TRT Podcast#36: My reaction to the article that reignited the reading wars
When I first read Emily Hanford’s article, “At a Loss for Words,” I felt annoyed, angry and – in the end – dismissive. I’ve read the article many times since, and now my reaction is quite the opposite. Listen to find out what’s changed!
Listen to the episode here
Full episode transcript
The article that reignited the reading wars
- At a Loss for Words, by Emily Hanford
Link to original Facebook Live presentation
Check out the full science of reading bootcamp
- Introduction to the series
- Episode 1: What are the reading wars?
- Episode 2: My reaction to the article that reignited the reading wars
- Episode 3: How the brain learns to read
- Episode 4: What the science of reading is based on
- Episode 5: What’s wrong with three-cueing?
- Episode 6: Should you use leveled or decodable books?
YOU’LL LOVE THIS PRACTICAL BOOK!
Looking for an easy-to-read guide to help you reach all readers? If you teach kindergarten through third grade, this is the book for you. Get practical ideas and lesson plan templates that you can implement tomorrow!
Love Freebies?
Subscribing to our email newsletter is completely free. And when you do, you'll get access to our library of subscriber freebies! Sign up below to get access to a wonderful variety of math and literacy resources.
L. N.
Thank you Anna for the amazing content. I have a question… is it true what they say , “ if you can read it then you can spell it”. We had a 2nd grade teacher which said that. As a parent of a 7yr old, I noticed that my daughter can read some words but can’t fully spell it correctly, because she has not learned all the spelling rules. So , is the saying correct?
Anna Geiger
It’s actually more the opposite – if you can spell it, you can probably read it. Spelling lags behind reading, so it’s very normal for beginning readers to be able to read a word but not be able to spell it.
Anonymous
I appreciated your honesty. As a young reader, I can’t recall much about my reading instruction. It was probably phonics. Progressive school district, but early 70s. I don’t remember any three cueing. If we had it, I blew it off. But probably not.
I do remember the exact moment they explained how to sound words out…and it was like a light exploding and made so much open to me…became a huge reader, very fast. And it didn’t even matter so much that English has some irregularities. If the words were 80% recognizable (e.g. the consonants), that was enough. The unit on long vowels and e at the end of words was very helpful though…I remember that.
Em
There is a level of arrogance or mistrust in how you initially dismissed Emily Hanford’s research as “who is she to know” because she is “just a journalist”. If more people could look beyond their own egos and sense of proprietory (e.g., “I’m a teacher, I am in the trenches therefore I know what works; researchers are just ivory tower dwellers and what do journalists now anyway”) rather than being reflective and reflexive then the world may just become a little kinder and a little better.
Anna Geiger
I agree. That’s why I was open and honest about the negative feelings I was experiencing. I’m not proud of them.
CE
Thoroughly enjoyed the post about cueing vs phonics. Every day I work with students who are “guessing” at the words and struggling, their struggle leads to frustration. I have been able to convince my students to try different methods to help them achieve their goals of reading.
Just tonight, I was working on orthographic mapping with one of my students and making strides. He said, that I make him feel he is smart enough to enter a spelling bee. He is a precious child who is working hard to relearn how to read and understand what he is reading. Thank you for the articles.
Anna Geiger
What a beautiful story about your student! Thank you so much for the work you do!