Increasingly, parents and teachers are embracing the controversial Science of Reading (SoR), pushing for State policies that reinforce more phonics instruction. It’s troubling to see they only discuss commercial decoding programs, of which there are many. They rarely mention the importance of picture books and giving children the chance to read freely.
Is phonics important? Of course. Well-prepared teachers know this. But there’s much evidence that picture books are critical to early learning. They deserve to be highlighted in how children learn to read.
Picture Books Prepare Children for Kindergarten
A recent study in Pediatrics found two programs that increase kindergarten readiness in preschoolers. Was it a decoding program? More phonics for three and four-year-olds? No.
Researchers found that supporting families to read picture books to their children helped their children be ready for kindergarten!
For newborns through age 5, Reach Out and Read provides children with a new book and guidance from the pediatrician during well-visits about reading at home.
Dolly Parton’s Imagination Library mails new books to the child’s home once a month from birth through age 5.
The study found that:
Sharing books with preschoolers promotes speech and language development, preliteracy skills, and, ultimately, kindergarten readiness. Both Reach Out and Read and Dolly Parton’s Imagination Library have shown positive influences on the home literacy environment of preschoolers.
Providing young children, especially children at risk, with access to picture books helps prepare them for kindergarten!
Picture Books vs. Decoding Booklets
SoR includes decoding booklets focused on letters and sounds. These books might have a place in reading instruction, but they’re no match for books like The Very Hungry Caterpillar a picture book that illustrates the beauty and how children learn through picture books.
Author Eric Carle died on May 23. While the world of children’s literature lost a shining star, the vivid pictures and endearing sight of a caterpillar munching its way towards becoming a butterfly will always captivate children and teach them about the life cycle.
Read more about Carle and his many wonderful books here.
Wordless Picture Books
Wordless picture books are sometimes cast aside and considered a waste of a child’s time. But wordless picture books help children think.
Kirsten, The Library Lady, describes how wordless picture books help children learn cause and effect. They raise questions about the pictures. Children can tell what they think about the pictures, increasing vocabulary, improving sequencing skills, and much more.
She provides a list of picture books without words.
The Importance of Causal Information
Science Daily reports on a study in Frontiers in Psychology showing that children prefer storybooks with more causal information about the world they live in.
Children have an insatiable appetite to understand why things are the way they are, leading to their apt description as “little scientists.” While researchers have been aware of children’s interest in causal information, they didn’t know whether it influenced children’s preferences during real-world activities, such as reading.
Specifically, it demonstrates that children’s interest in causal information extends to personal book preferences.
Let children choose the picture books they like.
Picture Books and Mathematics
In Picture Books as an Impetus for Kindergartners’ Mathematical Thinking, we learn that picture books provide early learners with an environment conducive to learning mathematics and spatial relationships.
Picture books with high literary quality create their own priorities separate from possible didactical intentions. This makes them an interesting research area and a source for new understanding of the learning of mathematics.
Here’s a list of useful picture books for math instruction.
Magazines
If possible, get a subscription to Highlights for Children, Lady Bug, Ranger Rick, or other magazines for children, including pictures and short stories. Children’s magazines are also usually available in the library.
Stories in magazines are often accompanied by vivid pictures and games that address specific reading skills.
Children still enjoy getting a magazine from the mailbox, a welcome relief from screens, or for children who may not be ready for reading longer books.
Comic Books
Children who might be overwhelmed with all the words in books could be less intimidated by pictures in comic books.
In The Power of Reading: Insights from the Research, Stephen D. Krashen highlights numerous studies that indicate the importance of comic books to reading, including Marvel Comics (p. 91-110). Many of our favorite superhero movies like Superman, Spiderman, and Batman, come from comic books.
Comic books can improve language development, including for children learning a second language. Bright pictures help children make meaning of the difficult text (p.124).
Comic books provide rich story plots, and even funny books teach reading. I distinctly remember picking out words associated with pictures in Dennis the Menace and Mighty Mouse comic books!
Bibliotherapy
Introducing children to books that address personal issues they may be facing can be used at every stage of a child’s life and is called bibliotherapy.
Many picture books reflect difficulties and help children feel better about themselves and learn about problems facing others.
Here are some examples of books connected to difficulties children might be facing.
Bibliotherapy Goldmine: Books on a Variety of Topics
Bibliotherapy w/Kids – The Use of Books in Therapy
Audiobooks
Some children might need more intensive phonics instruction if they have difficulty learning to read or have a known disability.
But even then, beautiful, rich, and funny picture books should be the mainstay of a child’s reading instruction. Programs like Learning Ally, the use of audiobooks can be helpful.
Picture books are what children especially need when they are first learning to read or have a disability.
Libraries
As summer approaches and there’s fear of learning loss in children due to the pandemic, libraries with wonderful picture books await children. Schools need great libraries and library programs that are available to them over the summer.
____
Picture books are both pleasurable and instructive and will help children learn to be great readers. Ignoring the importance of picture books is detrimental to children and will likely cause them learning problems in the years to come.
The more access young learners have to quality picture books, the more they will care about reading and do it often and well.
References
Krashen, S. D. (2004). The Power of Reading: Insights from the Research. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Note:
The following isn’t a book I referenced, but I like to mention it when discussing the importance of picture books.
Co-author, Shirley C. Raines, was the President of the University of Memphis and is an early childhood specialist. She and Robert J. Canady have written a series of books with ideas on expanding picture books in a child’s life.
Raines, S. C. & Canady, R. J. (1989). Story S-T-R-E-T-C-H-E-R-S: Activities to Expand Children’s Favorite Books. Mt. Rainier, Maryland: Gryphon House.
Also:
Jim Trelease, a parent who understood the power of reading aloud to children, including picture books.
Trelease, J. (2013). The Read-Aloud Handbook. New York, NY: Penguin Books.
No one who supports SOR is talking about taking picture books out. Picture books are great for read alouds and pre K and beginning kindergarten. However once you start teaching children the code, decoding books are essential for practicing PA.
I don’t know if you are BL advocate, BL people completely misunderstand the use of decodables. Nobody is trying to take away decodables.
Thank you for bringing up Balanced Literacy because I believe that’s why the SoR supporters do not highlight picture books.
When I look at what’s written selling SoR, it’s all about commercial programs, including those books for decoding.
No one is talking about quality picture books. If they are mentioned, it’s an afterthought. But the evidence is clear that reading early to young children with picture books increases their chances of being good readers. We’ve actually known this for a very long time.
Don’t schools already have and value high quality picture books? No one who understands the science of reading would like to take away good books. When pictures are used with early readers for practice reading, students are interpreting the pictures not learning to decode the letters on the page. Decodables are used during reading instruction to practice letter sound correspondence that has been taught during instruction. This is just one part of the SOR, there is more to it. I recommend watching the Purple Challenge Part 1 and 2. https://youtu.be/Lxx7hs0qdKQ
Decoding books might have an instructional place, as I noted, but SoR doesn’t promote the early reading of picture books to help children be ready for kindergarten. It’s all about phonics.
I see FB pages about SoR that discuss nothing but sounds and programs, including online commercial programs that teach sounds. Picture books, if they’re mentioned, are an afterthought.
Picture books should have a prominent place in teaching young children how to read. This shouldn’t need to be said. We have always known this.
This blog is pure attention seeking . SoR promotes phonological awareness . We all agree this comes form exposure to language rich, quality experience. Parents reading and sharing picture book, rhymes and all aspects of language with their children. Decoding and decodable books come in later at the phonemic awareness stage when practising skills learnt. A teachers knows that this reinforces learning.
I believe you know this being a dedicated as you seem so I can only assume this is just a click bait to get your name out
No, I don’t see the SoR promote picture books. I hear parents and teachers discussing and debating which commercial decoding programs will teach their 3 and 4-year-olds how to read.
The real science of reading (not the nonsense about intensive phonics instruction) is ALL about experiencing meaning, and quality picture books offer meaning on myriad levels.
Is there parallel SoR? Could you tell me more?
Yes, yes, and yes! This is so important! It should be the start of every “How to Teach Reading” class in Early Childhood Education programs. It should also be included in Preparing for Parenthood classes.
Thank you, Dorothy. You reminded me of Jim Trelease. I added the information in the comment section.
And it’s not only young children who enjoy and appreciate picture books. Some of these books are quite sophisticated. I also believe that beautifully illustrated picture books belong in all children’s hands. We all need more beauty in our lives.
Yes! Thank you, Sheila!
Yes, I agree completely! I’m a Language Arts Specialist. Picture books are not meant for the very young only, but for all of us, helping us understand, feel emotions and make connections to our everyday lives. We often learn the meaning of words or phrases through images. Think of second language learners too. And any of us who travel to non-English speaking countries know that gestures and facial expressions are absolutely necessary to communicate…
Lovely! Thank you.
Nancy, I couldn’t agree more. My son recently sent me a video of him reading a picture book to my almost two years old grandson. Actually he was asking him to point out various, brightly colored animals. Not only was he learning the shapes of various animals, he was learning colors. I recalled how much his sister enjoyed the book “Brown Bear, Brown Bear & the way she could “read” it back to us.
Hi Lorrie! It is nice to hear from you. Thank you for sharing—such a great book. I know you’ll enjoy continuing to watch their language progress. I appreciate this example. Take care.
Where from anything in the science of reading have you gotten the idea that picture books aren’t important?
It’s because it is excluded in favor of nothing but decoding. I follow some FB pages and Twitter threads and never see picture books and their importance mentioned. I believe if they were mentioned, it would mean embracing balanced literacy.
You keep repeating that this is all based on “FB and Twitter “. Do you have any actual sources for anyone who is advocating for SOR saying to NOT use or get rid of picture books?
I’m both a parent, a teacher, and a bilingual teacher at that. I believe we NEED SoR, desperately, for young learners, but I also read to my children from infancy through (now 13). I read aloud in the class and at home, in Spanish and English. And talk about the beauty of Reading, because I love reading. I still remember learning to read in English, using phonics, to fall in love with Harry Potter in 5th grade, being an ELL who had been ridiculed for not speaking English well enough, those rules got me through many hard years while I became proficient in the English language.
You forget about the many “commercial programs” BL has out there also. F and P, Lucy Caulkins, LLI, any of the major companies like HMH, Pearson, etc. EVERYONE has programs. So you only call out the SoR ones?
I’d encourage you to use the search function in the groups, and Google. But please state your valid sources for anything stating SoR not supporting picture books.
Social media is where SoR conversations take place but nowhere else do I see picture books promoted.
I didn’t say the SoR folks said to get rid of picture books. I say they omit their importance.
There’s evidence that reading picture books to early learners help to prepare them for Kindergarten. SoR doesn’t say that. They promote early phonics programs.
I am glad you love reading and read to your children and that you did well. I am not anti-phonics. I taught it.
I took your advice and searched on google “the science of reading and picture books.” My post showed up and posts about reading books and the subject of science. Let me know if you find anything.
Thank you for sharing your story and taking the time to comment.
People aren’t talking about it because it is obvious, no one disagrees, and it happening already. Every preschool, library, and parent who is able to, uses picture books with young children.
I think that’s an assumption. Here’s a popular site describing SoR, and not once do they mention the importance of picture books.
https://journal.imse.com/what-is-the-science-of-reading/
No more or less of an assumption than to contend that the SOR movement doesn’t think picture books are important based off of “Twitter” research.
What I believe Maura is stating is that picture books aren’t a part of the broad conversation because that need that is already widely met in early literacy and widely understood among educators.
The important conversations happening in SOR Facebook Groups and yes, on Twitter, is currently focused on the long ignored deficits in instruction, such as sequential, explicit phonics.
The FB pages are concerning. Parents and teachers who believe that SoR is about decoding want their 3 and 4 year-olds kindergarten-ready. They talk at great length about commercial programs, all decoding, that will work in and out of the classroom.
I never see them discuss reading picture books. And as has been pointed out here, there’s a belief that children must FIRST have decoding skills. Yet as the Pediatric study showed, when children are read to and have access to picture books, they get to K very ready.
I also would disagree with the deficits in instruction coming from teachers. Phonics has been around forever. There are many variables as to why some children have fallen behind.
I think you are mistaken about what SoR is… not sure what FB pages you’re on but many SoR advocates place importance on both decodable texts and authentic texts. This video might help your understanding https://youtu.be/K_E7mk4bnlo
O.K. I skimmed through all the theoretical model discussions about the reading rope. At 6.09, she discusses briefly what to look for in authentic texts but quickly jumps to decodable texts.
So reading real picture books is mentioned, but there seem to be some conditions that are to be considered before children read those books, which is troubling in and of itself.
Children should have free access to picture books.
But thanks for sharing.
Science of Reading isn’t a commercial program. It’s an approach to teaching reading based on decades of brain research that has shown how the skill of reading is acquired. Science of Reading absolutely promotes the use of picture books. Before children can read independently, teachers should be reading quality literature to children for modelling and as a springboard for comprehension discussions.
Decodable readers are an instructional tool to allow children to experience reading success as they learn letter-sound correspondences and promote sounding out of unknown words. Once children can decode with increasing accuracy and automaticity, children can read quality literature on their own and in guided reading situations.
I’m so sick of proponents of balanced literacy either wilfully or ignorantly misrepresenting the Science of Reading and what it stands for without actually taking the time to consult the literature or ask an expert.
I disagree. And I think this illustrates the problem and reflects SoR. You say,
“Once children can decode with increasing accuracy and automatically, children can read quality literature on their own and in guided reading situations.”
I’m saying start with picture books. Lots of reading for children early on. The Pediatric study I cite indicates that’s what works.
And I guess that is balanced literacy.
What I see happening, involves parents and teachers pushing early phonics and they never highlight the importance of picture books.
Thanks for your comment. I appreciate this debate even though we disagree.
If you’re saying that children should attempt to read the words in picture books before they know the phonics that allows them to read that code without guessing, that is absolutely not supported by the Science of Reading. If, however, you are saying children should look at picture books and be read picture books by their parents and teachers, that absolutely is supported by the Science of Reading. For beginning readers, any reading strategies that promote guessing, such as looking at the picture and guessing butterfly because there’s a picture of a butterfly and the word starts with ‘b’ are actively working against the way brain research tells us brains acquire reading. For some children, they will learn how to read no matter how they’re taught (ie. they learn to read in spite of us not because of us) but for many children, the strategies of ‘balanced literacy’ and the three cueing system actively delay the acquisition of reading. For a smaller but still significant cohort of children, these strategies can mean the difference between learning to read or not. As a teacher, I am not ok with even delaying my students as they learn to read, let alone leaving them behind all together.
Also, it’s an approach with many commercial programs.
I’m not suggesting there are no commercial programs that align with the Science of Reading, though most only include several aspects of it and are not a complete reading program, ie. they need to be supplemented. The closest to complete program is an Australian program called Initialit. If you look into this program, you will see that it utilises quality picture books for read alouds. The company that makes it also sell picture book reading cards that provide lessons for teachers around Australian and some international picture books – they include comprehension questions for each spread and vocabulary to highlight.
So yes, there are commercial programs available that align with the Science of Reading. However, the Science of Reading is not a commercial program in and of itself. It is an approach to teaching reading that takes into account an overwhelming body of research that shows us how reading is acquired by the brain. This research comes from a range of fields including neuroscience.
I don’t think I ever said that SoR was a program. I am concerned about parents and educators purchasing commercial programs selling SoR for young children.
Thanks for the link but I only see their production of decoding books. Am I looking in the right place?
https://multilit.com/programs/initialit-readers/
SoR includes authentic text – but until kids can decode them, they can be read aloud! Authentic texts are important for vocabulary, background knowledge, arc of story, metaphor, foreshadowing, the list goes on.
Yes, they are important.
Certainly, you’d give children picture books to look at even if they cannot decode the words.
Nancy,
I hope you find time to read (and share) two important articles:
1. Nell Duke’s The Science of Reading Progresses: Communicating Advances Beyond the Simple View of Reading at https://ila.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/rrq.411 (ILA has granted open access) and
2. Regie Routman’s reaction at the bottom of this post: https://regieroutman.org/blog/what-im-reading-june-2021/
I think you will find these informative, and they open your readers’ eyes a bit to the point that while no one disagrees that phonics are important, use of them beyond teaching decoding skills is limited. Certainly those of us who work with older struggling readers first teach vowel sounds and decoding long words, but we will never help children move to the richness needed to understand deeper text when limiting them to decodable books.
Hi Terri, Thank you! I have great respect for both.
I think what I’m reading with Nell Duke is that the SoR can evolve. I believe there’s concern still that the heavy focus on decoding may create children who can sound words but have difficulties with comprehension. This was the problem with Reading First.
Also, with the Simple View of Reading (SVR), I hear questioning about having children learn to decode first. Which some argue for here.
“Indeed, the founders of the SVR suggested that these processes were not only entirely separate but also occurred sequentially, decoding first and listening comprehension second, leading to unfounded assumptions that students should be taught to decode first and then to comprehend (Houck & Ross, 2012).”
I’m saying that we know that reading picture books to children early helps prepare them for a lifetime love of reading and often they enter K ready to go. I’m arguing that this is more important than giving littles a steady stream of phonics instruction.
Certainly, teachers will need to identify student reading strengths and weaknesses. And phonics is critical to students with disabilities. Most children need some phonics for spelling.
But SoR is super focused on phonics very early and to the exclusion. I fear, of exposure to picture books. That’s why I wrote this post. That’s my concern.
I completely agree with your concern, and with your understanding of Nell Duke’s position.
I have the same visceral reaction to this phonics hyper-focus as I did as a fledgling teacher in the late 80s, when a leading phonics-only program claimed that students must learn a majority of 70 phonograms (taught with repetitive flashcards) before they could read a book. I am a strong believer in phonics as a way for students to crack the code, but where would we be without foundations of and love for story and language? I suppose it’s something akin to feeding someone a spoonful of cocoa powder, then trying to convince them to try a torte.
Great example! I think we’re shaking hands. Thanks for the follow-up comment, Terri.
Dear Nancy,
Respectfully, the reason you can’t find this on social media is because it isn’t something anyone in SoR is debating. Picture books and access to high quality literature are an accepted practice, and settled science, in SoR. I think you just don’t know what to look for to see it. Search Scarborough’s Reading Rope or the Simple View of Reading. Both are crucial in SoR and both highlight the importance of comprehension and vocabulary as an equal piece of the puzzle with decoding. I think the fact that you are arguing for exposure to a broad range of literature for young children would just receive head nods from teachers whose practice is based on the science of reading. (or even every single teacher that I know, BL or SoR) There wouldn’t be anything to argue with you about. I don’t think creating an argument where one doesn’t exist is helpful to anyone.
The reason you see so much about phonics and phonemic awareness on social media is because those are the pieces of the puzzle that teachers know the least about. They know about word work, but not explicit, systemic phonics instruction. So they come to facebook groups to ask questions about the things that they need help with. They ask questions about programs and resources, scope & sequence questions, methods and practices because they need help. Not because this is the ONLY thing that they value. If we, as a profession, received instruction in our institutions of higher ed related to explicit, systemic phonics instruction and if it was already accepted practice in all (or a majority of) schools, the teachers wouldn’t be talking about it as much. I taught for 16 years and in that time my university, and all of my administrators never talked to me about explicit, systemic phonics instruction. I was sent to 1 week of Orton-Gillingham training, but it was not accepted practice in the district that sent me, they focused on guided reading and word work. But I did receive a lot of education AND PD on high quality picture books and other literature. Please don’t equate a desire to know about one important component of SoR as the ONLY important piece. That simply is not true.
Your encouragement of high quality literature could stand on its own, without condemning SoR, and you could bring teachers together about this. We can all agree about this, why shouldn’t we celebrate this common ground? Your title could read “High Quality Literature: What All Teachers Can Agree On”. I assume you are just advocating for a practice you are worried is being ignored or done away with, but I assure you, this isn’t the case. In fact, speaking only for myself, my journey to SoR in the last 2 and a half years, has lead me to a deeper understanding of how to use picture books and content to support the language development of my students. I’m rethinking which books I use and looking to enhance my vocabulary development. Even making sure to give more time to science and social studies because of SoR.
I hope we can evaluate SoR based on what the research is saying (since SoR isn’t a program, but practices based on a body of research), and what the literature is saying (and many facebook posts advocate for teachers to receive training or read high quality books about SoR too), so that we can spend our energies helping children and not fighting over non-issues.
All the best to you! I support your advocating for high quality literature. I hope we can agree to agree on that.
And yet, even here, comments are about teaching phonics early before picture books, like decoding must be mastered first. My concern is that the simple practice of reading picture books and letting early learners look at books is bypassed for phonics instruction.
I am not anti-phonics. I taught SRA Morphographs (when that was popular) and sat through other phonics PD and worked with students with reading disabilities for years. But I find the SoR ignores the importance of reading picture books to children early in favor of browbeating early learners with phonics first.
Even with students with disabilities, exposure to rich literature is critical. I never see that mentioned with SoR. What I do see are parents worrying that their three-year-old will not be ready for K if they don’t get them the best online decoding program.
That’s my concern. Thank you for your thoughtful comment.
I guess if you are determined to see something that isn’t really there, you will find it. It is too bad that you are willing to base your opinion on SoR completely on your perception of facebook posts and not the actual literature and practice. But, if that is what you choose, then you get to do that. It is a shame we can’t work together to help parents understand the difference. But ah well…c’est la vie!
Who’s not wanting to work together? If I didn’t welcome debate I wouldn’t post comments.
Again, show me where SoR says that children should be encouraged to “freely” read picture books early. When it is mentioned there are so many conditions…
I totally agree with Nicole’s earlier and very thoughtful comment. I would ask you to put look at information through The Reading League and other sources of accurate information (not just Twitter or Facebook threads).
Reading and writing float on a sea of talk. Learning and playing with language is key to this. Rhyming and the myriad of other skills developed by engaging picture books is absolutely vital and extremely important to the development of phonological awareness, background knowledge, comprehension, vocabulary…not to mention the intangibles of joy and belonging.
In fact it is important to ensure there is a solid basis of phonological awareness to support phonics. No one is against authentic texts.
Rather there is a need for explicit instruction and many children will not acquire reading without this. Therefore teachers need to know how to teach and support students in this acquisition and decidable are vital in this time period.
However, picture books and authentic texts should still be read and discussed.
This is not an either or. There is so much great information in your blog and so much that I love. We live in such a polarized world and I feel very sad that this polarization stretches to reading.
We all love books. I am an author and avid reader. Decodables are an important step for many in the systematic acquisition of reading skills. They are a stepping stone on the pathway but not the pathway or the end goal.
Could you show me where the Reading League is promoting the early reading of picture books?
Again, it looks to me that you are stating that children must have a “solid basis of phonological awareness” before they can read picture books.
I am disappointed. I feel that you are misrepresenting the science of reading. SOR advocates for the reading rope which includes language comprehension. I read posts and articles all the time that discuss the importance of building students’ oral language skills using rich, quality children’s literature. Could you post examples you have found where those advocating for SOR have stated that picture books are not important?
The SoR includes much discussion about building skills through decoding.
They do not say that picture books are not important. That is not what I said.
What I said was that they omit discussion about the importance of picture books and free reading to early learning. When they do mention picture books they preface it with talk about the skills students need to accomplish reading.
I already posted a link above where they don’t mention it. If you can find where they discuss the importance let me know.
The SoR(which is not a program but actual Science based on research over decades) does not promote phonics as the very first step in reading. It promotes a “sounds first approach”. It starts with phonological awareness. Kids are listening for the sounds and syllables in words. They are segmenting and blending words before they are ever putting those sounds to letters. The are all oral activities. The phonics, which is different from phonological awareness, comes in later with kindergarten and 1st grade. This is when SoR advocates for decodables. You keep saying parents and teachers need to read and expose children to picture books especially at a young age 3-4 years, which no one in education ever disputes or puts as an after thought. The PARENTS and TEACHERS being the key words as to who is reading the picture books. The decodables are what we put into the children’s hands to practice the skills (phonics) they have been systematically and explicitly taught. Without the systematic and explicit phonics instruction most children will merely be guessing the words in a picture book or “reading” it from memory. There is definitely a place for parents and teachers to read to students, not just picture books but also chapter books and the SoR never discourages that. The programs based in SoR aren’t explicitly saying to read to kids because these are programs to help teach students to read words, not necessarily grow their love of reading. That will come once they know how to read. If they don’t have that strong foundation that phonics provides they are less likely to become strong readers and thus hate reading because they “can’t do it”.
Rhonda, I read over this again later in the day. I maybe answered too quickly. I don’t want to dismiss what you say about rhyme and how children listen to sounds and syllables etc. But I believe strongly and there’s evidence that young children pick these skills up by exposure to good children’s literature. Even looking at books on their own. Hope I’m making myself clear.
There is so much about this that I’m afraid I have to disagree with.
Please, do not deny children picture books to look at even if they cannot read the words. Young children thrive by looking a picture books.
My thanks to the NEPC.
https://nepc.colorado.edu/blog/science-reading-ignores
I think your post is right on target. Yes, teachers must teach phonics and decoding and encoding but if you want a child to love to read, you must expose them to good children’s literature, much of it self-chosen. I see your post as suggesting that in addition to teaching phonics, we want children to be read to every day, maybe several times a day, from really good children’s literature. This is where they develop their critical thinking skills and are also exposed to good writing, which may influence their own early writing style. This is also a way to grow children’s vocabulary as they are exposed to words unfamiliar to them in their everyday environment.
I am a retired teacher educator who has taught students preparing to become teachers who came to us with little background in and familiarity with good children’s literature. As we got to know each other well and our relationships developed, the students began to express how much they felt “cheated” by not being read to in school. And, yes, I can hear people say that their parents should have read to them but most of these students came from low-income families where parents themselves often were not read to as children and who worked long hours.
This conversation should not be a battle between phonics and providing children with excellent children’s literature (all types – poetry, fiction, non-fiction), and all its forms. One should not push out the other. They can co-exist, and when they do, it is a win-win for all, especially for the children.
Thank you, Nora Jane! Well said. I appreciate this very much.