A Personal Perspective by JoAnne Nelson, Super Books Children’s Book Author and Reading Specialist Master’s Thesis: “Phonics A Review of Research, A 2-Year Classroom Study”, Univ. of Wisconsin, Madison, 1963
This is my personal perspective on the teaching of reading over the past 100 years.
I started learning to read in first grade in1942 Later, as a teacher and graduate student, my research extended back into the 1920’s when “phonics” was prevalent — including teaching “word families” (phonograms). I started studying how to teach reading at Washington State Univ. in 1956. My initial teaching position was in a First Grade classroom in Edmonds, WA, in 1958 — the same year Dr. Seuss published “The Cat in the Hat”.
At that time schools were using the “Sight Approach” to teach reading. There were 4 Basal Reading series: Houghton-Mifflin, Ginn & Co., Scott Forsman, and Row Peterson (later Harper and Row). These programs were published in the 1940’s. Children learned to memorize words, to look at the beginning letter of the word, and to look at the shape of the word. We actually outlined the shape of words. If a child was not good at memorization s/he was in trouble. There were usually 3 reading groups in a classroom — sometimes 4. A different Basal Series was often used for each group.
Each group would go through 2 different published programs at each level. First Grade levels were Pre-Primer, Primer and First Reader. Teachers made the choice of which program children would read, and in what order. Often Scott Forsman was used first, and considered the “easiest”, then Ginn & Co and then Houghton Mifflin or Harper and Row. Sometimes a group might only read “Scott-Forsman”. Scott Forsman better known for “Fun with Dick and Jane and phrases like “Run, Spot, run.”
Each program had 3 children and a very typical family from the 1940’s. Pets were included, usually a dog and a cat. Scott-Forsman had Dick, Jane, Sally and Spot., Ginn & Co had Tom, Betty and Susan. Row Peterson was another program, actually published in the 1930’s. Alice and Jerry, had some interesting adventures and the art was charming.!
Back in the 40’s when I was learning to read, the school I was in, used Scott Forsman. We would do “round-robin” reading. Sitting in a circle, reading sections of the book. We all learned to project ahead to pre-read the paragraph or sentence that we would be called upon to read. I was somewhat dyslexic and did not learn to read very well in First Grade. In Second Grade my mother wanted me to take piano lessons but the teacher discouraged the idea because “I wasn’t reading well enough”. My mother went ahead with the piano lessons and by 3rd Grade I was not only a good reader — but a straight-A student. I have always thought the music helped to integrate my brain.
In 1960, my husband and I ended up in Madison, Wisconsin. I was teaching First Grade in Lake Mills in 1960 and Shorewood Hills in Madison, in 1961, 1962, and 1963. I was also enrolled in Graduate School and completed my Master’s Degree in 1963. As described above, my thesis was a combination of a Review of Research on Reading and Phonics; and an Instructional program, I developed, which added a structured reading strand to my first grade reading classes.
At that time, the so-called Reading Wars — created a great deal of controversy about how to teach reading. Phonics or meaning? Books like “Why Johnny Can’t Read” by Rudolph Flesch, and “The Great Debate” added to the controversy. Most “reading authorities” and the IRA (International Reading Association) were less than enthusiastic about phonics. A few reading authorities like Jeanne Chall and Donald Durrell wrote about the importance of phonics. Jeanne Chall particularly wrote about the 4th Grade Slump and the part that phonics plays in automatic word recognition which leads to fluency.
Time goes by, and after graduating from the Univ. of Wisconsin we moved back to Edmonds, Washington and again I taught first grade in 1964-65. In 1966 I was hired to be a “Helping Teacher”. My job was to assist teachers in implementing two “phonics based” reading programs published by Lippincott Co. and Open Court. In 1966 school districts were beginning to move away from the “sight approach-meaning first” reading programs to a more structured approach which included phonics.
Edmonds School District also gave us training in the “multisensory approach” (Orton-Gillingham), or Slingerland approach . Hooked on Phonics, SRA, Hay-Wingo, Spaulding, “Writing Road to Reading, Modern Curriculum Press, Plaid Phonics”, –There were a multitude of structured programs that included phonics and other skills on the scene and from the middle 1960s to mid l980’s .
In 1973 Lippincott Co. was getting input from teachers that their phonics-based readers were introducing skills too quickly and didn’t provide enough practice. At the IRA Conference in Denver in May — the company proposed to a group of Reading Consultants that they wished to publish a “Kit of Little Books” that would be supplemental to their basal reading program and would provide the review and practice needed. I happened to be in the group of consultants and went back to Edmonds excited to produce some early phonics readers.
Over the summer of 1973, while taking care of my three boys and house sitting for friends who also had three boys – I’m cooking meals, taking care of kids, traveling 30 miles to teach summer school in Edmonds, but somehow I was able to write 40 stories following the phonics sequence already established in Lippincott’s Basal Program.
I don’t know what happened to the other potential authors — but I ended up the sole author of SuperBooks (Stories Unique for Purposeful Extra Reading) a Kit of 200 phonics readers –5 copies of 40 Titles, plus a Teacher’s Manual and 40 Take-Home Stories.
Phonics continued to be the basis for many reading program during the 70’s and 80’s. Update to the early 1980’s, Whole Language emerged onto the “How to teach reading scene”. Originating in New Zealand and Australia, with names like Margaret Mooney, Brian Cambourne and Jan Turbilll — this approach was literature/meaning based. In 1988 we were excited about adding a literature strand to our more structured programs. I personally had an opportunity to go on a study tour to those two countries to learn how to implement “whole language”. Regie Routman and others in the U.S. became huge proponents of “whole language”.
Whole Language continued to dominate the reading field into the early 2000’s and beyond.
Finally around 2010 criticism was mounting about “whole language” and prediction (which looks a lot like guessing) and the call toward something identified as “the science of reading” was being heard and districts began converting to “foundational, structured” programs.
What is the “science of reading”? Some equate the term with Phonics — but of course it is a lot more than that. A group founded by Maria Murray, The Reading League, currently produces a publication, TRL Journal, with articles by authorities who are helping us understand the complexities of teaching reading while providing a more in-depth definition of “the science of reading.”
Certain groups have always promoted phonics-based programs and have continued through all the controversies using materials with decodable text. Those groups include homeschoolers, private and Christian schools, Catholic schools, tutors and often Charter schools. Parents have always believed in phonics.
I turned 90 on March 2nd 2026. Since my birthday is the same date as Dr. Seuss’ birthday, I have always wondered if my ability to write in rhyme is because I was born on that date. March is a month dedicated to the teaching of reading. And March 2nd is called “Read Across America”.
