Scientific Advisory Committee

Members

Marilyn Jager Adams
Visiting Scholar, Brown University

Ana Taboada Barber
Professor and Associate Dean, Research, Innovation and Partnerships, College of Education, University of Maryland

Sonia Cabell
Associate Professor of Education, Florida Center for Reading Research, Florida State University

Hugh Catts
Professor of Communication Science and Disorders, Florida State University

Anne E. Cunningham
Professor, Learning Sciences and Development, Berkeley School of Education, University of California, Berkeley

Nell Duke
Professor of Literacy, Language, and Culture and in combined Program in Education and Psychology, University of Michigan

Lily Wong Fillmore
Professor Emerita, Graduate School of Education, University of California, Berkeley

James S. Kim
Professor, Language and Literacy, Graduate School of Education, Harvard University

Danielle McNamara
Executive Director, Learning Engineering Institute, Arizona State University

Kate Nation
Professor of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford

Susan Neuman
Professor, Early Childhood and Literacy Development, Steinhardt School of Culture, Education, and Human Development, New York University

Kathleen Rastle
Professor of Cognitive Psychology, Royal Holloway University of London

Pamela Snow
Professor of Cognitive Psychology, School of Education, La Trobe University

David Steiner
Executive Director, Johns Hopkins Institute for Education Policy

Dylan Wiliam
Emeritus Professor of Educational Assessment, UCL Institute of Education

Daniel Willingham
Professor of Psychology, University of Virginia

Research guide

Adams, M. J. (2011). Advancing our students’ language and literacy: The challenge of complex texts. American Educator, 34(4), 4-11, 53. American Federation of Teachers. https://www.aft.org/sites/default/files/Adams.pdf

This article focuses on the special difficulty exhibited by U.S. students in understanding complex text and discusses causes of and solutions to this problem.

---

Best, R., Ozuru, Y., Floyd., R., & McNamara, D.S. (2006). Children’s text comprehension: Effects of genre, knowledge, and text cohesion. In S. A. Barab, K. E. Hay, D. T. Hickey (Eds.), Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference of the Learning Sciences (pp. 37-42). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. https://repository.isls.org/handle/1/3525  

This study examines reading comprehension in 4th grade students as a function of text genre, students’ prior knowledge, and text cohesion.

---

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.  https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1529100618772271

This article provides a comprehensive review of the science of learning to read, spanning the arc of a child’s acquisition of alphabetic skills to the fluent text comprehension characteristic of skilled readers. It argues for a classroom approach to reading instruction that is developmentally-informed and addresses the wide range of knowledge and skills needed to become a reader.

---

Catts, H. W. (2021-2022). Rethinking how to promote reading comprehension. American Educator. American Federation of Teachers. https://www.aft.org/ae/winter2021-2022/catts

Reading comprehension is unlike other aspects of reading in that it is not a skill that can be reduced to a single score or improved by short-term instruction/intervention, this article argues. Rather it is a condition that is created by teaching fundamental reading skills in a content-rich integrated curriculum that provides background and language knowledge.

---

Cunningham, A. E., & Stanovich, K. E. (1998). What reading does for the mind. American Educator, 22, 8-17. American Federation of Teachers. https://www.aft.org/sites/default/files/cunningham.pdf

Exposure to print (reading volume) is a unique experiential factor, like schooling, that has long-term cumulative effects. A series of studies are described, which examine reciprocal effects of experience and schooling in children’s early reading development and evaluate the subsequent cognitive consequences of differences in the volume of reading among individuals.

---

Duke, N. K., Ward, A. E., & Pearson, P. D. (2021). The science of reading comprehension instruction. The Reading Teacher, 74, 663-672. International Literacy Association. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1993

This article addresses the question, “What have decades of research told us about the nature of comprehension and how to develop students’ comprehension in schools?” and presents a layered model of reading comprehension instruction with knowledge building at the center.

---

Goldenberg, C. (1991). Instructional conversations and their classroom applications. NCRCDSLL Educational Practice Reports. UC Berkeley: Center for Research on Education, Diversity and Excellence. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/6q72k3k9

“Instructional conversations” are discussion-based lessons geared toward creating opportunities for students’ conceptual and linguistic development. They are intended to help students use knowledge and skills to understand, appreciate, and grapple with important ideas.

---

Hwang, H., Lupo, S. M., Cabell, S. Q., & Wang, S. (2021). What research says about leveraging the literacy block for learning. Reading In Virginia, XLII (2020-2021), 35-48. https://heyzine.com/flip-book/cf84416713.html

This article describes what it looks like to infuse science and social studies content into English language arts instruction in K-5 classrooms. Four high-impact knowledge-building practices are discussed: (1) plan units around content concepts, (2) use conceptually coherent text sets, (3) design hands-on activities in connection with reading, writing, and discussion, and (4) teach vocabulary using categorical relations among words.

---

McNamara, D. S., & Kendeou, P. (2011). Translating advances in reading comprehension research to educational practice. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 4, 33-46.  https://iejee.com/index.php/IEJEE/article/view/212

This publication explores a few key findings on reading comprehension for educators, including how comprehension assessments may miss aspects of readers’ comprehension abilities and how inferencing (and practice doing so) is integral to (improving) comprehension.

---

Taboada Barber, A. & Lutz Klauda, S. (2020). How reading motivation and engagement enable reading achievement: Policy implications. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 7(1), 27-34. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/2372732219893385

Reading motivation and engagement are malleable and shaped by children’s environments at school and at home. This article addresses practices that teachers and other practitioners can use to promote motivation in the classroom to boost reading achievement and foster lifelong readers.

---

Willingham, D. T. (2017, November 25). How to get your mind to read. New York Times.  https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/25/opinion/sunday/how-to-get-your-mind-to-read.html

The article makes the case for the importance of background knowledge for comprehension.

---

Willingham, D. T., and Hirsch Jr., E. D. (2026). “Rediscovering Knowledge as the Key to Reading: Two champions of knowledge-rich instruction reflect on its current momentum.” Education Next, 26(1), 24 March 2026.

This article explains how educators are returning to the idea that background knowledge plays a central role in comprehension and critical thinking, after decades of emphasizing transferable reading strategies. The authors argue that carefully sequenced, knowledge-rich curricula can improve not only reading outcomes but also learning across subjects, particularly for students with fewer opportunities to build knowledge outside of school.

Statements from the Scientific Advisory Committee

---

March 28, 2024 • Model Language for Legislators Drafting Reading Legislation

Given the role of policy in advancing the literacy cause, and studies showing that recently passed state “science of reading” laws seldom note the important role of building content knowledge, we offer this model language for legislators drafting reading legislation:

Comprehensive, coherent literacy instruction must begin in the earliest grades—PreK and Kindergarten—so that as students are learning to read, they are also building their reading comprehension.  

Instruction aligned to the science of reading should be designed around the research on reading comprehension, which includes the important role that content knowledge plays in literacy.  

Prioritizing the acquisition of knowledge across a broad range of topics should be the focus of instruction and will require high-quality curricula in, and daily time devoted to, not just English language arts, but also to science, social studies, and the arts. English language arts curricula should be rich in content about the natural and social world, with topics sequenced to provide opportunities to build oral and academic language so that students can make meaning of the words and sentences they encounter in print.  

Achieving this vision for literacy instruction will require reimagining teacher preparation programs and resourcing curriculum-based professional learning opportunities and coaching to support teachers in applying a comprehensive understanding of the science of reading in each of these disciplines.

– The Knowledge Matters Campaign Scientific Advisory Committee

---

August 15, 2022 • Elevate the Role of Background Knowledge

As reading researchers, we are deeply invested in seeing research insights translate into instructional practices in schools that promote high levels of literacy, learning, and success for each and every student. We support all avenues for making this happen.

In recent years, the “Science of Reading” movement has served as an important catalyst, fueled by grassroots activism, educator networks, and strong journalism. It has become a potentially powerful – and welcome – vehicle for promoting improved and more equitable outcomes for all students.

The Science of Reading movement has been successful in raising awareness of the importance of foundational reading skills (e.g., phonological awareness, knowledge of letters and sounds, knowledge of phonics, decoding skills). There is little doubt these skills, which allow students to understand how the spoken sounds of the language are represented in print, are foundational to reading success and to literacy acquisition and development more generally; a worldwide research literature, across many first and additional languages, attests to this. Literacy is simply not possible without mastery of these skills, a fact that should no longer be a point of contention.

Unfortunately, the Science of Reading has often been interpreted far too narrowly as exclusively focused on foundational skills. Reading success requires much more than foundational skills. There are other factors critical for literacy development, including those that address language, meaning, and communication. Among the most important is knowledge. Knowledge is necessary to comprehend what we read. Foundational skills are literally meaningless unless readers can make sense of words and texts. This sense-making requires knowledge that must be systematically built (not just activated!) through instructional experiences and curricula that evoke curiosity and the desire to learn more. In short, knowledge matters.

Our charge is to bring knowledge into the vibrant and dynamic conversation about the Science of Reading. In fact, we believe that the Knowledge Matters discussion has significant potential to inspire educators, and will bring more hearts and minds to the discussion. Here’s why:

The Equity Imperative: Educators care deeply about equity in education; in fact, equity has arguably been the most prominent theme in K–12 discourse in recent years. At its heart, the #KnowledgeMatters movement is an equity movement, pointing a path to supporting all students as readers, writers, thinkers, and learners. Knowledge-building is particularly critical for children who have inequitable opportunities to gain it. All students have knowledge and other assets that educators must value, understand, and build upon. But they also have the right to an education that builds new knowledge, addresses their instructional strengths and needs, and offers opportunities to apply their knowledge in ways that have meaning for them and their communities.

Student Engagement: The role of student engagement looms large in educator discourse. Who doesn’t love seeing a child’s eyes light up with wonder? Knowledge-rich curricula can inspire this delight and curiosity about the world. One of the clearest takeaways from the Knowledge Matters School Tour is that knowledge-rich curricula can get children buzzing about their learning, as the voices on this site readily attest. A thirst for knowledge is as motivational for the child as it is for the teacher.

Applicability in All Grades: Centering knowledge helps speak to educators who think that the Science of Reading is only about foundational skills. This misconception is keeping the conversation from reaching many upper-grades teachers, as they may presume that the Science of Reading discussion is not relevant to them. The broad, PK–12 applicability of knowledge can help to broaden the audience for Science of Reading discussions.

We call on literacy and education leaders, as well as K–12 journalists, to bring the role of knowledge to the forefront of Science of Reading conversations, in hopes of expanding the conversation and building more bridges between research and practice. Knowledge matters. It’s as simple—and complicated—as that.

– The Knowledge Matters Campaign Scientific Advisory Committee