Understanding America’s Reading Problem

Join NCLC

“Literacy is not a privilege—it is a fundamental right and the foundation of all learning.”

— California Department of Education

Why Literacy Matters for everyone.

Reading is the gateway to every other academic, social, and economic opportunity. Decades of research show that when children do not learn to read proficiently by the end of elementary school, the consequences extend far beyond academics — affecting graduation rates, employment, health, and lifelong opportunity.

Below are the most credible, widely respected resources that explain the reading problem and its impact across society. 

National Research Council

Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Children (Snow, Burns & Griffin, 1998)

The most comprehensive and authoritative overview of the reading problem.
Commissioned by the National Academy of Sciences, this landmark report synthesizes research across cognitive science, linguistics, psychology, and education.


It explains:

  • Why early reading matters

  • What causes reading failure

  • What schools must do to prevent it

  • How reading proficiency affects long-term life outcomes

Why NCLC recommends it:

This report remains the foundational source behind today’s Science of Reading movement and state literacy policies.

Language and the Speed of Light

Mark Seidenberg – Language at the Speed of Sight (2017)

A compelling and accessible explanation of:

  • Why so many children struggle to read, write and spell

  • The gap between research and classroom practice

  • How reading ability shapes opportunity in school and beyond

Why NCLC recommends it:
This book helps educators, families, and policymakers understand the systemic factors contributing to the literacy crisis.

Reading and the Brain

Stanislas Dehaene – Reading in the Brain (2009)

A neuroscience-based explanation of how the brain learns to read — and why explicit, systematic instruction is essential.

Highlights include:

  • How neural pathways for reading are formed

  • Why some approaches support brain development and others do not

  • Yhe long-term cognitive and academic consequences of reading struggles

Why NCLC recommends it:

Explains the neuroscience of reading those who learn best from this field of study.

Ending the Reading Wars

Castles, Rastle & Nation (2018)

A highly cited modern research synthesis confirming what decades of evidence already show:

  • Reading acquisition follows predictable developmental patterns

  • Systematic instruction is effective

  • Reading failure is preventable

Why NCLC recommends it:

It provides a clear, research-backed explanation of what works — and why confusion persists..

Why this matters.

All of these sources converge on one central truth.

Reading failure is preventable — when instruction is aligned with what research shows works.
These resources guide the literacy beliefs and instructional commitments of the Northern California Literacy Collaborative and help ensure every child, in every community, receives the scientifically grounded instruction they deserve..

Selected Research that Supports Science of Reading.

Foundational Syntheses & Theoretical Frameworks

Adams, M. J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. MIT Press.

Castles, A., Rastle, K., & Nation, K. (2018). Ending the reading wars: Reading acquisition from novice to expert. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 19(1), 5–51.

Hoover, W. A., & Gough, P. B. (1990). The simple view of reading. Reading and Writing, 2(2), 127–160.

Perfetti, C. A. (2007). Reading ability: Lexical quality to comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11(4), 357–383.

Share, D. L. (1995). Phonological recoding and self-teaching: Sine qua non of reading acquisition. Cognition, 55(2), 151–218.

Snow, C. E., Burns, M. S., & Griffin, P. (Eds.). (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. National Academy Press.

Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21(4), 360–407.

Phonological Awareness, Phonics & Word Reading

Ehri, L. C. (2005). Learning to read words: Theory, findings, and issues. Scientific Studies of Reading, 9(2), 167–188.

Ehri, L. C. (2014). Orthographic mapping in the acquisition of sight word reading, spelling memory, and vocabulary learning. Scientific Studies of Reading, 18(1), 5–21.

Foorman, B. R., Francis, D. J., Fletcher, J. M., Schatschneider, C., & Mehta, P. (1998). The role of instruction in learning to read: Preventing reading failure in at-risk children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(1), 37–55.

Vellutino, F. R., Scanlon, D. M., Sipay, E. R., Small, S. G., Pratt, A., Chen, R., & Denckla, M. B. (1996). Cognitive profiles of difficult-to-remediate and readily remediated poor readers: Early intervention as a vehicle for distinguishing between cognitive and experiential deficits as basic causes of specific reading disability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(4), 601–638.

Fluency, Language & Comprehension

Catts, H. W., Hogan, T. P., & Fey, M. E. (2003). Subgrouping poor readers on the basis of individual differences in reading-related abilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 36(2), 151–164.

Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hosp, M. K., & Jenkins, J. R. (2001). Oral reading fluency as an indicator of reading competence: A theoretical, empirical, and historical analysis. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5(3), 239–256.

Scarborough, H. S. (2001). Connecting early language and literacy to later reading (dis)abilities: Evidence, theory, and practice. In S. B. Neuman & D. K. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (pp. 97–110). Guilford Press.

Snow, C. E., & Sweet, A. P. (2003). Reading for comprehension. In A. P. Sweet & C. E. Snow (Eds.), Rethinking reading comprehension (pp. 1–11). Guilford Press.

Neuroscience & Dyslexia

Pugh, K. R., Mencl, W. E., Jenner, A. R., Katz, L., Frost, S. J., Lee, J. R., Shaywitz, S. E., & Shaywitz, B. A. (2001). Neurobiological studies of reading and reading disability. Journal of Communication Disorders, 34(6), 479–492.

Shaywitz, S. E., & Shaywitz, B. A. (2005). Dyslexia (specific reading disability). Biological Psychiatry, 57(11), 1301–1309.

Snowling, M. J., & Hulme, C. (2012). Annual research review: The nature and classification of reading disorders—A commentary on proposals for DSM-5. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 53(6), 593–607.

Vellutino, F. R., Fletcher, J. M., Snowling, M. J., & Scanlon, D. M. (2004). Specific reading disability (dyslexia): What have we learned in the past four decades? Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45(1), 2–40.

Intervention, RTI/MTSS & Long-Term Outcomes for Struggling Readers

Coyne, M. D., Kame’enui, E. J., & Simmons, D. C. (2001). Prevention and early intervention in beginning reading: Two complex systems. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 16(2), 62–73.

Simmons, D. C., Coyne, M. D., Kwok, O., McDonagh, S., Harn, B. A., & Kame’enui, E. J. (2008). Indexing response to intervention: A longitudinal study of reading risk from kindergarten through third grade. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41(2), 158–173.

Torgesen, J. K., Alexander, A. W., Wagner, R. K., Rashotte, C. A., Voeller, K. K. S., & Conway, T. (2001). Intensive remedial instruction for children with severe reading disabilities: Immediate and long-term outcomes from two instructional approaches. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 16(4), 230–243.

Vaughn, S., & Fuchs, L. S. (2003). Redefining learning disabilities as inadequate response to instruction: The promise and potential problems. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18(3), 137–146.

Vaughn, S., & Wanzek, J. (2014). Intensive interventions in reading for students with reading difficulties, including dyslexia. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 29(2), 90–98.

Wanzek, J., & Vaughn, S. (2009). Students at risk for reading difficulties: Response to intervention (RTI) and multi-tier intervention in the primary grades. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42(4), 304–317.

Teacher Knowledge, Teacher Prep & Instructional Quality

Binks-Cantrell, E., Joshi, R. M., & Washburn, E. K. (2012). Validation of an instrument for assessing teacher knowledge of basic language constructs of literacy. Annals of Dyslexia, 62(3), 153–171.

Moats, L. C. (1999). Teaching reading is rocket science: What expert teachers of reading should know and be able to do. American Educator, 23(2), 12–44.

Moats, L. C. (2014). What we know and what we need to know about literacy instruction. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 47(1), 3–7.

Piasta, S. B., Connor, C. M., Fishman, B. J., & Morrison, F. J. (2009). Teachers’ knowledge of literacy concepts, classroom practices, and student reading growth. Scientific Studies of Reading, 13(3), 224–248.

Spear-Swerling, L., & Brucker, P. O. (2004). Preparing novice teachers to develop basic reading and spelling skills in children. Annals of Dyslexia, 54(2), 332–364.

Washburn, E. K., Joshi, R. M., & Binks-Cantrell, E. (2011). Are preservice teachers prepared to teach struggling readers? Annals of Dyslexia, 61(1), 21–43.

Multilingual Learners / English Learners

August, D., & Shanahan, T. (Eds.). (2006). Developing literacy in second-language learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Genesee, F., Lindholm-Leary, K., Saunders, W., & Christian, D. (2006). Educating English language learners: A synthesis of research evidence. Cambridge University Press.

Goldenberg, C. (2008). Teaching English language learners: What the research does—and does not—say. American Educator, 32(2), 8–44.

Long-Term Outcomes & Economic Impact of Literacy

Fletcher, J. M., & Vaughn, S. (2012). Response to intervention: Preventing and remediating academic difficulties. Child Development Perspectives, 6(3), 203–210.

Hanushek, E. A., & Woessmann, L. (2012). Do better schools lead to more growth? Cognitive skills, economic outcomes, and causation. Journal of Economic Growth, 17(4), 267–321.

Murnane, R. J., Willett, J. B., & Levy, F. (1995). The growing importance of cognitive skills in wage determination. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 77(2), 251–266.

Ritchie, S. J., & Bates, T. C. (2013). Enduring links from childhood mathematics and reading achievement to adult socioeconomic status. Psychological Science, 24(7), 1308–1316.

Snow, C. E. (2018). Simple view of reading is complicated: Lessons from the PISA and PIRLS reading assessments. Educational Psychologist, 53(4), 270–283.