Marnie Ginsberg

How long-standing and how deep is the science on early reading acquisition? Check out our hyperlinked timeline of history's heavy hitters. readingsimplified.com/science-shorts… #notnewnews #sor #scienceofreading @ehanford

@OnTrackReading @DanaPalubiak I haven't seen that issue widely but my sample size is not huge. I have many times seen kids fix a word before they were taught the new sound/spelling in that word. That's one reason why I think it's less essential to teach the order of frequency of sounds.

My experience with struggling readers is that they can easily be taught to test the vowel. That is, after all, what experienced readers do when they try to decipher the name of a new prescription drug. They can also be taught to try a specific sound of an ambiguous vowel on the first attempt. So our curricula always have them trying the short sound (our 1st sound) on the first attempt, and stop the chunk after the vowel sound (as you do.) Two examples: "casting" and "tasting". As you know, the linguistic syllables are similar (ca-sting and ta-sting) Once taught, the child gets "casting" on the first attempt. If they say "ta-sting" with an /a/ sound and don't continue, our correction is specifically this: "You said tasting." (rhyming it with casting) (Point to the letter "a") "What else can this be?" They then get "tasting." But, usually, they would just start switching on their own after being corrected like that a few times. Just pointing at the letter "a" without comment is enough after a bit, until they learn to just re-test on their own. The problem I see with not teaching the specific options is that they might jump to a real word with an unrealistic vowel sound. For example, they might go from "tasting" (w/ short-a) to "testing," especially if they're used to struggling and have developed a guessing habit. And it might even fit the context. (Tasting the soup, or testing the soup.)

This article asks the question I’ve been circling for months. We know how to improve early decoding. But if comprehension, curiosity, and engagement plateau later, then perhaps the question isn’t simply how we teach reading. It’s what we mean by literacy. 🔥👇👏🏼

Never did write anything else on that sadly! What you explain makes total sense. I just wonder what the process is when a person adjusts a mispronounced word? Do we actually test sounds we think fit the vowel, or are we searching for a meaningful word? I hope researchers dig into that.

I think you trained in Phono-Graphix, right? All I really did is organize what they did. They taught all the spellings of a sound, but didn't systematically link the overlap options. In our remedial program, when a kid learns "ow" is the /ow/ sound in "how" nothing is noted. But in the next lesson he learns the "ow" spelling is also the /oe/ sound in "grow." At that point he's asked if he's seen the digraph "ow" before. Of course, he has, just a lesson before. So I have them put a "2" over the "ow" heading of the /ow/ sound and now "ow" has become the /ow/../oe/ sound. It's a simple addition that organizes the sounds of "ow". Later, I do the same every time a letter or digraph repeats. Actually, in that same /oe/ mapping, the letter "o" appears, previously taught as /o/ in "hot". So it gets a "2" over it also, and now "o" is the /o/../oe/ sound. ' Later, during the mapping of the /oo/ sound, the letter "o" in "to" and "do" gets a "3" over it and now "o" is the /o/../oe/../oo/ sound. I did the same sort of organizing of their MS chunking method, adding a systematic way to chunk (much like yours) with a Main Rule (Stop each chunk after the vowel sound) and Three Exceptions (which are really cool too, because they all lock in 1st vowel sounds, i.e., the short sounds.) In the beginner's program (our new one, in field testing) I just tell the child the options up front, so the letter "i" is the /i/../ie/ sound. (The /ee/ sound in "ski" is added much later because it mainly appears in MS words.) That enables me to teach the word "I" in one of the very first lessons without making it a sight word. Ditto for "s." It's immediately named the /s/../z/ sound and the word "is" is the second word taught in the curriculum. The McGuinnesses presented very clear reasoning that a child of 5 could easily deal with that level of logic, as you no doubt know. I think you wrote a piece on one of their conclusions a couple years ago, either on 1 sound/many spellings or 1 spelling/many sounds. I recall mentioning to you that you should write the companion piece...not sure if you ever did.

@OnTrackReading @DanaPalubiak That was the first phonics approach I tried but I couldn't figure out how to adapt it to older readers as it sounds as if you did.

Yes, that seems reasonable once they've built the habit of testing their options (flexing the sounds.) I always liked the Spalding Method which specifically teaches the options from the start, then goes into spelling. She used the options to explain the spellings of words. Then I read a comment recently that said that a few Spalding-trained kids would "freeze up" when faced with a word they'd decoded with the wrong option. They didn't attempt to flex the sounds. I realized then that Ms. Spalding didn't really emphasize that skill explicitly even though she'd laid all the groundwork initially. I still think it's a good curriculum, way ahead of its time, but that could be a valid criticism. I don't have enough experience with it to really know, however.

@GardensR4Health Praise God for his skill and his heroism!

🚨WOW. Child Dramatically Rescued in Santa Cruz yesterday A 16yr old Lifeguard went VIRAL for the rescue, exhibiting STUNNING lifesaving skills As onlookers attempted to help, they too were almost swept away, the young lifeguard telling them to save themselves

We teach double letter consonants in our first few weeks so by the time they hit MS words, they aren't a stumbling block. I find that set for variability works primarily by building strong phonological processing and a Day 1 habit of flexing the sounds in the context of meaning. So, readers try reasonable choices when they misread a word without teaching them a particular order to test. I think they are pulling mostly from semantics at this point to test a vowel sound.

I would recommend considering the use of 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and even 4th options. The student learns the letter "a" as the /a/../ae/../o/ letter and the letter "e" as the /e/../ee/ letter, etc. (My sound notation is fairly obvious.) Then, if taught to systematically test those options in unfamiliar words, and in chunks of unfamiliar MS words, the MS method is useful for continuous rehearsal of the student's phonics knowledge. With vowel digraphs, we try to emphasize the most common option as the first choice, so "ea" is taught as /ee/../e/../ae/ (teach, head, great) and they are taught to test the /ee/ sound first. Anyway, I think it's a concept worth considering over short-a, long-a, and that other-a. But you might already deal with that another way? Incidentally, I'm trying to do this from the get-go, with four and five year olds. The third letter they learn is the letter "s" and we teach them to call it /s/../z/. The first letter is "i" which we teach initially as /i/../ie/ (and add the /ee/ sound in ski much later.) So, after learning three letters, "is" can be taught phonetically instead of as a "heart word" or "sight word," or as having them say "iss" and hoping they get to "is." I'm curious how you handle doubled consonants like bb, tt, mm, etc., in the chunking process.

Yes, @OnTrackReading this multisyllable approach is mostly similar to our approach at Reading Simplified except we don't teach 1st/2nd sounds, and, yes, guessing can die quickly with good coaching. Easy! Also, kids need to know more stuff AND they need to be better @ decoding: aerdf.org/new-research-f…

Adding @readsimplified so you see the above comment, Marnie. Also, the statement at the end about stopping guessing is not an uninformed guess on my part. I used the above method with close to two hundred struggling readers, many of the guessers. They typically started consciously applying the method after just a few lessons at the multisyllable level. Big plus: It's ridiculously easy to learn how to teach this method.

@thewrightjungle @karenvaites True! We have issues from all sides... But the SRI report cited was about schools implementing the "SOR" approach. It would be great if we had national data about how many schools are still digging their heels in with 3 cueing.

@karenvaites @ReadSimplified There is such an assumption here on Edu Twitter that all districts and teachers have adopted SoR and/or phonics in their classrooms. This isn't the case. We are not beyond the reading wars. We aren't beyond Whole Language or Balanced Literacy b/c the academics/influencers say so.

How to end pendulum swings in literacy: Clearly articulate the reasonable middle for teachers and education leaders in a way that incorporates all essential practices. Create curricula as well as guidance documents that illustrate and explain how schools can walk and chew gum at the same time in early graes, and beyond: teaching phonics while also building knowledge and vocabulary; ensuring all students have foundational skills while also making sure they work with whole books from the earliest grades; designing the ELA block to include all essential practices, including writing, without short-changing the importance of foundational skills. The method is in the models: We have known for a long time that the shape of curriculum influences teacher practice, whether we're talking about cueing or work with whole books. Some teachers modify their curricula heavily, but importantly, some don't. The way to ensure that pendulums continue to swing is to embrace the tribalism that has long pervaded the literacy space: For example: "You are Science of Reading, or you're the problem." Or, "The Science of Reading movement is so essentially good and important that we ought not critique its excesses." Or "Critiquing the Science of Reading movement for its excesses will invite Whole Language practices back into schools." Friends, this is simply not the case. Even Balanced Literacy standard-bearers have evolved with the SoR shifts. Lucy Calkins had revised her position on phonics before Emly Hanford's podcast was finsished; go listen to Episode 6 if you have forgotten. Calkins has aligned her decodable books with the UFLI Scope and Sequence. Whole Language frankly lacks a viable camp, and it's important to note this development. We are no longer in your mother's (or my mother's) Reading Wars. Please, all, let's evolve with the times.

@C_Hendrick 🫣

@ReadSimplified BURN THEM ALL

HURRAH!!!! I've been waiting for this.

@MeganGierka @karenvaites Yes, urgent!

@ReadSimplified @karenvaites It is so urgent. So few classrooms with kids even reading (and sometimes even speaking about academics). Fidelity to a fault with "HQ"IMs 😢

The Science of Reading movement has mutated into something causing more harm in public education than good.

@karenvaites Agreed! Thank you Karen. Yes, I like the "middle way." Education has a hard time with moderation...

I have had this conversation quite a few times lately. The consensus position: kids had books in hands in 1st and 2nd grade FAR more often in the pre-SOR era. Now, sticking kids in books without teaching them the code to the English language was ridiculous. Creating insane thresholds for kids’ decoding skills before you will put books ib their hands, or letting Word Work consume the foundational skills block every day (this survey!!!)… also ridiculous. We need to help teachers craft a middle way. I respect your work doing so with Reading Simplified. It should offer a model!

@MsDanielsStormy @waygroundpinata @waygroundai @KyleNiemis @ISTE_ASCD @tech_purpose @EdTech_K12 Could this work for quizzing teachers on their PD, too?

🎉Let me save you the scrolling… Let me help you find your WAY 👀 …to the Wayground announcement you did not want to miss. 🏆 Wayground is officially an ISTE Best of Show 2026 winner — Elementary and Secondary! There is a way… and it’s Wayground. NO WAY? ....YES WAY. 🔗 Link + pics below! techlearning.com/awards/tech-an…

I can't stop thinking about this report. In 58% of the observed K-2 classrooms, students did not get to read text longer than individual words during their foundational skills block. This is a HUGE problem. Word level accuracy does not automatically transfer to reading fluency. Students need to spend way more time reading real stuff. Even in K, individual words are not sufficient. Sentences are not sufficient. Kids need to be reading real books!

Good to hear about the increasing complexity of knowledge! I wonder if another developmental sequence could be genres. And to get real fancy - specific bodies of knowledge, esp. history and science. Marzano or Freddy Hiebert's megaclusters of vocab may be useful: textproject.org/paper/growing-…

@ReadSimplified @_MathAcademy_ Partly - the graph is the visualization layer and tracks outcomes. Underneath we pick texts based on the student's existing knowledge/interests, with increasing complexity and novelty. The goal is to nurture their knowledge base and build analysis that holds up on new texts

we built @_MathAcademy_ for literacy skills. check it out 👇

@AlexAndBooks_ Yikes! "Gambling has become a more common leisure activity than reading a book: Last year, 57 percent of Americans placed a bet."

The Atlantic’s new cover story about the end of reading is absolutely frightening. Here are 5 concerning facts from it: 1) 51% of adults read 0 books a year: According to the National Endowment for the Arts, which conducts the most comprehensive survey of the nation’s reading habits, fewer than half of all adults reported having read a book of any kind in 2022. 2) Reading for fun has gone from a mainstream hobby to a niche one: Americans who read for pleasure on any given day fell from 28 percent in 2004 to 16 percent in 2023. 3) Everyone is reading less: The decline in reading cuts across age groups, gender, and education levels. Even the demographics that traditionally read the most—retirees, women, and college graduates—have seen a collapse. 4) Books are getting simpler and shorter: New York Times best sellers today have sentences that are about one-third shorter than they were a century ago. 5) Kids are struggling to read and doing less of it: Fourth- and eighth-grade reading scores have slid for the past decade. From 1984 to 2025, the percentage of 13-year-olds who said they rarely or never read for fun rose from 8 to 29 percent. "Every year older a child gets, the less they like to read." For most of history, the biggest reading problem was illiteracy. People didn't know how to read books. But today the biggest problem is post-literacy. People know how to read books, but don't. A society that doesn't read loses more than just books. People lose the ability to think critically, focus deeply, and see life through multiple perspectives. The world needs you. Please consider picking up a book today. theatlantic.com/magazine/2026/…

@ben_m_somers @reedhastings Most struggling readers get to grade level in about 12 hours of tutoring with Reading Simplified. Hope you look for non-mainstream, accelerated results that we see routinely!

I'm excited to announce the most ambitious recreation of Bloom's 2Sigma study of the last 40 years. It's funded by @reedhastings and staffed by a team of 20 of the best educators in this country. Our education team's goal is to show the largest academic gains in one year ever recorded, and we'll publish our results even if we fail. Recently, @jwdanner introduced me to @reedhastings. Most people know Reed co-founded Netflix. Fewer know he has been one of the driving forces behind improving education for the last twenty years. When Reed pitched me on recreating Bloom's famous 2-sigma problem, I felt an overwhelming sense of hope for education. Over the last few months we have moved at breakneck speed to assemble an exceptional team. Someone recently described it to me as the "Avengers of education." We are testing one question with the rigor it deserves: can elite one-on-one tutoring reproduce the largest learning gains ever measured in a controlled study? We will work with researchers from Stanford, Brown, Cornell, and other leading institutions, and we intend to be the most transparent research group in the field. That means publishing our methods, our benchmarks, and our results, whatever they show. We will invest up to $100,000 per year per student to give them the best education on the planet. If it works, the data and methods can help educators and technologists recreate these outcomes for every child. We are actively hiring tutors, engineers, and operations people to help us climb this mountain.