"It Works" and Other Myths of the Science of Reading Era

Tim Shanahan

Recently, I wrote about the science of reading. I explained how I thought the term should be defined and described the kind of research needed to prescribe instruction.

Today I thought I’d put some meat on the bone; adding some details that might help readers to grasp the implications of a scientific or research-based approach to reading.

What does it mean when someone says an approach to reading instruction “works”?

The term “it works” has gnawed at me for more than fifty years! I remember as a teacher how certain activities or approaches grabbed me. They just seemed right. Then I’d try them out in my classroom and judge some to work, and others not so much.

But why?

What was it that led me to believe some of them “worked” and some didn’t?

It puzzled me even then.  

Teachers, administrators, and researchers seem to have different notions of “what works.”

Teachers, I think, depend heavily on student response. If an activity engages the kids, we see it as hopeful. We give credence to whether an activity elicits groans or a buzz of activity.  

READ MORE...