Editing Phonics (section)

===United States===
More than a century of debate has occurred over whether English phonics should or should not be used in teaching beginning reading.

The use of phonics in education in the [[United States]] dates at least to the work of [[Favell Lee Mortimer]], whose works using phonics includes the early [[flashcard]] set ''Reading Disentangled'' (1834)<ref>''The Clumsiest People in Europe: Or, Mrs. Mortimer's Bad-Tempered Guide to the Victorian World,'' [[Favell Lee Mortimer]], foreword by Todd Pruzan, 2006 edition, [https://books.google.com/books?id=B_AC9ae6lzkC&pg=PA5&dq=favell+mortimer+phonics p. 5]</ref> and text ''Reading Without Tears'' (1857). Despite the work of 19th-century proponents such as [[Kate Harrington (Poet)|Rebecca Smith Pollard]], some American educators, prominently [[Horace Mann]], argued that phonics should not be taught at all. This led to the commonly used "[[look-say]]" approach ensconced in the ''[[Dick and Jane]]'' readers popular in the mid-20th century. Beginning in the 1950s, however, inspired by a landmark study by Dr. Harry E. Houtz,{{citation needed|date=August 2023}} and spurred by [[Rudolf Flesch]]'s criticism of the absence of phonics instruction (particularly in his book, ''[[Why Johnny Can't Read]]'', 1955) and [[Jeanne Chall]] (the author of ''Learning to Read the Great Debate'' - 1967–1995<ref>{{cite book|title=Learning to Read: The Great Debate, 1967-1995|author=Jeanne S. Chall|year=1996|publisher=Harcourt Brace College Publishers |isbn=0155030809}}</ref> phonics resurfaced as a method of teaching reading.

In the 1980s, the "[[whole language]]" approach to reading further polarized the debate in the United States. Whole language instruction was predicated on the principle that children could learn to read given (a) proper [[motivation]], (b) access to good [[literature]], (c) many reading opportunities, (d) focus on meaning, and (e) instruction to help students use semantic, syntactic and graphophonic cues to "guess" the pronunciation of unknown words. Also, in practice children are often taught to use pictures to guess a word. For some advocates of whole language, phonics was antithetical to helping new readers to get the meaning; they asserted that parsing words into small chunks and reassembling them had no connection to the ideas the author wanted to convey.<ref>{{Cite journal |title=A psycholinguistic guessing game|journal=Journal of the Reading Specialist|volume=6|issue=4|pages=126–135|doi=10.1080/19388076709556976|year = 1967|last1 = Goodman|first1 = Kenneth S.}}</ref>

The whole language emphasis on identifying words using context and focusing only a little on the sounds (usually the alphabet consonants and the short vowels) could not be reconciled with the phonics emphasis on individual sound-symbol correspondences. Thus, a dichotomy between the whole language approach and phonics emerged in the United States causing intense debate. Ultimately, this debate led to a series of [[United States Congress|Congressionally]]-commissioned panels and government-funded reviews of the state of reading instruction in the U.S.

In 1984, the [[National Academy of Education]] commissioned a report on the status of research and instructional practices in reading education, ''Becoming a Nation of Readers''.<ref>''Becoming a Nation of Readers'', National Academy of Education, Center for the Study of Reading, 1984</ref> Among other results, the report includes the finding that phonics instruction improves children's ability to identify words. It reports that useful phonics strategies include teaching children the sounds of letters in isolation and in words, and teaching them to blend the sounds of letters together to produce approximate pronunciations of words. It also states that phonics instruction should occur in conjunction with opportunities to identify words in meaningful sentences and stories.

In 1990, Congress asked the [[U.S. Department of Education]] (ED) to compile a list of available programs on beginning reading instruction, evaluating each in terms of the effectiveness of its phonics component. As part of this requirement, the ED asked [[Marilyn Jager Adams|Dr. Marilyn J. Adams]] to produce a report on the role of phonics instruction in beginning reading. This resulted in her 1994 book ''Beginning to Read: Thinking and Learning about Print''.<ref>{{cite book |author=Adams, Marilyn Jager|title=Beginning to read: thinking and learning about print|year=1994|publisher=MIT Press|location=Cambridge, MA 
|isbn=978-0-262-51076-9 |url=https://archive.org/details/beginningtoread00mari}}</ref> In the book, Adams asserted that existing scientific research supported that phonics is an effective way to teach students the ''alphabetic code'' – building their skills in decoding unknown words. By learning the alphabetic code, she argued, students can free up mental energy used for word analysis and devote this mental effort to meaning, leading to stronger comprehension. Furthermore, she suggested that students be encouraged ''not'' to skip words they find difficult. Instead they should take the time to study the challenging words and to reread sentences after they have succeeded in decoding them. She also concluded that while phonics instruction is a necessary component of reading instruction, it is not sufficient by itself. Children should also have practice reading text provided they do not make too many mistakes. In spite of her study, the argument about how to teach reading eventually known as "the Great Debate", continued unabated.

In 1996 the [[California]] Department of Education took an increased interest in using phonics in schools.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/1996/05/22/us/california-leads-revival-of-teaching-by-phonics.html|title= NY Times 1996, California Leads Revival Of Teaching by Phonics|website= [[The New York Times]]|date= 22 May 1996}}</ref> And in 1997 the department called for grade one teaching in concepts about print, phonemic awareness, decoding and word recognition, and vocabulary and concept development.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.cde.ca.gov/be/st/ss/documents/elacontentstnds.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/https://www.cde.ca.gov/be/st/ss/documents/elacontentstnds.pdf |archive-date=2022-10-09 |url-status=live|title= English–Language Arts Content Standards for California Public Schools}}</ref>

In 1997, Congress asked the Director of the [[Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development|National Institute of Child Health and Human Development]] (NICHD) at the [[National Institutes of Health]], in consultation with the [[United States Secretary of Education|Secretary of Education]], to convene a national panel to assess the effectiveness of different approaches used to teach children to read.

The [[U.S. National Research Council|National Research Council]] re-examined the question of how best to teach reading to children (among other questions in education) and in 1998 published the results in the ''Prevention of Reading Difficulties in Young Children.''<ref>Snow, Catherine E., Susan Burns, Peg Griffin, eds. ''Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Children''. Committee on the Prevention of Reading Difficulties in Young Children, National Research Council, 1998 {{ISBN|0-309-06418-X}}</ref> The National Research Council's findings largely matched those of Adams. They concluded that phonics is a very effective way to teach children to read at the word level, more effective than what is known as the "embedded phonics" approach of whole language (where phonics was taught opportunistically in the context of literature). They found that phonics instruction must be systematic (following a sequence of increasingly challenging phonics patterns) and explicit (teaching students precisely how the patterns worked, e.g., "this is ''b'', it stands for the /b/ sound").<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Ziegler JC, Goswami U |title=Reading acquisition, developmental dyslexia, and skilled reading across languages: a psycholinguistic grain size theory |journal=Psychol Bull |volume=131 |issue=1 |pages=3–29 |date = January 2005|pmid=15631549 |doi=10.1037/0033-2909.131.1.3|s2cid=7082443 }}</ref>

In 2000 the findings of the [[National Reading Panel]] was published. It examined quantitative research studies on many areas of reading instruction, including phonics and whole language. The resulting report ''Teaching Children to Read: An Evidence-based Assessment of the Scientific Research Literature on Reading and its Implications for Reading Instruction'' provides a comprehensive review of what is known about best practices in reading instruction in the U.S.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.nichd.nih.gov/sites/default/files/publications/pubs/nrp/Documents/report.pdf|title=National reading panel, nichd.nih.gov}}</ref> The panel reported that several reading skills are critical to becoming good readers: phonemic awareness, phonics for word identification, fluency, vocabulary and text comprehension. With regard to phonics, their meta-analysis of hundreds of studies confirmed the findings of the National Research Council: teaching phonics (and related phonics skills, such as phonemic awareness) is a more effective way to teach children early reading skills than is embedded phonics or no phonics instruction.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20080705194256/http://www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/nrp/findings.cfm Findings and Determinations of the National Reading Panel by Topic Areas<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> The panel found that phonics instruction is an effective method of teaching reading for students from kindergarten through 6th grade, and for all children who are having difficulty learning to read. They also found that phonics instruction benefits all ages in learning to spell. They also reported that teachers need more education about effective reading instruction, both pre-service and in-service.

The State driven [[Common Core State Standards Initiative]] was developed in 2009, because of a lack of standardization of education principles and practices.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.corestandards.org|title=Common Core State Standards Initiative}}</ref> The site has a comprehensive description of the specific details of the English Language Arts Standards that include the areas of the Alphabetic Principle, Print Concepts, Phonological Awareness, Phonics and Word Recognition, and Fluency.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy/RF/introduction/|title=English Language Arts Standards, Reading – Foundational Skills, K-5|access-date=2020-05-13|archive-date=2020-05-14|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200514204551/http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy/RF/introduction/|url-status=dead}}</ref> It is up to the individual States and School Districts to develop plans to implement the standards. As of 2020, 41 States had adopted the standards, and in most cases it has taken three or more years to have them implemented.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.corestandards.org/standards-in-your-state/|title=Standards in your state|access-date=2020-05-13|archive-date=2019-06-10|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190610015351/http://www.corestandards.org/standards-in-your-state/|url-status=dead}}</ref> For example, [[Wisconsin]] adopted the standards in 2010, implemented them in the 2014–2015 school year, yet in 2020 the state Department of Public Instruction was in the process of developing materials to support the standards in teaching phonics.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/education/2020/01/22/wisconsin-dpi-endorses-explicit-phonics-instruction-reading/4543737002/|title= DPI endorses 'explicit phonics instruction' as critical component of reading instruction, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 2020-01-22}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://dpi.wi.gov/standards|title=Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction|date=10 April 2015}}</ref>

The [[State of Mississippi]] passed the Literacy-Based Promotion Act in 2013 in part because of the States' poor showing in the [[National Assessment of Educational Progress]].<ref>{{cite web|url=https://legiscan.com/MS/text/SB2157/id/1390375|title=Literacy-Based Promotion Act, Mississippi Senate Bill 2157,2016-04-20}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.bdtonline.com/opinion/from-the-opinion-page-literacy-and-phonics-are-and-should-be-among-america-s-top/article_79a291d2-9e22-11ea-809a-c3bf323a44a1.html|title=OPINION PAGE: Literacy and phonics are, and should be, among America's top issues|date=25 May 2020 }}</ref> The [[Mississippi Department of Education]] provides resources for teachers in the areas of phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary, fluency, comprehension and reading strategies.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.mdek12.org/ESE/literacy/professional-development-and-resources-for-teachers|title=Professional Development and Resources for Teachers, Mississippi}}</ref> In 2019 Mississippi made a bigger advance in reading than any other State.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/highlights/reading/2019/|title=Nations report card}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/05/opinion/mississippi-schools-naep.html|title=Opinion, Mississippi schools, NT Times, 2019-12-05|website=[[The New York Times]]|date=5 December 2019|last1=Hanford|first1=Emily}}</ref>

In 2014 the California Department of Education stated "Ensuring that children know how to decode regularly spelled one-syllable words by mid-first grade is crucial". It goes on to say that "Learners need to be phonemically aware (especially able to segment and blend phonemes)".<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/rl/cf/documents/elaeldfwchapter3.pdf|title= English–Language Arts, Transitional Kindergarten to Grade 1, California Public Schools}}</ref> In grades two and three children receive explicit instruction in advanced phonic-analysis and reading multi-syllabic and more complex words.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/rl/cf/documents/elaeldfwchapter4.pdf|title= English–Language Arts, Pedagogy Grades Two and Three, California Public Schools}}</ref>

In 2015 the New York State Public School system began a process to revise its English Language Arts Learning Standards. The new standards call for teaching involving "reading or literacy experiences" as well as [[phonemic awareness]] from prekindergarten to grade 1 and phonics and word recognition from grade 1 to grade 4.<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.engageny.org/resource/new-york-state-next-generation-english-language-arts-learning-standards|title=2015 New York State Next Generation English Language Arts Learning Standards}}</ref>

In 2015 the Ohio Legislature set minimum standards requiring the use of phonics as a technique in teaching reading. It includes guidelines for teaching phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary and comprehension.<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://education.ohio.gov/Topics/Operating-Standards/Table-of-Contents/Instruction/Phonics|title=Rules for Phonics, Ohio}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |url=http://education.ohio.gov/getattachment/Topics/Early-Learning/Third-Grade-Reading-Guarantee/Third-Grade-Reading-Guarantee-District-Resources/Approved-List-of-Research-Based-Reading-Instructio/Reading_Competencies.pdf.aspx |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/http://education.ohio.gov/getattachment/Topics/Early-Learning/Third-Grade-Reading-Guarantee/Third-Grade-Reading-Guarantee-District-Resources/Approved-List-of-Research-Based-Reading-Instructio/Reading_Competencies.pdf.aspx |archive-date=2022-10-09 |url-status=live|title=Reading Competencies, Ohio}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |url=http://education.ohio.gov/Topics/Learning-in-Ohio/Literacy/Third-Grade-Reading-Guarantee/Third-Grade-Reading-Guarantee-Teacher-Resources|title=Third grade reading guarantee, Ohio }}</ref> In February 2017, the Ohio Department of Education adopted new learning standards for English Language Arts. They include ''Reading Standards for Foundational Skills K–12'' that clearly lay out a systematic approach to teaching ''phonological awareness'' in kindergarten and grade one, and ''grade-level phonics and word analysis skills in decoding words'' (including fluency and comprehension) in grades one through five.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://education.ohio.gov/getattachment/Topics/Learning-in-Ohio/English-Language-Art/English-Language-Arts-Standards/ELA-Learning-Standards-2017.pdf.aspx?lang=en-US|title=Reading Standards for Foundational Skills K–12, OHIO Department of Education, 2017}}</ref>

In 2016 the What Works Clearinghouse<ref>{{cite web|url=https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/|title=What Works Clearinghouse}}</ref> and the [[Institute of Education Sciences]], an independent and non-partisan arm of the U.S. Department of Education, published an Educator's Practice Guide (with evidence) on Foundational Skills to Support Reading for Understanding in Kindergarten Through 3rd Grade.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Docs/PracticeGuide/wwc_foundationalreading_070516.pdf|title=What works clearinghouse: Educator's Practice Guide on Foundational Skills to Support Reading for Understanding in Kindergarten Through 3rd Grade, 2016, Institute of Education Sciences}}</ref> It contains four recommendations to support reading: 1) Teach students academic language skills, including the use of inferential and narrative language, and vocabulary knowledge, 2) Develop awareness of the segments of sounds in speech and how they link to letters (phonemic awareness and phonics), 3) Teach students to decode words, analyze word parts, and write and recognize words (phonics and synthetic phonics), and 4) Ensure that each student reads connected text every day to support reading accuracy, fluency, and comprehension. Some universities have created additional material based on this guide.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdGMRJSEjzU |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/varchive/youtube/20211211/xdGMRJSEjzU| archive-date=2021-12-11 |url-status=live|title=Youtube, Overview of the Foundational Reading Skills Practice Guide and PLC Webinar, Florida State University, 2018|website=[[YouTube]]|date=June 2018 }}{{cbignore}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://place.fi.ncsu.edu/local/catalog/course.php?id=15&ref=1|title=Teaching Foundational Reading Skills MOOC-Ed, NC STATE COLLEGE OF EDUCATION}}</ref>

In 2016, [[Colorado Department of Education]] updated their Elementary Teacher Literacy Standards with a comprehensive outline including standards for development in the areas Phonology; Phonics and Word Recognition; Fluent Automatic Reading; Vocabulary; Text Comprehension; and Handwriting, Spelling, and Written Expression.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.cde.state.co.us/coloradoliteracy/elementaryteacher-literacystandards|title=Elementary Teacher Literacy Standards, COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, 2016}}</ref> At the same time, the Department of Education in Delaware produced a plan to improve education results. It states that teachers' preparation programs must include evidence-based practices, including the five essential components of reading instruction (phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension).<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.doe.k12.de.us/literacyplan|title=Literacy plan, prekindergarten to grade 3, Delaware, USA}}</ref>

In 2017, research published in the ''[[Journal of Experimental Psychology]]'' has shown that learning to read by sounding out words (i.e. phonics) has a dramatic impact on the accuracy of reading aloud and comprehension.<ref>{{cite journal |title=Comparing and validating methods of reading instruction using behavioural and neural findings in an artificial orthography. Taylor JSH, Davis MH, Rastle K.|journal = Journal of Experimental Psychology: General|volume = 146|issue = 6|pages = 826–858|pmc = 5458780|year = 2017|last1 = Taylor|first1 = J. S.|last2 = Davis|first2 = M. H.|last3 = Rastle|first3 = K.|pmid = 28425742|doi = 10.1037/xge0000301}}</ref> It concludes that early literacy education should focus on the systematic approach in "print-to-sound relationships" in alphabetic languages, rather than teaching "meaning-based strategies", in order to enhance both reading aloud and comprehension of written words.

In 2018 The [[Association for Psychological Science]] published an article entitled ''Ending the Reading Wars: Reading Acquisition From Novice to Expert''. The purpose of the article is to fill the gap between the current research knowledge and the public understanding about how we learn to read, and to explain "why phonics instruction is so central to learning in a writing system such as English".<ref>{{cite journal |title=Ending the Reading Wars: Reading Acquisition From Novice to Expert, The Association for Psychological Science, 2018.|journal=Psychological Science in the Public Interest|volume=19|issue=1|pages=5–51|doi=10.1177/1529100618772271|pmid=29890888|year = 2018|last1 = Castles|first1 = Anne|last2=Rastle|first2=Kathleen|last3=Nation|first3=Kate|doi-access=free}}</ref>

In 2018 the [[Arkansas Department of Education]], Literacy Support Unit, published a report about their new initiative known as R.I.S.E., Reading Initiative for Student Excellence, that was the result of The Right to Read Act, passed in 2017.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.arkansased.gov/public/userfiles/Learning_Services/RISE/RISE_Arkansas/RISE_Arkansas_2018_Report_REV2.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/http://www.arkansased.gov/public/userfiles/Learning_Services/RISE/RISE_Arkansas/RISE_Arkansas_2018_Report_REV2.pdf |archive-date=2022-10-09 |url-status=live|title=A New Chapter for Arkansas Students, 2018 Report}}</ref> The first goal of this initiative is to provide educators with the in-depth knowledge and skills of "the science of reading" and evidence-based instructional strategies.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://dese.ade.arkansas.gov/public/userfiles/Learning_Services/RISE/SCIENCE_OF_READING.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/http://dese.ade.arkansas.gov/public/userfiles/Learning_Services/RISE/SCIENCE_OF_READING.pdf |archive-date=2022-10-09 |url-status=live|title=The Science of Reading, RISE, Arkansas}}</ref> This includes a change of focus to research-based instruction on phonological awareness, phonics, vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension. Specific requirements are that reading instruction be systematic and explicit, and include decoding techniques.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.arkansased.gov/divisions/learning-services/r.i.s.e.-arkansas/its-all-about-meaning|title=It's all About Meaning, arkansased.gov/divisions/learning-services, 2018|access-date=2020-03-21|archive-date=2019-07-30|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190730065926/http://www.arkansased.gov/divisions/learning-services/r.i.s.e.-arkansas/its-all-about-meaning|url-status=dead}}</ref> Part of the instruction involves the use of a book and study guide entitled Essentials of Assessing, Preventing and Overcoming Reading Difficulties, by David Kilpatrick.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.arkansased.gov/public/userfiles/Learning_Services/RISE/It_s_All_About_Meaning/Book_Study_Facilitator_Guide.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/http://www.arkansased.gov/public/userfiles/Learning_Services/RISE/It_s_All_About_Meaning/Book_Study_Facilitator_Guide.pdf |archive-date=2022-10-09 |url-status=live|title= Essentials of Assessing, Preventing and Overcoming Reading Difficulties, David Kilpatrick, cortland.edu, arkansased.gov/public/userfiles}}</ref>

In 2018 the Minnesota Reading Corps (MRC)<ref>{{cite web |url=https://minnesotareadingcorps.org/the-challenge/|title= Minnesota Reading Corp, Our Work}}</ref> published impact evaluation reports of their reading programs for children in pre-kindergarten to grade three (2017–2018). MRC is a participating organization under [[Americorps]] in which volunteers tutor at-risk students who need extra support in reading and math. The tutors are trained to use research-based literacy activities and interventions as identified by the [[National Reading Panel]], including phonological awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. The reports, presented by [[NORC at the University of Chicago]], compare the results of students in the MRC program with students in control groups. They found that MRC kindergarten students achieved significantly higher scores in letter-sound fluency, and MRC first grade students achieved significantly higher scores in both [[nonsense word]] fluency and oral reading [[fluency]].<ref>{{cite web|url=https://1kvjxp28gemz2aa4gi2qmxxh-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Minnesota-Reading-Corps_2017-2018-Evaluation_Full-Report-FINAL.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/https://1kvjxp28gemz2aa4gi2qmxxh-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Minnesota-Reading-Corps_2017-2018-Evaluation_Full-Report-FINAL.pdf |archive-date=2022-10-09 |url-status=live|title=Final Report, Impact Evaluation of the Minnesota Reading Corps K-3 Program (2017–18)}}</ref>

In 2019 the [[Minnesota Department of Education]] introduced standards requiring school districts to "develop a Local Literacy Plan to ensure that all students have achieved early reading proficiency by no later than the end of third grade" in accordance with a Statute of the [[Minnesota Legislature]] requiring elementary teachers to be able to implement comprehensive, [[Evidence-based education|scientifically based reading]] and oral language instruction in the five reading areas of phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/120B.12 |title=MN Statute 120B.12, 2019, READING PROFICIENTLY NO LATER THAN THE END OF GRADE 3}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://education.mn.gov/MDE/dse/stds/|title= MN Department of Education Academic Standards (K-12), 2019}}</ref>

In 2019 the [[International Literacy Association]] released a report entitled Meeting the Challenges of Early Literacy Phonics Instruction<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.literacyworldwide.org/docs/default-source/where-we-stand/ila-meeting-challenges-early-literacy-phonics-instruction.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/https://www.literacyworldwide.org/docs/default-source/where-we-stand/ila-meeting-challenges-early-literacy-phonics-instruction.pdf |archive-date=2022-10-09 |url-status=live|title=Meeting the challenges of early Literacy Phonics Instruction, International Literacy Association, 2019}}</ref> The report clearly supports the use of phonics instruction that is explicit and systematic, stating that "phonics instruction is helpful for all students, harmful for none, and crucial for some". It also offers an opinion on the ten most common causes of Phonics Instructional Failure, namely: inadequate time devoted to mastering a new phonics skill such as blending (4–6 weeks recommended); lack of application to real reading instruction; inappropriate reading material to practice the skills; too much teacher instruction, and too little reading by the student; lost time during instructional transitions; the teacher's attitude and knowledge of phonics instructional material; lessons that are not fast-paced and rigorous; lack of assessments over an extended period of time; waiting too long to transition to multi-syllable words; and over-emphasis of phonics drills at the expense of other aspects such as vocabulary.

In 2019, the Best Evidence Encyclopedia,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bestevidence.org|title=Best Evidence Encyclopedia}}</ref> part of [[Johns Hopkins University]], released a review of research on 61 studies of 48 different programs for struggling readers in elementary schools.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bestevidence.org/word/strug_read_April_2019_full.pdf|title=A Quantitative Synthesis of Research on Programs for Struggling Readers in Elementary Schools, Best Evidence Encyclopedia, April 24, 2019|access-date=May 4, 2020|archive-date=July 8, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200708081225/http://www.bestevidence.org/word/strug_read_April_2019_full.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref> It concluded that:<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bestevidence.org/word/methodological_Sept_21_2015.pdf|title=How Methodological Features Affect Effect Sizes in Education, Best Evidence Encyclopedia, September 2015|access-date=2020-05-04|archive-date=2020-07-08|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200708050526/http://www.bestevidence.org/word/methodological_Sept_21_2015.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref>
* Outcomes were positive for one-to-one tutoring
* Outcomes were positive but not as large for one-to-small group tutoring
* There were no differences in outcomes between teachers and teaching assistants as tutors
* Technology-supported adaptive instruction did not have positive outcomes
* Whole-class approaches (mostly [[cooperative learning]]) and whole-school approaches incorporating tutoring obtained outcomes for struggling readers as large as those found for one-to-one tutoring, and benefitted many more students
* Approaches mixing classroom and school improvements, with tutoring for the most [[at-risk students]], have the greatest potential for the largest numbers of struggling readers

In 2019, 52.8% of Louisiana's third-graders scored at or above the State's reading benchmark.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.louisianabelieves.com/docs/default-source/test-results/fall-2019-dibels-reading-report.pdf?sfvrsn=51c9a1f_2|title=Fall 2019 K-3 Reading Report, Louisiana Dept. of Ed.}}</ref> Also in 2019, 26% of grade 4 students were reading at a proficiency level according to the Nation's Report Card.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/profiles/stateprofile?chort=1&sub=RED&sj=AL&sfj=NP&st=MN&year=2019R3|title=GRADE 4 READING 2019, Nation's Report Card}}</ref> In that same year, the [[Louisiana State Legislature]] passed resolution 222 urging the Department of Education to create the ''Early Literacy Commission'' to make recommendations to implement a system providing effective [[Evidence-based education|evidence-based reading instruction]] for children from birth through third grade.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.legis.la.gov/legis/ViewDocument.aspx?d=1142799|title=Louisiana HOUSE RESOLUTION NO. 222, 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.louisianabelieves.com/docs/default-source/early-childhood/louisiana-s-early-literacy-commission-legislative-report.pdf?sfvrsn=984b9a1f_4|title=Louisiana Early Literacy Commission}}</ref> On March 8, 2019, the [[Louisiana Department of Education]] revised their curriculum for K–12 English Language Arts. Its ''Reading Standards for Foundational Skills'' includes requirements for instruction in the alphabetic principle, phonological awareness, phonics and word recognition, fluency and comprehension.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.louisianabelieves.com/docs/default-source/teacher-toolbox-resources/k-12-ela-standards.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/https://www.louisianabelieves.com/docs/default-source/teacher-toolbox-resources/k-12-ela-standards.pdf |archive-date=2022-10-09 |url-status=live|title=K-12 Student Standards for English Language Arts, Louisiana, 2019-03-08}}</ref> Effective in 2020 The [[Louisiana Board of Elementary and Secondary Education]] (BESE) screens for the following skills: Kindergarten-Phonemic Awareness; First Grade-Phonics; Second Grade-Oral Reading Fluency; and Third Grade-Reading Comprehension.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.louisianabelieves.com/docs/default-source/early-childhood/louisiana-s-early-literacy-commission-legislative-report.pdf?sfvrsn=984b9a1f_4|title=Louisiana's Early Literacy Commission, 2020}}</ref>

In 2019, 30% of grade 4 students in [[Texas]] were reading at the "proficiency level" according to the [[National Assessment of Educational Progress|Nation's Report Card]], as compared to the National Average of 34%.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/profiles/stateprofile?chort=1&sub=RED&sj=AL&sfj=NP&st=MN&year=2019R3|title=Grade 4 Reading, The Nation's Report Card (NAEP, 2019)}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d19/tables/dt19_221.40.asp|title= NAEP reading scale score of 4th-grade public school students, by state, 1992 through 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=147|title=Fast facts, NCES}}</ref> In June of that same year the Texas Legislature passed House Bill 3 (HB 3 Reading Academies) requiring all kindergarten through grade-three teachers and principals to "''begin'' a teacher literacy achievement academy before the 2022–2023 school year". The training is anticipated to be a total of 80 hours.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://tcta.org/node/15296-tea_releases_new_details_on_literacy_achievement_academies|title=Literacy Achievement Academies, Texas Classroom Teachers Association, 2019-12-03}}</ref> The goal is to "increase teacher knowledge and implementation of [[Evidence-based education|evidence-based practices]] to positively impact student literacy achievement".<ref>{{cite web|url=https://tea.texas.gov/sites/default/files/tra_overviewparticipantdetails_final_1_2020.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/https://tea.texas.gov/sites/default/files/tra_overviewparticipantdetails_final_1_2020.pdf |archive-date=2022-10-09 |url-status=live|title=HB 3 Reading Academies, Texas Education Agency}}</ref> The required content of the academies' training includes the areas of ''Science of Teaching Reading, Oral Language, Phonological Awareness, Decoding (i.e. Phonics), Fluency and Comprehension.''

In 2016, amongst 50 countries, the United States achieved the 15th highest score in Reading Literacy for students in their fourth year of school according to the [[Progress in International Reading Literacy Study]] (PIRLS).<ref>{{cite web|url=http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/pirls2016/international-results/pirls/student-achievement/pirls-achievement-results/|title=PIRLS reading achievement 2016}}</ref> Of 78 countries, the United States ranked 14th in reading for the international [[PISA]] study for 15-year-old students.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.oecd.org/pisa/publications/PISA2018_CN_USA.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/https://www.oecd.org/pisa/publications/PISA2018_CN_USA.pdf |archive-date=2022-10-09 |url-status=live|title=USA in PISA, 2018}}</ref> In 2019, with respect to the nation's grade-four public school students, 34% performed at or above the [[National Assessment of Educational Progress|Nations Report Card]] "proficient level" (solid academic performance) and 65% performed at or above the NAEP "basic level" (partial mastery of the proficient level skills).<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/reading/states/achievement/?grade=4|title=The NAEP nation's report card}}</ref>

In 2021, the State of Connecticut passed an act concerning the "right to read" that will take effect in 2023. It requires education standards that are evidenced-based and scientifically based and focused on competency in the five areas of reading: phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary development, and reading fluency, including oral skills and reading comprehension.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.cga.ct.gov/2021/FC/PDF/2021HB-06620-R000650-FC.PDF |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/https://www.cga.ct.gov/2021/FC/PDF/2021HB-06620-R000650-FC.PDF |archive-date=2022-10-09 |url-status=live|title=The right to read, sHB6620 / File No. 650, Connecticut, USA}}</ref> In the same year, the state of [[North Carolina]] passed a bill requiring that the teaching of reading be based on the [[Reading#Science of reading|science of reading]].<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.ncleg.gov/BillLookup/2021/S387|title=Excellent Public Schools Act of 2021, Senate Bill 387 / SL 2021-8, April 9, 2021}}</ref>

Between 2013 and 2022, 30 States have passed laws or implemented new policies related to [[Reading#Science of reading|evidence-based reading instruction]].<ref name="Sarah Schwartz"/> In some instances, this requires the teaching of phonics in an explicit and systematic manner. However, these requirements are not uniform and may prove difficult to implement as "old practices prove hard to shake".<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/states-are-pushing-changes-to-reading-instruction-but-old-practices-prove-hard-to-shake/2022/07|author=Sarah Schwartz|date=July 20, 2022|title=States Are Pushing Changes to Reading Instruction. But Old Practices Prove Hard to Shake, EdWeek|website=[[Education Week]] }}</ref>

In 2023, New York City set about to require schools to teach reading with an emphasis on phonics. In that city, less than half of the students from the third grade to the eighth grade of school scored as proficient on state reading exams. More than 63% of Black and Hispanic test-takers did not make the grade. Elementary school teachers will have to implement one of three comprehensive reading programs over the next couple of years. The United Federation of Teachers celebrated the announcement, but the local principals union was “not satisfied” with the lack of choice. All but two of the school superintendents chose the most traditional of the three choices, with explicit and systematic instruction in foundational literacy skills such as vocabulary and reading comprehension.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/education/ny-nyc-mandate-public-schools-teach-reading-phonics-20230509-twzrkyjkqjgxhnnpzz3dcmqt7i-story.html|title=NYC to mandate citywide reading approach in bid to lift lagging literacy rates, New York Daily News|date=2023-05-09|author=Cayla Bamberger|website=[[New York Daily News]] }}</ref>