Literacy is at the forefront of learning. Literacy isn’t just decoding words—it’s about understanding, analyzing, and interpreting what a text is saying (and sometimes what it’s not saying). Within the lens of an interpretive research method, educators can focus on how readers bring their own experiences, contexts, and perspectives to a text to become a critical learner/reader. So how can I as an educator enable my students to comprehend text in different ways based on their backgrounds, cultures, and interactions?

More and more students are struggling to read and understand texts. In order to motivate students to read and write in school settings, we need to consider revolutionizing how literacy is taught in schools. A study conducted by Malette, Henk, Waggoner, and DeLaney (Multiliteracy Home, 2012) found that traditional ways of teaching literacy continue to be prominent even in schools that are noted for their excellence. In order to prepare students for their futures within a globalized society, the education system needs considerable restructuring.

Differentiation changed the educational world in supporting readers to meet them where they are at rather than using a one-size-fits-all model. Students were instructed based on their literacy level rather than their grade level. Differentiation in teaching is basically a way of tailoring instruction to meet the different needs, learning styles, and abilities of students in a classroom. The learning environment the instructor creates with students has also been shown to be an important part of successful differentiation implementation (Shareefa et al., 2019). This is a teaching strategy not a literacy pedagogy though. Changes in society and educational learning paths have created two very different theories on literacy instruction that have been embedded within my school district in the past ten years. Incorporating the interpretive research method, we can analyze two popular literacy pedagogies, Balanced Literacy and Science of Reading, as they have been implanted into our school’s educational program.

The following graphic gives a basic visual of the difference between Balanced Literacy and Science of Reading.

Fig. 1 What Does Science of Reading Mean to Me? https://medium.com/@Theneuroaffirmingparent/what-does-science-of-reading-mean-to-me-bf3fc6e9b0a7

Traditional literacy instruction has always focused on the ability to read the written word to gain understanding and meaning. As an emergent reader, I remember learning letters, sounds, and sounding out words and then using those decoding skills to jump right into reading. As I developed my reading skills, more books, especially textbooks were put into my hands. However, it was always the same routine. A student would be called on to read aloud while the other students were expected to follow along. Were students actually following along? Were they gaining meaning from listening to another read? As an educator, I look back at this experience and wonder about these questions even as I have implemented similar strategies in my classroom. Throughout my years of teaching, I have tried several approaches to teach literacy including the aforementioned. Some other strategies include reading texts to students while assessing their comprehension level, working in small literature groups to analyze and read texts, and using worksheets with reading passages to check for comprehension. Although these strategies worked for some, they were not truly effective for all and they typically did not allow readers to bring in their own experiences and backgrounds. For the purpose of this project, I will examine two different literacy approaches to understand their impact on not only reading but making-meaning.

For years, the skills-based and meaning-based approaches to literacy were seen as incongruous, and there was much debating on which technique was the best way to teach reading. Snow, Burns & Griffin (1998) supports the idea that the successful teaching of reading requires skill instruction, including phonics and phonemics, in conjunction with stimulating reading and writing experiences. Balanced reading instruction in the classroom should combine phonics instruction with the whole-language approach to teach both skills and meaning and to meet the reading needs of individual children (Johnson, 1999).

Many schools in the past used methods like Balanced Literacy, which often lacked systematic phonics. The Science of Reading movement argues this has left too many kids behind, especially those with dyslexia or other reading challenges. According to PBS News, in 2000, a government-formed National Reading Panel conducted research on students and reading, finding that phonics instruction was crucial to teaching young readers, along with several related concepts which Balanced Literacy did not have a strong hold on (Hollingsworth, 2023). The premise behind Science of Reading is purely science--or knowledge of how the brain learns to read. The focus is on the building blocks of words. Timothy Shanahan, a professor emeritus at the University of Illinois at Chicago, states that 30 percent to 40 percent of kids will need the more explicit instruction which is part of the Science of Reading (Hollingsworth, 2023). The idea is that with a strong background in phonics and phonemic instruction, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension will follow.

The following map shows how many states have passed laws that have implemented Science of Reading. This shows how nationwide this form of literacy theory has become.

Fig. 2: The Science of Reading vs. Balanced Literacy. https://www.lexialearning.com/blog/the-science-of-reading-vs-balanced-literacy

Literacy becomes more than decoding—it becomes a tool for understanding, connection, self-expression, and even social change. The interpretive method in literacy education sees reading and writing as acts of interpretation—where students actively make meaning by connecting texts to their own experiences, culture, and worldviews. It pushes beyond surface-level comprehension to include emotional, cultural, and critical engagement with language. So what does reading actually mean? The debate on the purposeful meaning behind reading also encompasses asking what is the best approach to teach students to read.

Some theorists believe that literacy should encompass all aspects of the learner’s life and should be incorporated across curriculum. This is the framework of a Balanced Literacy program which shapes how to teach reading and writing by emphasizing meaning, identity, dialogue, and critical thinking, rather than just technical skills like phonics or grammar (though those still have a place). The term Balanced Literacy originated in California in 1996 (California Department of Education, 1996; Honig, 1996). Balanced Literacy is a pedagogical approach that integrates various modalities of literacy instruction in hopes of providing students with the framework of literacy to create lifelong readers. Balanced Literacy utilizes explicit instruction through the use of authentic texts. The three important components to this pedagogical approach include: (1) teacher modeling, (2) teacher supporting learners as they practice, and (3) learners working independently. This follows the popular “I do, we do, you do” ideology to learning. Using this instructional idea, there are seven pillars to Balanced Literacy which include: read alouds, shared reading, mini-lesson, independent reading, conferring, collaborative group work, and assessment (Lynch, 2013).

In 2009, Balanced Literacy was introduced into Malian primary schools and was consistently used until the government was overthrown in 2012. According to the Education Development Center, Inc. (2015), a study was conducted among the first grade students who experienced the Balanced Literacy approach for six months in comparison to a national sample of second graders who did not use Balanced Literacy. First grade students showed significant gains from baseline to endline on all nine subjects. First graders in intervention schools (Balanced Literacy) significantly outscored their second grade comparison counterparts.

The following visual shows the components of a Balanced Literacy program as well as how the program works with gradual release.

Fig. 3: Treehearn. Effective Balanced Literacy. https://knilt.arcc.albany.edu/Lesson_1:_Balanced_Literacy

The theory behind Balanced Literacy follows the approaches of Benjamin Bloom and Dr. Norman Webb. Benjamin Bloom classified the levels of intellectual behaviors with a group of educators in 1956 (Armstrong, 2017). Their original framework involves the levels of cognitive taxonomy starting with knowledge and moving up the levels through comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and finally evaluation. Bloom’s Taxonomy has been updated since then to alternate the levels of synthesis and evaluation (Miller, 2018). Bloom’s Taxonomy builds on each other hence the triangular shape. A learner must master the lower levels before moving on to the next. His framework assists in instruction and helps measure the cognitive rigor of a lesson. Throughout the pillars of Balanced Literacy lies the different levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy. Each level of the taxonomy is present in at least one pillar. Learners are consistently remembering, understanding, applying, analyzing, evaluating, and creating throughout their Balanced Literacy instruction.

The following video gives a brief overview of Bloom’s taxonomy and how it structures the learning journey.

In 1997, Dr. Norman Webb created an approach that focused on categorizing activities according to the level of complexity in thinking (Miller, 2018). He called this approach Depth of Knowledge or DoK. Webb's Depth of Knowledge stemmed from the alignment of standards to assessments. Standardized assessments measured how students think about content and the procedures learned but did not measure how deeply students must understand and be aware of their learning so they can explain answers and provide solutions, as well as transfer what was learned in real world contexts (Francis, 2017). Essentially, the goal of Depth of Knowledge is to establish the context - the scenario, the setting, or the situation - in which students express the depth and extent of the learning (Francis, 2017). In contrast with Bloom’s Taxonomy which focuses on tasks students complete to deepen their understanding, Webb’s DoK focuses on the thinking process and the cognitive demands of instruction. DoK supports Balanced Literacy to create thoughtful and independent learners by

• incorporating each level of reasoning skills with categorized verbs,
• including various levels of complexity with DoK stem questions,
• assessing students’ depth of knowledge, and
• aligning with common core state standards (CCSS)

The following video breaks down Webb’s Depth of Knowledge.

Similar to an interpretive lens, the following theories/theorists also convey approaches to literacy instruction that centers on technical skills, specifically the foundational building blocks of reading. The Science of Reading (SoR) is not a teaching program—it’s a body of interdisciplinary research about how the brain learns to read. It draws from cognitive science, neuroscience, education, linguistics, and psychology, and it has reshaped how educators, policymakers, and researchers think about effective reading instruction. When a child is taught how to read, neural networks that have evolved to specialise in language and visual recognition are repurposed for the process of reading and writing (Dehaene, 2010; Snow, 2021). Reading must be explicitly and systematically taught in a structured way. The 5 components of Science of Reading include (1) phonemic awareness-the ability to identify and manipulate sounds and words, (2) phonics-the ability to relate phonemes to groups of letters, (3) fluency-the ability to accurately and read at a specific rate, (4) vocabulary-understanding what words mean, and (5) comprehension-the ability to accurately interpret what is read. The Science of Reading has demystified any wonder of how we learn to read and offers evidence backed by science to confirm that there is one right way to teach reading (Ordetx, 2024).

The following image portrays the five pillars of Science of Reading which will be discussed further in this work.

Fig. 4: Science of Reading. https://isteep.com/science_of_reading/

The theory behind Science of Reading stems from many theorists including approaches from Dr. Philip Gough and Dr. William Tumner. Gough and Tumner break down reading into two components: decoding and language comprehension or in simple terms what the words say and what the words mean. Both of these components together are necessary for skilled reading comprehension. Using a simple equation, they created their “Simple View of Reading”. This equation is expressed as Decoding (D) x Language Comprehension (LC) = Reading Comprehension (RC). They define decoding as the ability to apply sound-symbol relationships to read words and language comprehension as the ability to understand spoken language (Sager, 2024). This theory emphasizes that reading is not merely the ability to recognize words but also the capacity to understand and interpret them within context. Kilpatrick writes regularly about the efficacy of this model in understanding both reading acquisition and reading difficulty. He says: “If a student can quickly and effortlessly read the words in a given passage and if that student can understand that same passage when it is read to her, it follows that the student should be able to comprehend that passage when she reads it to herself” (2015, p. 46).

The following video outlines Gough and Tumner’s Simple View of Reading.

Building upon Gough and Tumner’s Simple View of Reading, Dr. Hollis Scarborough developed a metaphorical framework illustrating the essential components for reading. She called it the Reading Rope which intertwines two major strands: word recognition and language comprehension. Word recognition is broken down into 3 strands: (1) phonological awareness, (2) decoding, and (3) sight recognition (Loewus, 2024). Scarborough describes the importance of automatic word recognition skills (phonological awareness, decoding, and sight recognition of words) to ensure that the reader exerts minimal effort to decode text, saving important cognitive energy for comprehension (Scarborough, 2001, p. 98).

Language comprehension is further broken down into five strands: (1) background knowledge, (2) vocabulary, (3) language structure, (4) verbal reasoning, and (5) literacy knowledge. Scarborough shows how all the strands interwoven creates a skilled reader. If one strand is weak, it can affect the overall strength of the rope, leading to challenges in reading proficiency. The rope can also serve as a road map to help identify students’ reading discrepancies. Weakness in one strand can cause the rope to fray. According to Landmark Outreach (2022), the original goal of the Reading Rope was to call attention to all the skills needed for early literacy and as a way to identify more children at risk for reading difficulty. This idea has become a key part of the research in the Science of Reading, helping teachers support students in developing a strong, stable base for word recognition and language comprehension.

The following image gives a visual representation of all the strands put together to make the Reading Rope.

Fig. 5: Landmark Outreach. Scarborough's Rope. https://www.landmarkoutreach.org/strategies/scarboroughs-reading-rope/

Literacy programs include community, home and library involvement as well as structured classroom plans and the use of activities, such as read alouds, guided reading, shared reading and independent reading and writing (Fountas & Pinnell, 1996). Literacy should encompass all aspects of the learner’s life and should be incorporated across the curriculum. Not only should literacy take place in a variety of environments but it should also include a multitude of teaching strategies. A successful literacy program, it is argued, must combine a balance of teacher directed instruction (including teacher modeling of skills, strategies and processes) and student centered activities ( Snow, Burns & Griffin, 1998). Essential components of literacy should mirror principles of effective learning and teaching. To best achieve this goal, teachers need to: a) emphasize reading, writing and literature by providing long, uninterrupted periods of successful reading every day, b) create a positive, reinforcing, cooperative environment in the classroom, c) set high but realistic expectations for all students, and d) thoroughly integrate reading and writing across the curriculum (Asselin, 1999). Effective literacy teachers have the ability to provide good classroom management and scaffold literacy instruction with a focus on explicit skills and authentic opportunities to read and write and discuss the text. Effective schools provide a collaborative learning environment, share the responsibility for student learning, and support the learning of teachers and students.

The Balanced Literacy approach and the Science of Reading (SoR) represent fundamentally different views about how children learn to read—and how they should be taught. Balanced literacy believes learning to read is similar to learning to speak - it is a natural process whereas Science of Reading believes that reading is a skill that should be explicitly taught. A Balanced Literacy approach will focus on the love of reading and meaning-making while Science of Reading’s goal is for accurate decoding plus comprehension. Student choice is a high priority in Balanced Literacy but not as much in Science of Reading as it is more teacher-guided. The table below gives a brief overview of the main differences between the two programs.

The following video debates the difference between Balanced Literacy and Science of Reading (Structured Literacy) throughout the video.

Science of Reading advocates argue that too many kids are not learning to read with Balanced Literacy, especially students with dyslexia, multilingual learners, and those from disadvantaged backgrounds. Balanced Literacy defenders argue that Science of Reading can feel too scripted, test-driven, or mechanical, and that it ignores the social, cultural, and emotional dimensions of literacy.

Let’s break down what these look like in action—because it’s one thing to talk theory, but what happens day-to-day in the classroom is what really matters. Balanced Literacy is designed to offer a "balanced" blend of phonics, reading, writing, and student-centered activities, but in practice, it often leans more toward meaning-making and student choice than structured skill instruction. This looks like short lessons focusing on word work involving word walls, word sorts, and shared reading. Students read leveled readers in small guided reading groups focusing on comprehension strategies while the teacher models these strategies through read-alouds. Reading and writing strategies are also taught through a workshop model and stamina for reading is built through independent reading time. The idea behind Balanced Literacy is to expose students to a “balance” of reading and writing across the curriculum. Even though this sounds perfect, it is not always as straightforward as some readers still struggle. The pillars describe what this balance should look like.

Pillar 1: Read Aloud

• Develops high-level thinking and discourse
• Deepens comprehension through discourse and active thinking
• Increases rigor and raises the caliber of conversation

Pillar 2: Shared Reading

• Leads to higher levels of comprehension
• Expands and increases fluency rates

Pillar 3: Mini-Lesson

• Engages students actively in different literacy strategies
• Develops connections and links to other texts and the world

Pillar 4: Independent Reading/Writing

• Practices reading and/or writing strategies from mini-lesson

Pillar 5: Conferring

• Intervenes with reteaching and reviewing specific skills
• Holds students accountable for their learning
• Allows educators to use formal and informal assessments to guide learning

Pillar 6: Collaborative Group Work

• Differentiates instruction to meet the needs of all students
• Develops conversational skills around texts

Pillar 7: Assessment

• Allows for differentiated instruction or common “strategy” need
• Assesses students using a variety of methods to fully understand the need and progress of individual students

Here is a short video that explains the Balanced Literacy approach.

In a Science of Reading curriculum, there is daily, systematic phonics instruction and phonemic awareness. Students practice phonics and phonemic awareness through reading using decodable texts. Teachers use read-alouds with complex, rich text to teach vocabulary and knowledge building for comprehension. This approach is assessment driven with frequent progress monitoring. Teachers utilize this data to guide and adjust instruction as needed. The Science of Reading classroom builds strong decoding skills first—then uses that foundation to launch into rich reading, vocabulary, and comprehension. Science of Reading encompasses the following five pillars:

Pillar 1: Phonemic Awareness

• Recognizes and manipulates sounds in words or the ability to hear, identify, and manipulate individual sounds—called phonemes—in spoken words
• Key skills include recognizing, isolating, blending, segmenting, and manipulating sounds

Pillar 2: Phonics:

• Understands the relationship between letters (or letter combinations) and the sounds they make.
• Key skills include decoding, blending, segmenting, and recognizing common spelling patterns

Pillar 3: Fluency

• Reads smoothly, accurately, and with expression (similar to how you talk)
• Key skills include reading in a way that makes sense and helps with understanding the meaning of the text

Pillar 4: Vocabulary

• Knows and understands the meaning of words when they are heard and seen in print
• Key skills include word meanings, nuance and context, word relationships, and morphology

Pillar 5: Comprehension

• Understands, interprets, and thinks deeply about a text
• Key skills include making sense of a text, connecting ideas, drawing inferences, asking and answering questions, and summarizing and reflecting on a text

Here is a short video on Science of Reading and what educators should know about it.

The best literacy theory has sparked much debate. The Science of Reading is more effective for teaching all students how to read—especially those who do not learn to read easily. Balanced Literacy has good intentions (like fostering a love of reading), but it lacks the systematic, evidence-based methods proven to actually teach reading—especially in the critical early years. Science of Reading is better for ensuring all students can learn to read. Balanced Literacy may be engaging, but without strong foundational instruction, it leaves too many kids behind. Balanced Literacy can be ineffective for students with dyslexia because of the lack of focus on decoding skills students need in order to develop stronger reading skills. However, Science of Reading does prepare students to decode words in an explicit and systematic manner, making it more effective for all readers. Gough and Tumner (1986) cite many sources showing the effectiveness of the Simple View of Reading embedded in Science of Reading for students with dyslexia, hyperlexia, and other poor readers. Gough and Tunmer’s purpose, which was to show that decoding, along with linguistic comprehension, was central to reading comprehension enabling these struggling readers to become successful readers. There are many perspectives on both of these approaches. While they both have their advantages and disadvantages, they have both met the needs of students and helped foster the love of reading. But, maybe the best choice is to aim for a "balanced approach to structured literacy"—keeping student engagement and choice while anchoring instruction in research-based practices like Science of Reading.