Trusted Sources and Voices on the Science of Reading
Experts, Journals, and Studies with Reliable Information on the Science of Reading
There’s so much information available on the Science of Reading, and as educators strive to make instructional decisions in an informed way, based on evidence and supported by cognitive science, the amount of information to sift through can be overwhelming. In addition to the sheer amount of information is the quality of the information — not all articles are research, and not all studies are equal in terms of validity or translation to classroom practices.
To help educators think about their approach to navigating research in service of literacy instruction, we asked reading experts Jan Hasbrouck and Tim Shanahan for their thoughts on the current landscape of literacy research in reltaion to the Science of Reading. Then, we collected a few reliable sources for you to begin (or continue) your literacy learning journey.
Trusted Voices
From Jan Hasbrouck:
It’s fine to subscribe to journals and go to conferences and listen to people share their research. But understand that you should never change your practice based on a single study. We need a convergence of evidence, over time, in well-constructed studies, analyzed by smart people. We need more folks like the National Reading Panel to do that important work that has positively and profoundly influenced our work in schools, over the last 20 years.
I do think the other important thing is tools and knowledge. There’s a lot of discussion about that these days; there are a lot of options for teachers post-college, university training, independent — to learn more about reading and understand the research.
But it is both of those things — tools and knowledge — and there need to be wise and trusted voices giving guidance to people about how to sort through all of this research.
From Doug Fisher:
The problem with the way we sometimes do studies is that we compare to nothing. We’ll say “oh my gosh this was amazing”, but when you calculate the effect size, it was minimal. And that’s why I got into effect sizes; that’s why most journals are now requiring effect sizes — because for that investment of time, effort, and money, what was the return? How do you measure [effectiveness] when we see that some of the evidence is minimal? These studies need to be compared to doing business as usual; they shouldn’t be compared to the absence of doing something. If you go way back to the National Reading Panel, they summarized the quantitative research [meta-analysis] in all five of those areas of reading and said, “Here’s the preponderance of evidence on what we have to have to teach children to read.”
From Timothy Shanahan:
There are those kinds of sources [studies that compare to nothing] and it’s not bad to try to monitor those and the kinds of meta-analyses that Doug was talking about, but I would also say that when someone is telling you that the “research says” or the “science of reading” says, educators just have to be less afraid of this stuff and start asking some really basic questions like “What research evidence do you have?” and “This approach was found to be better than what?”
Trusted Sources
Taking this advice to heart, it inspires us to go out and dig for those meta-analyses and start asking the important questions. But, there is no governing body or organization with all of the research available for quick consumption, or a single entity giving programs a Science of Reaidng “seal of approval.” So where can educators go to find trusted research, and learn more about what the Science of Reading is, and what it means for instruction?
First, check out this guide by Dr. Tim Shanahan, Dr. Jan Hasbrouck, and a few of our internal experts on asking important questions about education research. This quick guide is intended to help you think critically about the information you find as you search for best practices and analyze the importance or impact of a study:
After you’re prepared to read the research, it’s time to find reliable sources. This list captures a few of the best sources, but it’s by no means comprehensive — if you’re new to the Science of Reading or looking to dig in further to specific aspects, these resources are an excellent place to start:
Organizations
- Institute for Education Sciences (IES) — often cited as the “gold standard” for educational research, part of the U.S. DOE.
- What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) — part of IES, WWC reviews educational research to help educators make evidence-based decisions around what works.
- National Institute for Child Health and Development (NICHD) — in particular, the Division of Extramural Research (DER) which focuses on clinical and behavioral research about child development.
- National Academy of Education (NAE) — NAE’s mission is to improve education policy and practice, through research studies and professional development. Check out their Publications page for their reports, including Reaping the Rewards of the Reading for Understanding Initiative (which is available for download).
Journals
Note: Many of these journals require a membership or subscription to gain access to the articles.
- Scientific Studies of Reading (official journal of the Society for the Scientific Study of Reading) — Abstracts can be viewed/issues can be purchased at Taylor & Francis Online.
- Reading Research Quarterly (from ILA) — They have published a special issue focused entirely on the Science of Reading.
- Journal of Educational Psychology (from APA) — They also have a podcast, which is free to listen to: APA Journals Dialogue.
Specific Reports
The following is a list of specific research reports that drove the evidence-based design and development of our Wonders program:
- Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction: Reports of the subgroups (National Institute of Child Health and Human Development [NICHHD], 2000). This source presents an extensive, detailed research review related to five broad categories. In cases where the data were of sufficient quality and uniformity, research results were summarized in a meta-analysis, a method for statistically combining research results across an entire body of research studies.
- Preventing reading difficulties in young children, a review of research on early childhood reading commissioned by the National Research Council (Snow, Burns, & Griffin, 1998). This source represents a broad-ranging research summary and review, but without inclusion of specific details of the research.
- Writing to Read: Evidence for How Writing Can Improve Reading. A Report from the Carnegie Corporation of New York (Graham & Herbert, 2010). This document provides a meta-analysis of research on the effects of specific types of writing interventions found to enhance students’ reading skills.
- Writing Next: Effective Strategies to Improve Writing of Adolescents in Middle and High Schools. A Report from the Carnegie Corporation of New York (Graham & Perin, 2007). This report provides a review of research-based techniques designed to enhance the writing skills of 4th to 12th grade students.
- Improving Reading Comprehension in Kindergarten Through 3rd Grade: A Practice Guide. (Shanahan, Callison, Carriere, Duke, Pearson, Schatschneider, & Torgesen, 2010). This article contains recommended research-based practices in reading, according to level of evidence.
- Ending the Reading Wars: Reading Acquisition from Novice to Expert. (Castles, Rastle, & Nation, 2018). There is intense public interest in questions surrounding how children learn to read and how they can best be taught. There remains a wide gap between the state of research knowledge about learning to read and the state of public understanding. The aim of this article is to fill this gap.
For more on the Science of Reading, visit mheonline.com/SOR.
