The New Yorker article “Alphabet Soup” (Dec 29/Jan 5 issue) did a good job of conveying the complexity of dyslexia, the frustrations of dyslexics and their families, and the promise of schools such as the Central Brooklyn Learning Academy. It covered a lot of ground, and I know it wasn’t generated by AI because it was so well written. I am less enthusiastic about other aspects of the article.

This post summarizes my longstanding concerns about the practice of phonemic awareness instruction, a core element of the “science of reading” approach that is based on a deep misunderstanding of what phonemes are and how phonemic awareness develops.

This material will appear in somewhat different form in the updated edition of my book, to appear early next year.

An updated version of my book about reading and education will appear in a few months. It focuses on developments in reading education since it was published, including the emergence of the “science of reading” approach to instruction.  This post is based on material that will appear in the new edition.

An index of published articles by Mark Seidenberg and/or Maryellen MacDonald, with links to PDFs. Still updating but mostly complete. Here.

The December 2024 article does a good job of characterizing Lucy Calkins’ complex legacy, but she is not the “scapegoat” for America’s failure to adequately teach reading.

In light of the Dec 2024 article in the Atlantic about Lucy Calkins, I am reposting this piece of mine from a few years ago.

AI tools that do remarkable things are appearing so often it’s impossible to keep up. I have just tried the innocuously named NotebookLM from Google and think you’ll be interested in the results.

I see that there are >100 responses to my last post, which will take me a little time to go through. The exchange is also continuing on the SPELLtalk list. I won't have time to copy all of that over to this site, I'm afraid. 

I don’t know if we agree about phonics, but let’s get back to phonemic awareness. Thanks for clarifying that you don’t advocate teaching 44 phonemes as a prerequisite skill. I had in mind the many people who are doing this.

You’re obviously committed to reading education and to achieving consensus about what works and why. Engaging in thoughtful, civil discussions about challenging issues is essential, of course, and I am responding with that in mind. Although I’m responding to your post, I’m addressing views that are shared by many people, which you’ve helpfully summarized.