The Science of Reading: Four Forces That Modified, Distorted, or Ignored the Research Finding on Reading Comprehension

Abstract

ABSTRACT The science of reading is the latest version of the reading wars brought to national attention by the popular press. Although most of the popular press has focused on phonics and early reading, in this article, we chose to study what happened to the research on reading comprehension. By the beginning of the 21st century, there had emerged a mainstream view of reading comprehension and comprehension instruction. However, four factors distorted, impeded, and swamped the research findings. (1) Commercial publishers fit comprehension instruction into a curricular format that distorted the intent of the research. (2) The No Child Left Behind Act, with its high‐stakes testing and concomitant interim assessments, moved the focus in schools from developing comprehension to passing tests. (3) The publishers’ criteria for the Common Core State Standards promoted instruction that ran contrary to research findings. (4) Problems with the educational research, publication, development, and dissemination process itself further weakened the effect of research on practice. We conclude with suggestions for researchers to better communicate their results and procedures to other educators, suggestions for how the research community can have a greater impact on the development and review of commercial reading materials and policy initiatives, and suggestions for improving the education of future researchers, administrators, and teachers.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 36 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.