The “science of reading” has received a tremendous amount of public attention over the past few years.

How has that public discourse impacted the classroom?

Today’s post will focus on its impact on English learners.

Must Be ‘Linguistically Inclusive’

Altagracia (Grace) Delgado is the director of Texas initiatives for the English Learners Success Forum. With over 30 years of experience in education, she has served as a teacher, instructional coach, and both campus and central-office administrator across Texas:

The growing attention to the “science of reading” has had a profound impact on the field of education, particularly in how literacy is approached in early and elementary classrooms. Rooted in decades of cognitive science and reading research, this movement emphasizes explicit, systematic instruction in phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. As an educator and advocate for multilingual learners, I recognize the value this body of research brings in clarifying what students need to become proficient readers.

However, I also believe it is essential to apply these principles through an equity- and language-conscious lens, which also acknowledges the linguistic assets multilingual learners bring to the classroom.

One of the most significant shifts I’ve seen is the increased emphasis on structured literacy instruction, particularly in foundational skills. This has brought a welcome sense of clarity and consistency in phonics instruction, which is critical for early reading development, especially for students who are decoding English for the first time. For multilingual learners, however, it is not enough to simply apply a one-size-fits-all model.

We must consider how students’ home languages interact with English phonology, orthography, and syntax. For example, a Spanish-speaking student may transfer knowledge of syllabic structures or cognates, while a Vietnamese-speaking student might need support with distinguishing between tonal patterns in their home language and the stress patterns of English. The science of reading must be adapted with these linguistic realities in mind.

In addition, the focus on oral language development, vocabulary, and comprehension is especially relevant for multilingual learners. However, these areas can be unintentionally underemphasized in the science of reading conversations when the emphasis is placed too heavily on decoding alone. For students acquiring English as an additional language, oral language serves as a foundation for literacy. Intentional opportunities to develop language through conversation, academic discourse, and content-rich texts are essential.

Teachers must be prepared not only to teach phonics but also to scaffold language structures and vocabulary in ways that are culturally responsive and developmentally appropriate. I’ve found that incorporating students’ home languages and background knowledge into lessons, such as previewing texts in their first language or exploring concepts through bilingual resources, enhances comprehension and engagement.

What gives me hope is that the national dialogue around the science of reading is beginning to evolve. More educators, researchers, and policymakers are recognizing that multilingual learners require a tailored approach that integrates the evidence-based practices of reading science with research on second-language acquisition and biliteracy development.

This integrated lens is crucial to ensure multilingual learners are not misdiagnosed as struggling readers when in fact they are developing proficiency in more than one language. Programs that incorporate biliteracy or dual-language development, for instance, provide strong evidence that students can learn to read in two languages simultaneously, with both reinforcing one another.

Ultimately, I believe the science of reading offers valuable guidance, but it must be implemented in ways that are linguistically inclusive and culturally affirming. It’s not just about how students learn to read, but how we honor who they are as readers, learners, and language users. For multilingual students, literacy development is a dynamic and multilingual process, and our instructional approaches must reflect and respect that complexity.

Don’t ‘Treat Literacy as a Checklist’

Angel Martinez Sanchez has been a teacher at the Norwich public schools in Connecticut:

The attention to the science of reading has been both validating and invigorating—but also raises important questions. As someone who teaches multilingual learners, I welcome the emphasis on explicit, systematic phonics and the understanding that reading is not “natural”—especially for those developing literacy in a new language.

However, I also worry that some implementations reduce the science to rigid scripts, overlooking the rich linguistic assets of our learners. Effective reading instruction must be grounded in evidence and responsive to language development. For MLLs, decoding matters, yes—but so do oral language, background knowledge, and culturally sustaining texts.

I’ve adapted by weaving foundational skills with language objectives—using decodable readers in tandem with visuals, realia, and targeted vocabulary. I’m excited by the momentum, but I also advocate nuance: The science is a compass, not a cage. And we must never forget that reading is both a cognitive and linguistic journey.

To ensure this work truly benefits multilingual learners, we must go beyond simply teaching them to read—we must help them read in ways that affirm who they are. The science of reading must live alongside the science of language acquisition and the science of belonging.

Students need phonics, yes—but they also need stories that reflect their experiences, scaffolded conversations that deepen comprehension, and instruction that builds not just skills but identity. We can’t afford to treat literacy as a checklist. For multilingual learners, it must be a bridge—between languages, between cultures, and between who they are and who they’re becoming as readers.

Biliteracy Instruction

Emelia Ahmed, who has an M.S. in reading, is a biliteracy consultant with 30 years of experience in education:

The recent attention to the science of reading has had a positive impact on biliteracy instruction because it has provided an opportunity to build our teachers’ capacity in emergent biliteracy instruction while ensuring our students are literate.

The science of reading refers to the research that explains how we learn to read and how to teach reading. We often use Philip Gough and William Tunmer’s Simple View of Reading to explain the science of reading. The simple view of reading defines reading as decoding X language comprehension = reading comprehension.

In addition, it calls for systematic instruction that is planned from simple to complex skills and explicit instruction that provides for the gradual release of responsibility. In the biliteracy classrooms where I coach, the science of reading and simple view of reading have contributed to focusing our attention on understanding the similarities and differences between Spanish and English literacy instruction.

Spanish is a transparent language that is easy to systematically and explicitly teach; hence, the science of reading research was not a huge challenge to implement in Spanish literacy instruction. In Spanish, we teach the five vowels followed by nonvariable consonants, those that have only one sound, then we add the variable consonants such as c which makes the /k/ and /s/ sounds. All along, we have been making simple open syllables (cv) and reading. For example, if we have taught the five vowel sounds (a, e, i, o, u) and then the mm /m/ sound, we can now make the syllables ma-me-mi-mo-mu and read a sentence such as, Mi mamá mima a Memo. Except for the variable consonants, Spanish has a one-to -one sound-symbol correspondence that facilitates and accelerates literacy learning in Spanish.

With the focus on the science of reading, we have become more knowledgeable about teaching cross-linguistic connections in biliteracy classrooms. Cross-linguistic connections from Spanish to English ensure that students understand that what they know in Spanish transfers to English. For example, the letter M has the /m/ sound in both Spanish and English. We must explicitly teach this connection to accelerate biliteracy development.

The simple view of reading language comprehension side focuses on oral language and vocabulary development, which are key features and skills when teaching emergent bilingual students to learn the English language and to read in English. What is a little challenging to implement and systematically design are the skills that must be explicitly taught in English because there is zero transfer or a negative transfer between languages.

For example, there is a negative transfer of the letter h from Spanish to English because in Spanish, the letter h makes no sound; but in English, it does make a /h/ sound, which is the sound /j/ in Spanish. An example of zero transfer would be the long vowels in English, which do not exist in Spanish. That is why it is important to have literacy-based systematic English-language-development time in the daily schedule.

In my experience, the science of reading has provided us with an opportunity to develop our understanding of how to systematically and explicitly teach Spanish literacy while making cross-linguistic connections to skills that have a positive transfer to English while also ensuring that we teach our emergent bilingual students the skills that have zero transfer from Spanish to English and English to Spanish. Our students have the right to read in order to succeed in our school systems and in our society.

Thanks to Grace, Angel, and Emelia for contributing their thoughts!

Today’s post answered this question:

How has the relatively recent attention to the “science of reading” impacted your teaching, and how do you feel about it?

Consider contributing a question to be answered in a future post. You can send one to me at lferlazzo@epe.org. When you send it in, let me know if I can use your real name if it’s selected or if you’d prefer remaining anonymous and have a pseudonym in mind.

You can also contact me on X at @Larryferlazzo or on Bluesky at @larryferlazzo.bsky.social .

Just a reminder; you can subscribe and receive updates from this blog via email. And if you missed any of the highlights from the first 13 years of this blog, you can see a categorized list here.