To the Editor:
I believe the EdWeek article 鈥�What Is Background Knowledge, and How Does It Fit Into the Science of Reading?鈥� (Jan. 30, 2023) is problematic. The 鈥渟cience of reading鈥� inspired by the National Reading Panel was never scientifically tested for efficacy by experts before it was presented as the only way to teach reading.
Try reading this. The topic is 鈥渞eading鈥�:
Ti is pssbleoi to rdea wtouthi snoudign otu wdros. I鈥檈v jtsu dmsteontrade it.
Instead of decoding the sentence, the brain must look for the message. And, to find the message, the brain must compare minimal phonetic information with all the knowledge and language you鈥檝e acquired to find something meaningful.
Those who promote decoding as reading鈥檚 required fundamental skill ignore the research cited in a 2006 article that shows who already know how to read when entering preschool, kindergarten, or 1st grade do so without ever being formally taught to decode. My grandson is one of them. He鈥檚 a 3rd grader and reads at a 5th/6th grade level.
The struggling readers I work with overcome their reading problems even though I never ask them to decode a single word. Using methods from my mentor Dee Tadlock, I help learners from ages 7 to 57 become readers by putting meaning first and guiding them to figure out how to use strategic phonetic information to anticipate the language in stories (what you did above to read the scrambled sentence).
My new readers (5- and 6-year-olds) do not learn to read鈥攐ne鈥攚ord鈥攁t鈥攁鈥攖ime鈥攚ith鈥攗gly鈥攑auses鈥攂etween鈥攅very鈥攚ord. There is no meaning in single words. Language is what we use to express meaning. Meaning, therefore, must come first.
Rhonda Stone
Parent Advocate & Reading Tutor/Trainer
Co-Author, Read Right! (McGraw-Hill, 2005)
Shelton, Wash.
