are having trouble with, or on a new or difficult phonics pattern that appears in a class reading assignment. The focus on meaning is generally maintained, but the mini-lesson provides some time for focus on individual sounds and the letters that represent them. Embedded phonics is different from other methods because instruction is always in the context of literature rather than in separate lessons about distinct sounds and letters; and skills are taught when an opportunity arises, not systematically.
Phonics through spelling For some teachers, this is a method of teaching spelling by using the sounds (phonemes). However, it can also be a method of teaching reading by focusing on the sounds and their spelling (i.e. phonemes and syllables). It is taught systematically with guided lessons conducted in a direct and explicit manner including appropriate feedback. Sometimes
mnemonic cards containing individual sounds are used to allow the student to practice saying the sounds that are related to a letter or letters (e.g.
a,
e,
i,
o,
u). Accuracy comes first, followed by speed. The sounds may be grouped by categories such as vowels that sound short (e.g. c-
a-t and s-
i-t). When the student is comfortable recognizing and saying the sounds, the following steps might be followed: a) the tutor says a target word and the student repeats it out loud, b) the student writes down each individual sound (letter) until the word is completely spelled, saying each sound as it is written, and c) the student says the entire word out loud. An alternate method would be to have the student use mnemonic cards to sound-out (spell) the target word. Typically, the instruction starts with sounds that have only one letter and simple CVC words such as
sat and
pin. Then it progresses to longer words, and sounds with more than one letter (e.g. h
ear and d
ay), and perhaps even syllables (e.g. wa-ter). Sometimes the student practices by saying (or sounding-out) cards that contain entire words.
Synthetic phonics Synthetic phonics, also known as blended phonics, is a systematic phonics method employed to teach students to read by
sounding out the letters and then
blend the sounds to form the word. This method involves learning how letters or letter groups represent individual sounds, and that those sounds are blended to form a word. For example,
shrouds would be read by pronouncing the sounds for each spelling,
sh, r, ou, d, s (IPA ), then blending those sounds orally to produce a spoken word,
sh – r – ou – d – s = shrouds (IPA ). The goal of a synthetic phonics instructional program is that students identify the sound-symbol correspondences and blend their phonemes automatically. Since 2005, synthetic phonics has become the accepted method of teaching reading (by phonics instruction) in England, Scotland and Australia. The 2005
Rose Report from the UK concluded that systematic
synthetic phonics was the most effective method for teaching reading. It also suggests the "best teaching" includes a brisk pace, engaging children's interest with
multi-sensory activities and stimulating resources, praise for effort and achievement; and above all, the full backing of the headteacher. It also has considerable support in some
States in the U.S. and some support from expert panels in
Canada. In the US, a pilot program using the Core Knowledge Early Literacy program that used this type of phonics approach showed significantly higher results in K–3 reading compared with comparison schools. In addition, several States such as California, Ohio, New York and Arkansas, are promoting the principles of synthetic phonics (see
synthetic phonics in the United States).
Structured literacy Structured literacy has many of the elements of
systematic phonics and few of the elements of balanced literacy. It is defined as explicit, systematic teaching that focuses on phonological awareness, word recognition, phonics and decoding, spelling, and syntax at the sentence and paragraph levels. It is considered to be beneficial for all early literacy learners, especially those with
dyslexia. According to the
International Dyslexia Association, structured literacy contains the elements of
phonology and
phonemic awareness, sound-symbol association (the
alphabetic principle and
phonics),
syllables,
morphology,
syntax, and
semantics. The elements are taught using methods that are systematic, cumulative, explicit,
multisensory, and use diagnostic assessment. A meta-analysis published in 2024 concluded that
Structured literacy approaches "tend to yield larger positive effects on student learning as compared to
balanced literacy approaches". Structured literacy was found to have a mean unweighted
effect size of .47, and a fixed weighted mean effect size of .44. (meta-analysis 2024) There is general agreement that SL is beneficial for all
early literacy learners, especially those with
reading disabilities such as
dyslexia. However, according to professor
Mark Seidenberg, while SL is necessary for students with special needs (e.g., to overcome dyslexia), he suggests that teachers strike a balance between
implicit instruction and explicit instruction, with explicit instruction for all students at the start, followed by implicit instruction for all students except dyslexics (who continue to receive explicit instruction as required) On the other hand, others worry that this approach could prompt educators "to abandon research-tested practices that are only just now securing a foothold in districts". And, still others suggest that one solution to
differentiated instruction might be to utilize the "walk to read" approach. Another example of using a
structured approach to teach reading is the foundational-skills curriculum, UFLI Foundations, developed by researchers at the University of Florida Literacy Institute. Using this program, kindergarten and 1st-grade students progressed much faster in reading skills than students receiving business-as-usual instruction. girls
sit outside their school, reading books they received at a rural school book party.
Related areas Phonemic awareness Phonemic awareness (PA) is the process by which the
phonemes (sounds of oral language) are heard, interpreted, understood and manipulated – unrelated to their
grapheme (written language). It is a sub-set of
Phonological awareness that includes the manipulation of
rhymes,
syllables, and
onsets and
rimes, and is most prevalent in alphabetic systems. The specific part of speech depends on the
writing system employed. The
National Reading Panel (NPR) concluded that phonemic awareness improves a learner's ability to learn to read. When teaching phonemic awareness, the NRP found that better results were obtained with focused and explicit instruction of one or two elements, over five or more hours, in small groups, and using the corresponding
graphemes (letters). See also
Speech perception. In one instance, a 2014 program of advanced phonemic awareness training (without using the corresponding letters) improved the PA but not the word reading. Some research has concluded that "reading outcomes are stronger when phonemic awareness is taught with print", and as mentioned earlier, the most effective way of teaching phonemic awareness is through segmenting and blending, a key part of
synthetic phonics.
Vocabulary A critical aspect of reading comprehension is vocabulary development.
Sight vocabulary vs. sight words Sight words (i.e. high-frequency words), sometimes called the
look-say or
whole-word method, are
not a part of the phonics method. They are usually associated with
whole language and
balanced literacy where students are expected to memorize high-frequency words such as those on the
Dolch word list and the Fry word list (e.g. a, be, call, do, eat, fall, gave, etc.). The supposition (in whole language and balanced literacy) is that students will learn to read more easily if they memorize the most common words they will encounter, especially words that are not easily decoded (i.e. exceptions). On the other hand, using sight words as a method of teaching reading in English is seen as being at odds with the
alphabetic principle and treating English as though it was a
logographic language (e.g.
Chinese or
Japanese). In addition, according to research, whole-word memorization is "labor-intensive", requiring on average about 35 trials per word. Also, phonics advocates say that most words are decodable, so comparatively few words have to be memorized. And because a child will over time encounter many low-frequency words, "the phonological recoding mechanism is a very powerful, indeed essential, mechanism throughout reading development".
Sight vocabulary is a part of the phonics method. It describes words that are stored in long-term memory and read automatically. Skilled fully-alphabetic readers learn to store words in long-term memory without memorization (i.e. a mental dictionary), making reading and comprehension easier. "Once you know the sound-based way to decode, your mind learns what words look like, even if you're not especially trying to do so". The process, called
orthographic mapping, involves
decoding, crosschecking, mental marking and rereading. It takes significantly less time than memorization. This process works for fully-alphabetic readers when reading simple decodable words from left to right through the word.
Irregular words pose more of a challenge, yet research in 2018 concluded that "fully-alphabetic students" learn irregular words more easily when they use a process called
hierarchical decoding. In this process, students, rather than decode from left to right, are taught to focus attention on the irregular elements such as a vowel-digraph and a silent-e; for example, break (b – r –
ea – k), height (h –
eigh – t), touch (t –
ou – ch), and make (m –
a – k
e). Consequentially, they suggest that teachers and tutors should focus on "teaching decoding with more advanced vowel patterns before expecting young readers to tackle irregular words". Others recommend including high-frequency words (i.e. Fry word list) while teaching the "sound-symbol relations" (i.e. phonics).
Fluency Fluency is the ability to read orally with speed, accuracy, and
vocal expression. The ability to read fluently is one of several critical factors necessary for reading comprehension. If a reader is not fluent, it may be difficult to remember what has been read and to relate the ideas expressed in the text to their background knowledge. This accuracy and
automaticity of reading serves as a bridge between decoding and comprehension. One way to improve fluency is
rereading (the student rereads a passage aloud several times with vocal expression). Another is
assisted reading (the student visually reads a text while simultaneously hearing someone else fluently read the same text).
Reading comprehension The NRP describes reading comprehension as a complex
cognitive process in which a reader intentionally and interactively engages with the text. A US study published in 2024 found that English/language arts teachers across grades K-12 on average devote 23% of reading/language arts instruction to reading comprehension, however they are not regularly using research-based practices when helping students to understand text. The
science of reading says that reading comprehension is heavily dependent on word recognition (i.e., phonological awareness, decoding, etc.) and oral language comprehension (i.e., background knowledge, vocabulary, etc.). Phonological awareness and rapid naming predict reading comprehension in second grade but oral language skills account for an additional 13.8% of the variance. It has also been found that sustained content literacy intervention instruction that gradually builds thematic connections may help young children transfer their knowledge to related topics, leading to improved comprehension. The American educator,
Eric "E. D." Donald Hirsch Jr., suggests that students need to learn about something in order to read well. However, some researchers say reading comprehension instruction has become "content agnostic", focused on skill practice (such as "finding the main idea"), to the detriment of learning about science, history, and other disciplines. Instead, they say teachers should find ways to integrate content knowledge with reading and writing instruction. One approach is to merge the two – to embed literacy instruction into social studies and science. Another approach is to build content knowledge into reading classes, often called "high-quality or "content-rich" curricula. However, according to
Natalie Wexler, in her book
The Knowledge Gap, "making the shift to knowledge is as much about changing teachers' beliefs and daily practice as about changing the materials they're supposed to use".
Researcher and educator Timothy Shanahan believes the most effective way to improve reading comprehension skills is to teach students to summarize, develop an understanding of text structure, and paraphrase.
Spelling instruction and reading Evidence supports the strong synergy between reading (decoding) and
spelling (encoding), especially for children in kindergarten or grade one and elementary school students at risk for literacy difficulties. Students receiving encoding instruction and guided practice that included using (a) manipulatives such as letter tiles to learn phoneme-grapheme relationships and words and (b) writing phoneme-grapheme relationships and words made from these correspondences significantly outperformed contrast groups not receiving encoding instruction. According to a 2025 meta-analysis of spelling interventions for students with or at-risk for learning disabilities, among the various methods of teaching spelling only those with "phonemic approaches to spelling intervention" had a positive effect on word-reading.
Using embedded pictures, and mnemonic alphabet cards when teaching phonics Research supports the use of embedded, picture
mnemonic (memory support) alphabet cards when teaching letters and sounds, but not words.
Introducing the Letters - Faster vs. slower A study in 2019 concluded that, during the first year of school, introducing the letters at a faster pace yielded significantly better results, especially for the lower-performing students.
Whole language and related areas , such as Australia and the United Kingdom, it has lost favor or been abandoned because it is not supported by evidence. Some notable researchers have clearly stated their disapproval of
whole language and
whole-word teaching. In his 2009 book,
Reading in the brain, cognitive neuroscientist,
Stanislas Dehaene, said "cognitive psychology directly refutes any notion of teaching via a 'global' or 'whole language' method". He goes on to talk about "the myth of whole-word reading", saying it has been refuted by recent experiments. "We do not recognize a printed word through a holistic grasping of its contours, because our brain breaks it down into letters and graphemes". In addition, cognitive neuroscientist
Mark Seidenberg, in his 2017 book
Language at the speed of light, refers to whole language as a "theoretical zombie" because it persists despite a lack of supporting evidence. According to a survey in 2010, 68% of elementary school teachers in the United States profess to use balanced literacy. However, only 52% of teachers in the United States include
phonics in their definition of
balanced literacy. The National Reading Panel concluded that phonics must be integrated with instruction in phonemic awareness, vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension. And, some studies indicate that "the addition of language activities and tutoring to phonics produced larger effects than any of these components in isolation". They suggest that this may be a constructive way to view balanced reading instruction. However, balanced literacy has received criticism from researchers and others suggesting that, in many instances, it is merely
whole language by another name. According to phonics advocate and cognitive neuroscientist
Mark Seidenberg, balanced literacy allows educators to defuse the
reading wars while not making specific recommendations for change. He also says that struggling readers should not be encouraged to skip a challenging word, nor rely on pictures or semantic and syntactic cues to "guess at" a challenging word. Instead, they should use
evidence-based decoding methods such as
systematic phonics.
Three cueing system (Searchlights model) The three-cueing system (the searchlights model in England) is a theory that has been circulating since the 1980s, yet it is not supported by research. Its roots are in the theories proposed in the 1960s by
Ken Goodman and
Marie Clay that eventually became
whole language,
reading recovery and guided reading (e.g.,
Fountas and Pinnell early reading programs). As of 2010, 75% of teachers in the United States teach the three-cueing system. They also say, while a cueing system does help students to "make better guesses", it does not help when the words become more sophisticated, and it reduces the amount of practice time available to learn essential decoding skills.
Nell Duke, a professor of literacy, language, and culture at the University of Michigan School of Education says that "after the child has correctly read a sentence ... then they can use context to figure out the meaning of any word they don't understand". In the US, at least 11 states prohibit three-cueing in schools, and other States are considering doing so. In England, the
simple view of reading and
synthetic phonics are intended to replace "the searchlights multi-cueing model". The Department of Education in
Ontario, Canada, issued a statement saying they are "revising the elementary Language curriculum and the Grade 9 English course with scientific, evidence-based approaches that emphasize direct, explicit and systematic instruction, and removing references to unscientific discovery and inquiry-based learning, including the three-cueing system, by 2023."
Three Ps (3Ps) – Pause Prompt Praise The three Ps approach is used by teachers, tutors, and parents to guide oral reading practice with a struggling reader. For some, it is merely a variation of the above-mentioned
three-cueing system. However, for others it is very different. For example: when a student encounters a word they do not know or get it wrong, the three steps are: 1) pause to see if they can fix it themselves, even letting them read on a little, 2) prompt them with strategies to find the correct pronunciation, and 3) praise them directly and genuinely. In the
prompt step, the tutor does not suggest the student skip the word or guess the word based on the pictures or the first sound. Instead, they encourage students to use their decoding training to sound out the word and use the context (meaning) to confirm they have found the correct word.
Guided reading, reading workshop, shared reading, leveled reading, silent reading (and self-teaching) Guided reading is small group reading instruction that is intended to allow for the differences in students' reading abilities. While they are reading, students are encouraged to use strategies from the three-cueing system, the searchlights model, or MSV. It is no longer supported by the
Primary National Strategy in England as
synthetic phonics is the officially recognized method for teaching reading. In the United States, guided reading is part of the Reading Workshop model of reading instruction. The
reading workshop model provides students with a collection of books, allows them the choice of what to read, limits students' reading to texts that can be easily read by them, provides teaching through mini-lessons, and monitors and supports reading comprehension development through one-on-one teacher-student conferences. Some reports state that it is 'unlikely to lead to literacy success' for all students, particularly those lacking foundational skills.
Shared (oral) reading is an activity whereby the teacher and students read from a shared text that is determined to be at the students' reading level.
Leveled reading involves students reading from "leveled books" at an appropriate reading level. A student who struggles with a word is encouraged to use a cueing system (e.g. three-cueing, searchlights model or MSV) to guess its meaning. Many systems purport to gauge the students' reading levels using scales incorporating numbers, letters, colors, and lexile readability scores.
Silent reading (and self-teaching) is a common practice in elementary schools. A 2007 study in the United States found that, on average only 37% of class time was spent on active reading instruction or practice, and the most frequent activity was students reading silently. Based on the limited available studies on
silent reading, the
NRP concluded that independent silent reading did not prove an effective practice when used as the only type of reading instruction to develop fluency and other reading skills – particularly with students who have not yet developed critical alphabetic and word reading skills. Other studies indicate that, unlike silent reading, "oral reading increases phonological effects". According to some, the classroom method called DEAR (Drop everything and read) is not the best use of classroom time for students who are not yet fluent. However, according to the
self-teaching hypothesis, when fluent readers practice decoding words while reading silently, they learn what whole words look like (spelling), leading to improved fluency and comprehension. The suggestion is: "if some students are fluent readers, they could read silently while the teacher works with the struggling readers".
Reading wars: phonics vs. whole language For decades, the merits of phonics vs.
whole language have been debated. It is sometimes referred to as the
reading wars. Phonics was a popular way to learn reading in the 19th century.
William Holmes McGuffey (1800–1873), an American educator, author, and Presbyterian minister who had a lifelong interest in teaching children, compiled the first four of the
McGuffey Readers in 1836. In 1841
Horace Mann, the Secretary of the
Massachusetts Board of Education, advocated for a whole-word method of teaching reading to replace phonics. Others advocated for a return to phonics, such as
Rudolf Flesch in his book ''
Why Johnny Can't Read'' (1955). The whole-word method received support from
Kenneth J. Goodman who wrote an article in 1967 entitled
Reading: A psycholinguistic guessing game. In it, he says efficient reading is the result of the "skill in selecting the fewest, most productive cues necessary to produce guesses which are right the first time". Although not supported by scientific studies, the theory became very influential as the
whole language method. Since the 1970s some whole language supporters such as
Frank Smith, are unyielding in arguing that phonics should be taught little, if at all. Yet, other researchers say instruction in phonics and
phonemic awareness are "critically important" and "essential" to developing early reading skills. Furthermore, a 2017 study in the UK that compared teaching with phonics vs. teaching whole written words concluded that phonics is more effective, saying "our findings suggest that interventions aiming to improve the accuracy of reading aloud and/or comprehension in the early stages of learning should focus on the systematicity present in print-to-sound relationships, rather than attempting to teach direct access to the meanings of whole written words". More recently, some educators have advocated for the theory of
balanced literacy purported to combine phonics and whole language yet not necessarily consistently or systematically. It may include elements such as word study and phonics mini-lessons, differentiated learning, cueing, leveled reading, shared reading, guided reading, independent reading, and sight words. According to a survey in 2010, 68% of K–2 teachers in the United States practice balanced literacy; however, only 52% of teachers included
phonics in their definition of
balanced literacy. In addition, 75% of teachers teach the
three-cueing system (i.e., meaning/structure/visual or semantic/syntactic/graphophonic) that has its roots in whole language. In addition, some phonics supporters assert that
balanced literacy is merely
whole language by another name. And critics of whole language and sceptics of balanced literacy, such as neuroscientist
Mark Seidenberg, state that struggling readers should
not be encouraged to skip words they find puzzling or rely on semantic and syntactic cues to guess words. Over time a growing number of countries and states have put greater emphasis on phonics and other
evidence-based practices. This has focused attention on
Systematic phonics and
Structured literacy. (see
Phonics practices by country or region).
Tutoring in reading The use of tutoring to improve academic performance, including reading skills, is increasing. A multi-level study in 2023 about "High-Dosage Tutoring" programs for beginning readers concluded that "a convincing and robust body of research provides evidence that tutoring is an effective intervention to accelerate student learning, particularly for students that perform below academic thresholds". One-to-one tutoring is the most effective intervention for improving the reading achievement of struggling elementary school students, with a medium
effect size of 0.41. Small-group tutoring also improves students' literacy, with a small effect size of 0.24. A follow-up study to the
NRP concluded that, when added together, the combined effect of systematic phonics instruction (d=.24), effective one-to-one tutoring (d=.40), and systematic language activities (syntax, morphology, and etymology, d=.29) "may triple the effect of phonics alone". Another study suggests that phonologically based reading instruction for first-graders at risk for learning disabilities can be delivered by non-teachers. In the study, non-certified tutors gave students intensive one-to-one tutoring for 30 minutes, 4 days a week for one school year. The students outperformed untutored control students on measures of reading, spelling, and decoding; with
effect sizes ranging from .42 to 1.24. The tutoring included instruction in phonological skills, letter-sound correspondence, explicit decoding, rime analysis, writing, spelling, and reading phonetically controlled text. Although the effects diminished at the end of second grade, the tutored students continued to significantly outperform untutored students in decoding and spelling. Robert Slavin, of Best evidence Encyclopedia, says "only tutoring, both one-to-one and one-to-small group, in reading and mathematics, had an
effect size larger than +0.10 ... averages are around +0.30", and "well-trained teaching assistants using structured tutoring materials or software can obtain outcomes as good as those obtained by certified teachers as tutors". Other studies conclude that programs using non-teacher tutors can produce reading improvements for first-grade students, if the programs are carefully designed and structured, and tutors receive regular training and supervision. A meta-analysis in 2023 found that so-called
high-impact tutoring increased achievement by 3 to 15 months of learning across grade levels, and the best results came from programs that a) use teachers or paraprofessionals as tutors, b) are held in earlier grades, c) occur at least 3 days per week, and d) are held during school. According to a report in January 2026, the San Francisco school district is expanding a tutoring program in which the percentage of participating students reading at grade level increased from 24% to 54%. Not all tutoring programs produce the expected results. This is because, in part, "larger programs tend to have higher student-tutor ratios and less time spent in tutoring than smaller programs". In addition, with larger programs the quality of delivery and implementation is reduced. One study suggests schools should start tutoring programs early rather than wait until students show signs of struggling. However, tutoring programs can cost between $1,000 and $4,000 per student. Many parents seek out private tutors because they are unhappy with the results they see from their child's education system. However, those parents often face challenges when hiring private literacy tutors, including high demand, long waitlists, limited knowledge, a lack of tutors in their area, inadequately trained tutors, and costs. A study in Ontario, Canada, found that many families paid all or part of a psychoeducational assessment outside of the school, at an average cost to the parents of $1,800. In addition, most parents who accessed private tutoring services paid the median cost of $3,500. ==Teaching reading for logographic languages==