What is the National Reading Panel Report?
If we are to truly understand the shift from "Balanced Literacy" or "Whole Language" to the "Science of Reading" we have to understand where it restarted.
In the late 1990s, the National Reading Panel (NRP) was convened by the U.S. Congress to evaluate the effectiveness of different approaches to teaching children how to read. The goal was to provide a clear, evidence-based understanding of the best practices in reading instruction. The resulting report, published in 2000, has profoundly impacted reading education in the United States and beyond.
The Formation and Mission of the National Reading Panel
The National Reading Panel was established in 1997 as part of the federal Reading Excellence Act. The panel comprised 14 members, including leading scientists in reading research, representatives of colleges of education, reading teachers, educational administrators, and parents. Their mission was to assess the effectiveness of various approaches to reading instruction by reviewing existing research studies.
Methodology
The NRP's methodology was rigorous and systematic. The panel focused on studies that met high standards of scientific research, including randomized control trials and other well-designed experiments. The panel reviewed over 100,000 studies conducted since 1966 and 10,000 earlier studies. Their review process culminated in the identification of five critical areas of reading instruction: phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and text comprehension.
Key Findings
Phonemic Awareness: Phonemic awareness is the ability to hear, identify, and manipulate individual sounds—phonemes—in spoken words. This skill is foundational for learning to read. The NRP found that teaching phonemic awareness significantly improves children’s reading skills, including word reading, reading comprehension, and spelling.
Phonics: Phonics instruction teaches the relationship between letters and sounds, enabling readers to decode words. The panel found that systematic and explicit phonics instruction is more effective than non-systematic or no phonics instruction. This approach is particularly beneficial for kindergarteners and first graders, as it helps them develop early reading skills that are crucial for later success.
Fluency: Reading fluency is the ability to read with speed, accuracy, and proper expression. The NRP highlighted the importance of guided oral reading practices in developing fluency. Students who read aloud with feedback and guidance from teachers, parents, or peers show significant improvements in reading fluency and overall reading achievement.
Vocabulary: A robust vocabulary is essential for reading comprehension. The NRP found that vocabulary should be taught both directly and indirectly. Direct vocabulary instruction involves teaching specific words, while indirect instruction involves exposing students to new words through reading and conversation. Both methods are necessary to help students understand and use new vocabulary in context.
Text Comprehension: Text comprehension is the ultimate goal of reading—it involves understanding and interpreting what is read. The NRP identified several strategies that improve comprehension, including:
- Monitoring comprehension: Teaching students to be aware of their understanding of the text.
- Using graphic organizers: Visual aids that help students organize and relate information from the text.
- Answering questions: Encouraging students to answer questions about the text to improve understanding.
- Generating questions: Teaching students to ask their own questions about the text.
- Summarizing: Helping students identify the main ideas and summarize the content.
Implications for Teaching
The findings of the National Reading Panel have significant implications for reading instruction. Here are some practical ways that educators can implement these findings in the classroom:
Balanced Literacy Programs: The NRP's findings support a balanced approach to literacy instruction, integrating various methods to address the five critical areas. Educators should provide systematic and explicit instruction in phonemic awareness and phonics, while also promoting fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension through diverse activities and reading materials.
Professional Development: Teachers need ongoing professional development to stay informed about the best practices in reading instruction. Training programs should focus on the five key areas identified by the NRP and provide teachers with practical strategies for implementing these in their classrooms.
Early Intervention: Early identification and intervention for struggling readers are crucial. By addressing reading difficulties early, educators can prevent long-term reading problems. The NRP's findings underscore the importance of early instruction in phonemic awareness and phonics to build a strong foundation for future reading success.
Parental Involvement: Parents play a vital role in their children's reading development. Schools should encourage parents to engage in their children's reading activities and provide them with strategies to support reading at home. This can include reading aloud together, discussing books, and providing access to a variety of reading materials.
Use of Technology: Technology can be a valuable tool in reading instruction. Interactive software, e-books, and online resources can provide additional practice in phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. Educators should integrate technology in a way that complements traditional teaching methods.
Criticisms and Controversies
While the National Reading Panel Report has been widely influential, it has also faced criticisms and controversies. Some educators and researchers argue that the panel's focus on certain methodologies, such as phonics, downplays other important aspects of reading instruction, such as whole language approaches and the role of motivation in reading. Additionally, some critics contend that the report's emphasis on quantitative research overlooks the insights that qualitative studies can provide.
Continuing Impact and Relevance
Despite these criticisms, the NRP Report remains a cornerstone of reading instruction policy and practice. Its influence is evident in the widespread adoption of balanced literacy programs and the emphasis on evidence-based teaching strategies. Furthermore, the report has spurred ongoing research into effective reading instruction, contributing to the evolving understanding of how children learn to read.
In recent years, the science of reading has continued to advance, building on the foundation laid by the NRP. New research has further explored the cognitive processes involved in reading, the impact of socio-economic factors on reading development, and the most effective ways to support diverse learners. Educators and policymakers continue to rely on the principles outlined in the NRP Report while adapting to new findings and changing educational contexts.
The National Reading Panel Report represents a pivotal moment in the field of reading education. Its comprehensive review of research provided a clear, evidence-based framework for effective reading instruction, emphasizing the importance of phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. While it has faced criticisms, its impact on educational policy and practice is undeniable. As the science of reading continues to evolve, the NRP Report remains a valuable resource for educators, guiding the way toward more effective and inclusive reading instruction.
This is the beginning of a new series on the Science of Reading. The Science of Reading impacts how everyone including special education teachers teach reading to students regardless of their disability. The difference is the accommodations and modifications we make to help students access the material.
Chat Soon-
References
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). 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. U.S. Government Printing Office.
Shanahan, T. (2003). The National Reading Panel Report: Practical Advice for Teachers. Learning Point Associates.
Snow, C. E., Burns, M. S., & Griffin, P. (1998). Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Children. National Academy Press.
The NRP Report's enduring legacy underscores the importance of rigorous, evidence-based approaches to reading instruction, ensuring that all children have the opportunity to become proficient and enthusiastic readers.
The Importance of Oral Language for ELL Students in Reading and Writing
 |
| Scarborough's Rope |
Oral Language and Scarborough’s Rope
- Phonological Awareness: ELL students need to become familiar with the sounds of English. Phonological awareness, which includes recognizing and manipulating sounds, is crucial for decoding words during reading. If a student cannot hear and produce the sounds in a word, reading that word becomes significantly more challenging.
- Vocabulary Development: A robust vocabulary is essential for understanding and producing both spoken and written language. Oral language activities, such as storytelling and discussions, expose ELL students to new words and phrases in context, helping them to build their vocabulary. This, in turn, aids in reading comprehension and the ability to express ideas in writing.
- Syntax and Grammar: Understanding the structure of English sentences is crucial for both reading and writing. Through oral language practice, ELL students learn how words and phrases are organized in English. This knowledge helps them decode complex sentences while reading and construct grammatically correct sentences when writing.
- Listening Comprehension: Listening to spoken English helps ELL students develop an ear for the language, including intonation, rhythm, and stress patterns. Listening comprehension is directly related to reading comprehension; students who can understand spoken language are better equipped to understand written texts.
- Cultural and Pragmatic Understanding: Oral language also involves understanding the social use of language, which includes cultural nuances and pragmatic rules. This understanding helps ELL students navigate different contexts, which is important for both reading (e.g., understanding characters’ intentions in a story) and writing (e.g., knowing how to address different audiences)
Strategies to Support Oral Language Development
- Interactive Read-Alouds: Reading books aloud to students and engaging them in discussions about the story helps build vocabulary and comprehension skills. Ask open-ended questions that encourage students to think and talk about the text.
- Language-Rich Environments: Create a classroom environment that is rich in oral language opportunities. Label objects in the classroom, use word walls, and provide ample opportunities for students to engage in conversations, both with peers and adults.
- Explicit Vocabulary Instruction: Teach new words explicitly, using visuals, gestures, and examples to reinforce understanding. Encourage students to use new vocabulary in their speech and writing.
- Oral Language Activities: Incorporate activities such as storytelling, role-playing, and group discussions. These activities not only make learning fun but also provide meaningful contexts for using language.
- Peer Interactions: Pair ELL students with peers who are proficient in English. Peer interactions can provide models of fluent speech and offer opportunities for ELL students to practice speaking in a less formal, more supportive environment.
- Scaffolded Support: Provide scaffolded support by modeling correct language use, offering sentence starters, and gradually increasing the complexity of language tasks as students become more proficient.
Current Research
References
Why Unlocking Vocabulary is Key to Bridging the Gap for Students
The hard thing about waiting three months for iReady's classroom diagnostic data is not knowing how students will do after 10 weeks of intervention.
My state and building use iReady diagnostics three times a year for READ Plans and intervention data. (more on come on iReady-both loves and dislikes)
As a special education teacher, I only use this data to compare students to their peer group and see what kind of gains they had over the year. (I have a whole blog post coming on how my building uses iReady.)
My building relies on this information to make predictions about State testing outcomes and interventions.
For me, I look at the overall gains my students make on the five categories assessed each time. This year, I made a huge shift to building and creating a solid foundation in phonemic awareness and phonics.
The macro data showed students made huge gains when using both Heggerty and Yoshimoto Orton-Gillingham. We lived in controlled decodable and built vocabulary through morphology.
What didn’t improve???
Student’s vocabulary
On iReady, students’ scores either dropped or maintained.
I’m the first to tell you that you should never, ever make significant instructional decisions on a single piece of data. It could take you off a cliff.
But if you layer in IEP goal data and it shows everyone either made or is on target to meet their goals well within their IEP cycle …
Could layering in something, not a change continue that growth????
Could it support and build students’ vocabulary and not have all the growth drop off???
Why Focus on Vocabulary
When I explain the five reading components to parents, I use a pyramid. Phonemic awareness and phonics are the base of the pyramid. With vocabulary and comprehension coming after. Fluency is needed across all.
But what happens when you have weak word-level vocabulary????
What then? Let me explain how I landed here ...
All my phonics kiddos were placed in Orton-Gillingham. As the year progressed, the pacing of these groups slowed. In some cases stopping for a week or so on a concept, or phonogram or just working to get them unconfused. (English is so confusing.)
As lessons got more complex and the more layers students had to work with the more, I noticed other holes. Looking back at my lesson notes and comments about student progress within lessons it became more obvious that vocabulary was one thing students were struggling with.
To be clear, I'm not talking about Tier 3 subject-specific words. I'm talking about Tier 1 words--like chair, boil, broil, etc. (here is my previous post on Vocabulary Tiers)
Yes, about half of those I pull for OG do receive pull-out language support from a Speech-Language Pathologist.
The funny (or head-banging) thing about all their iReady Vocabulary score was the “can dos” all said to teach 5 words and all through read-aloud. (This is a great idea for classroom teachers; not so much for specialists.)
What Does the Research Say
The Science of Reading (SoR) is an evidence-based approach to teaching reading that is grounded in research from cognitive psychology, linguistics, and neuroscience. It emphasizes the importance of systematically teaching foundational skills to help students become proficient readers. One crucial aspect is phonemic awareness, which involves recognizing and manipulating individual sounds in spoken words.
By explicitly teaching students to understand the connection between letters and sounds through phonics instruction, they can decode words and read fluently. It's essential to provide activities that engage students in segmenting, blending, and manipulating sounds in words to strengthen their phonemic awareness and phonics skills.
Phonemic awareness refers to the ability to identify and manipulate individual sounds in spoken words. It is a critical skill that helps students understand the connection between letters and sounds. Phonics instruction teaches students the relationship between letters and sounds, enabling them to decode words and read fluently. Teachers should provide explicit instruction in these skills, using activities that involve segmenting, blending, and manipulating sounds in words.
Comprehension involves understanding and making meaning from text. Teachers can support comprehension by explicitly teaching strategies such as predicting, questioning, summarizing, and making connections. These strategies help students engage with the text, monitor their understanding, and make inferences. It is also essential to promote metacognition, encouraging students to think about their thinking and monitor their comprehension. By incorporating these strategies into instruction, teachers can help students become active and proficient readers.
What Does this Mean
SoR and Scarborough's Rope Model of Reading bring a new light to an old question surrounding phonics and vocabulary. The question is how to layer something in that doesn’t take away from the gains students have made.
I don’t know why this group of students have a weak vocabulary. I could blame COVID–these students were remote and hybrid during COVID. It could be the lack of direct, explicit instruction surrounding Tier 1 and Tier 2 vocabulary. Or it could be the lack of helping students make connections to previously taught vocabulary to new words.
Coming this semester, I’ll share how I plan to attack this and build students’ Tier 1 and Tier 2 vocabulary. I hope to find actionable, tangible ways for students to make gains that don’t take tons of time to get the most bang for my buck as a special education teacher all while doing my job as their special education teacher.
Chat soon-
I contribute to:
