Elephants in the Room: Why Does The Science of Reading World Skew Conservative?

As a former secondary school teacher, I didn’t spend much time thinking about how to teach students how to read. They came to me reading…for the most part. But at the Goyen Foundation, I quickly learned how critical early reading instruction is, how robust the evidence base is for certain best practices, and how inconsistently those practices are applied. I was hooked on the science of reading (1). 

But I was also puzzled. On www.twitter.com, that well-known and highly representative digital marketplace of free ideas (this is a joke), I noticed that many prominent advocates of the science of reading also share other ideas. They opine about critical race theory in K-12 schools (bad), Nikole Hannah-Jones and the 1619 project (evil), mask mandates in schools (oppressive), cancel culture (basically fascism), teacher unions (very evil), school choice (our last great hope), among other things. 

There are major exceptions, to be sure, but the message is clear: the science of reading world skews conservative. Having read the above paragraph, you’ll be shocked to learn that I do not. 

This is not just a Twitter phenomenon. Just last week, I was talking to a leading state-level advocate for mandatory dyslexia screening laws. She happens to be a Democrat but shared with me that her staunchest supporters in state government are all Republicans. In her words, if her statehouse was controlled by Republicans with whom she disagrees on almost everything, they’d have already passed the [very reasonable] screening bill that her group is pushing. 

So why does membership in this movement tend to skew conservative? 

My first thought was that conservatives in the education space see the dismantling of public schools through school choice as their end goal. To make that case, it helps to show that public schools are failing. And to do that, they use every piece of ammunition they can muster—ineffective reading instruction, content-poor curricula, Critical Race Theory, narratives about selfish and lazy teachers—to undermine public schools. Some of those arguments are fair—namely ineffective reading instruction and content-poor curricula. In my opinion, the others are not. But if you’re interested in delegitimizing public schools, they’re all useful. 

Of course, many conservative voices would disagree with this hypothesis. Some would argue that enumerating the failures of public schools is necessary to justify school choice. School choice would then create competition, forcing public schools to improve. 

So what about the other side? To return to my screening advocacy friend for a minute: why aren’t the elected Democrats in her state more supportive of the policies that her group is pushing? These are bills establishing higher standards for teacher training and requirements for evidence-based curriculum and universal screening, by the way. Good stuff. 

Her working hypothesis is that the Democratic representatives are beholden to the teacher’s unions, who oppose such laws because they believe they will reduce teacher autonomy and power and create more work for teachers. 

I also imagine that these elected Democrats see Republicans attacking from multiple angles. They see these efforts to put science of reading ideas into classrooms as part of those Republican attacks, and they fight back. 

This is a huge problem. The science of reading, evidence-based reading instruction, whatever you want to call it, is not a partisan issue. There is nothing left or right about the facts of how students learn. We know better than ever how to teach all students to read, but we’re not doing it. Instead, we’re politicizing our students' futures. 

How can we escape the polarization of this issue? I have some ideas— and I’d love to hear yours. Stay tuned for a future post where I share some. 

(1) Defined as followed by the Reading League “The science of reading is a vast, interdisciplinary body of scientifically-based research about reading and issues related to reading and writing. This research has been conducted over the last five decades across the world, and it is derived from thousands of studies conducted in multiple languages. The science of reading has culminated in a preponderance of evidence to inform how proficient reading and writing develop; why some have difficulty; and how we can most effectively assess and teach and, therefore, improve student outcomes through prevention of and intervention for reading difficulties.”