The "science of reading" is a research consensus—not a single program—and identifies practices like systematic phonics and explicit vocabulary instruction that support reading development. Joanna Yip's report recommends redesigning literacy professional development and expanding evidence-based P–12 supports so English learners benefit from both English literacy instruction and home-language development. New York has useful resources (the 2014 Blueprint and the 2025 Toolkit) but faces uneven implementation; adopting Yip's recommendations could create a balanced, scalable model for other states.
How the Science of Reading Can Support English Learners: A Practical Path Forward
The phrase "science of reading" has generated intense public attention and political energy, but it is important to clarify what the term actually means. It is not a single prescriptive program that schools can simply "implement." Rather, the science of reading is a body of research findings that together form a consensus about how children learn to read most effectively in English and in other languages that use phonetic writing systems.
The Science Of Reading Is A Guide, Not A Curriculum
Just as factories do not "implement" climate science and baseball teams do not "implement" analytics, schools cannot treat the science of reading as a plug-and-play curriculum. Instead, it describes evidence-based principles—such as systematic phonics, explicit vocabulary instruction, and guided practice to build fluent decoding—that should inform teaching decisions and curriculum design.
Concerns About English Learners Are Understandable—and Addressable
Some educators and advocates worry that the research consensus implies a rigid, one-size-fits-all pedagogy that may not meet the needs of English learners (ELs). There is a related concern that focusing on English literacy could divert attention from supporting students' development in their home languages. Those concerns are valid, but they reflect implementation choices, not an inherent incompatibility between the science of reading and multilingual education.
What Joanna Yip's Report Recommends
Joanna Yip of Education Trust–New York outlines practical recommendations for centering multilingual learners within statewide literacy policy. Key proposals include redesigning professional development so that training is informed by experts in EL language development, ensuring evidence-based supports across P–12 for newcomers, and expanding access to bilingual and dual-language programs that promote biliteracy.
"Teachers should learn strategies to advance oral language development and leverage students' emerging bilingualism to strengthen literacy in both languages."
Why Bilingualism And Biliteracy Matter
Research shows that many ELs can transfer skills from their first language to English. For example, a student who reads confidently in Spanish or Arabic brings linguistic strengths that instruction can build on. Dual-language programs and biliteracy instruction allow students to compare language features across systems—deepening understanding of grammar, phonology, and orthography in both languages.
New York's Progress—and Remaining Gaps
New York has important assets: a long history of serving multilingual communities, a 2014 Blueprint for English Learner Success, and a 2025 Science of Reading for Multilingual Learners Toolkit. Those resources provide helpful guidance for teachers working in multilingual settings (for example, pointing out phonological overlaps such as the letter "f" across English and Spanish while also teaching English spelling variants like "ph" and "gh").
However, Yip's report criticizes the state for relying heavily on voluntary guidance and uneven implementation instead of sustained, systemic policy. The report also notes that non–research-based instructional materials and teaching methods remain too common. For example, a 2024 literacy initiative directed $10 million to the New York State United Teachers for professional development; experts later observed that some resulting training did not align with the evidence behind the science of reading.
Practical Takeaways For Educators And Policymakers
English learners should not be excluded from the core elements of effective early-literacy instruction. Systematic phonics, explicit vocabulary teaching, and structured fluency practice benefit ELs just as they benefit English-dominant students. Effective policy and practice layer on supports for home-language development and explicit cross-language connections so instruction accelerates learning rather than impeding it.
If New York (and other states) can adopt research-aligned literacy priorities statewide while preserving and expanding bilingual programs, they can create a model that supports multilingual students' English literacy and their home languages simultaneously.
Disclosure: The views expressed here are those of Conor P. Williams alone and do not represent his employer or any affiliated organizations.
Help us improve.
