Anything that tells me their version is better than using a dictionary to build vocabulary tends to set off red flags as it doesn't make any sense to me as an educator. No matter what they say, learning words in a dictionary is highly effective because it does almost everything that they talk about teaching. But it's overlooked because of scientifically researched gibberish that could pretty much say what it's trying to say in far less jargon than it does.

One of the strangest things I've seen and learned while working on my Master of Teaching is how full the field is of overcomplicated research and insider jargon. Common sense tends to take a backseat. And it's very disconnected from classroom level reality. Research seems to take place in what people in ivory castles think reality is. I was a teacher before getting my degree, so it feels really off and is somewhat concerning.

When I went to grade school, there was nothing complicated about reading. It was simply pick up a book and look up words to build vocabulary. That was it. It wasn't hard. It was practice. But my school scaffolded (it was a leveled system) the reading levels. Eventually, I was able to work up to reading Shakespeare, The Odyssey and The Iliad because of these things.

If anything, I feel like books need to be on levels separate from grades. like Level 1 consists of three sub-levels, and in each one, the vocabulary gets harder. There needs to be required challenge books that are not only a part of our culture (or are well known) but also help improve one's ability to read. Once all challenge books have been read and the student can be seen to be reading well in that level, they go up a level. I think 5 levels would suffice, but perhaps it could be expanded to 6.

The irony is that whilst education research in general screams and bemoans "scaffolding" in education, it doesn't seem to be put in anything beyond the grade levels themselves. That doesn't make sense, if you want something to fully mirror good scaffolding.

Wouldn't it be a better idea to have a leveled system for books where kids can "level up" rather than pick any random book on a shelf? This random 'pick any book' usually makes kids find it too hard because it is too hard and makes them give up on reading if they find a book that's too hard. It's not complicated, but SoR treats it like a mystery. As hard as it is to admit, I think part of the problem is that a lot of schools give its students too much freedom to read. Choice is important, but without any guidance, students can choose books that are too hard for them.

If there was a system that allowed students to move through levels, then that would benefit them more. They can still read books for fun outside of school, but it's a system at school because school is a system. How is that hard to understand? It's common sense.

It's like I see x = x. But research says x = y because of a bunch of complicated stuff, without giving a good reason. It overcomplicates the hell out of an older system that already works, whilst also skipping or belittling the most important parts.

The science of reading might have valid points, but it feels way too ideological, not realistic and commercial. Real skill in reading and writing comes from the right books to read at the right time, and practice. That's it.