Two people pulling a rope in tug of war with bright background.

Balanced Literacy, Structured Literacy, and the Problem with Labels

Misunderstanding. The culprit that causes so many issues. Including, in large part, the “reading wars” and the ongoing debate about literacy instruction.

Case in point. Very recently I was talking about phonics instruction in the upper grades with another teacher. Phonics (and morphology) was a goal she was working on. Upon reflection of her own experience as a student, she said, “I never learned this stuff because I was taught with balanced literacy.”

And there it was. Deep-rooted misunderstanding.

I immediately stopped her. I reminded her that if phonics wasn’t taught, it was absolutely not balanced literacy. That’s not balanced at all. But I knew there was more to this misconception to uncover. I needed her to say more.

She went on to recall what she remembered. What she remembered, after explaining what she had experienced, was that she had been instructed with a whole-word approach. Pure memorization of many words, without the phonics instruction she–and undoubtedly many others–needed.

This really describes the look-say method that was in vogue decades ago. Or, quite possibly, her teachers used some sort of what might have been whole language instruction that didn’t include phonics (which it should have–here’s a quick overview of what whole language really means).

Whatever the label attached to that experience, it was certainly not balanced literacy.

The problem with literacy labels

The exchange really struck a chord. That single conversation is just one of many examples of people using the term balanced literacy so broadly that it has completely lost its meaning.

I’ve written about balanced literacy and what it is and isn’t before, but here’s the TLDR version: It means balancing all the components of effective literacy instruction, including explicit phonics, comprehension, reading, writing, speaking, and listening. And it means students get authentic, meaningful opportunities to apply skills. The video below encapsulates the definition very well:

With all of the media hype, podcasts, and Facebook groups perpetuating the misunderstanding this teacher held, I cannot blame her. It’s everywhere.

Before we debate literacy instruction, let’s ask questions first

Before we ever enter into a conversation, especially one that may lead to a misunderstanding, let’s just pause for a beat.

Let’s ask some clarifying questions. Ask: when you say balanced literacy, what does that look like for you? When you say that you grew up under a balanced literacy framework, what do you remember that that was like? These are exactly the questions I asked this teacher. And the answers helped me see that she was talking about a completely different thing. By no real fault of her own, she had mislabeled balanced literacy.

But I didn’t stop there, and neither should you.

We have to also name what we say is strong literacy instruction. Whether that means balanced or structured or comprehensive literacy. Whatever you name it, it’s important to define what it looks like to you. That’s the only way two people can have a real conversation.

What we actually agree on about strong literacy instruction

Because we actually have so much more in common than popular narratives will have us believe. Most teachers I know recognize that systematic phonics instruction matters. We might differ in our approach, the amount of time we devote to it, and the degree to which we integrate it into the instructional day. But the importance of phonics instruction isn’t new information. This was made very clear all those years ago in the NRP report, and has been clear from the research for much longer than that.

We all also recognize that literacy instruction is about far, far more than just phonics. Whether you look at the Reading Rope or the more comprehensive Active View of Reading, literacy instruction is so much more than phonics. Dr. Sharon Vaughn explains this point in more detail in a webinar she recently shared (check it out here).

We know the importance of background knowledge and its effect on comprehension.

And we all know how crucial vocabulary instruction is.

And as for comprehension? We know it’s both a process and a result of many factors.

I’m also certain we all agree that direct, explicit instruction is powerful. Vaughn and Fletcher (2021) remind us that “This explicitness includes modeling new skills, giving students ample practice with feedback, and providing structured opportunities for review and practice.” Whether a clear and to-the-point workshop mini lesson with a teacher model or a Direct Instruction scripted lesson, we all have the same end goal–clarity and practice for students.

Balanced literacy isn’t what the media says it is.

At least, not true balanced literacy. At the same time, “structured literacy”, while absolutely grounded in research, is not the entirety of literacy instruction. No single framework or approach is a silver bullet. Silver bullets don’t exist.

If we’re ever to move forward, past this “reading wars” debate that shouldn’t be a debate in the first place, we need to start getting curious and listening more. Right now, we’re at a point where just hearing the words “structured literacy” or “balanced literacy” causes a complete shutdown. Hearing one of these terms, all too often, puts up an impenetrable wall.

It’s time to move past the “reading wars”

In order to move forward, we have to be willing to listen. Really listen. Ask questions. That’s how we’ll finally move past the labels, and actually get to what exemplary literacy instruction looks like.

Because at the end of the day, this isn’t about defending a label. And it’s not about winning an argument.

It’s about making sure our students get the instruction they need to become skilled, knowledgeable, confident readers and writers.

And that’s something worth finding common ground over.

Coach from the Couch Michelle Ruhe wearing a blue sweater and white pants sitting on beige couch with laptop in a literacy coach session.

Who is Coach from the Couch? I’m Michelle Ruhe, a 25+ year veteran educator, currently a K-5 literacy coach. I continue to learn alongside teachers in classrooms each and every day, and it’s my mission to support as many teachers with this hard work as I can.