Kids without reading disorders will learn to read with any systematic, comprehensive program, as long as they are in a supportive environment at school and at home. As for the rest, an Orton-Gillingham-based approach is required.

That is to say, a comprehensive program, differentiated according to the students’ needs, which addresses reading in a systematic, fundamental way, allowing the students to learn externally, what most of us have internalized, like the rule for C’s.

I taught kindergarten for many years using balanced literacy. When I hear criticism of this approach, it is clear to me that people don’t understand it.

Teaching phonics is very important in balanced literacy. Basic skills are taught. But so are reading strategies that focus on reading literature and making meaning from the reading.

My students, who were mostly poor and were English language learners, learned to read! As with any method of teaching, it can be done well or poorly. You can’t blame balanced literacy on some teacher’s lack of skills and misunderstanding.

I was an adjunct in literacy studies and a teacher with the UFT Teacher Center years ago.

It was sad to see all of the unproven programs imposed on kindergarten children for the benefit of publishers and reading “gurus,” as described in your piece about one school in East Harlem [“Teaching reading is still rocket science,” Feb. 5]. 

Children need to develop their own interest and need to read on their own terms, not that of a striving publisher, or a guru. Hearing stories, doing art and public speaking would be more appropriate.

Joseph Mugivan, retired