Magic and Miracles: What Brain Research Really Says about Literacy

With Oklahoma public schools ranked 50th in the nation and third-grade reading proficiency near last, the Oklahoma State Chamber of Commerce took notice, launching the “Oklahoma Competes” plan. The campaign is modeled on what has been called the “Mississippi Miracle.” Using a combination of early intervention, science-based reading instruction and literacy coaches, among other things, Mississippi students’ fourth-grade reading scores on the National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP), often called The Nation’s Report Card, moved from near bottom in 2013 to near the top in the nation. Was it a miracle, and what can Oklahoma learn from Mississippi’s successes?

Jami Jackson-Cole, 25-year teacher and administrator of the Oklahoma Edvocates Facebook group, which helped launch the 2018 teacher walk-out, is skeptical about the Oklahoma Chamber’s plan.

“The biggest problem is that teachers have never truly felt that we’ve had a seat at the table,” Jackson-Cole says. “There’s so much that needs to be looked at and dived into. Teachers have been so frustrated, and we haven’t been asked.”

The “Mississippi Miracle”

As the expert in her field, Jackson-Cole isn’t necessarily opposed to the Chamber’s plan, especially if it includes raises for teachers and support staff. The last raise was in 2018. But, as a self-described data-driven person, she thinks the Chamber may be reaching for the next education trend without taking the time to look at the big picture of education in Oklahoma.

“The Chamber sees that it’s starting to affect their dollar,” Jackson-Cole says. “You’re not going to attract businesses without good schools. So now they’ve looked at the ‘Mississippi Miracle’ as the answer and not one teacher has been consulted.”

Mississippi held back struggling readers in third grade. The state also implemented early screening and intervention as well as hiring literacy coaches. In addition, an infusion of cash ($160 million) from the Barksdale Reading Institute and a $9.5 million investment from the Legislature helped fund the program.

“Of course you’re going to have better test scores in fourth grade if you hold back struggling readers in third grade. And all those gains are lost in the eighth grade,” Jackson-Cole says.

A statistical model reviewing the “Mississippi Miracle” shows that Jackson-Cole may be right about retention. At any rate, the “data” may simply be looking at one test score, while there are actually many variables that are difficult to control and measure. In looking at one measurement – the NAEP score in fourth grade – academic retention will show improvement in the score; however, policymakers may be missing the mark in implementing academic retention if it doesn’t result in the desired outcome – children’s literacy success in school and beyond.

Jackson-Cole says the entire Oklahoma school system needs a reset, and teachers need to be part of the solution. She says that children are stressed by having inappropriate academics pushed down to kindergarten before they’re ready. Too much learning on screens also creates stress for children.

“I think we’re pushing young children too hard before they’re ready,” she says. “Even my brightest kids feel stressed because we place so much emphasis on this one test.”

Jackson-Cole says that struggling students need to be identified and provided with early intervention and remediation in kindergarten and first grade, rather than retained in third grade. “A lot of those kids retained in third grade will have a jail cell waiting,” she says. “The state has to be willing to invest the money. I don’t have a lot of hope for that.”

While academic retention in third grade did bring higher NAEP test results in Mississippi, there are myriad supports that need to happen first. And, if retention is used, results can be a mixed bag, especially if used without targeted individualized services.

“I’m telling everyone that will listen. We don’t teach reading in the third grade. The focus needs to be on kindergarten and first grade. We need smaller class sizes, aides in the classroom and help with behavioral problems,” Jackson-Cole says. “We need in-school tutors. We have way too many standards in the younger grades. They don’t have time to get to mastery. So many of them are not mature or ready.”

Teaching Reading and The Science of Reading

In her book “Proust and the Squid: The Story and Science of the Reading Brain,” neuroscientist and reading specialist Maryanne Wolf writes, “there is nothing in the brain, not a single gene, not a single region that is specifically there for reading… What the brain has is the capacity to make novel circuits. And the human invention of reading required a new circuit.”

Reading is not natural to children. It must be taught. “It is one of the too little-sung miracles that young human beings can build a brand-new circuit for reading that will elaborate itself over time with everything the readers read.,” Wolf writes.

The question that educators have grappled with for decades is how best to teach reading.

Wolf is a scholar, a teacher, and an advocate for children and literacy around the world. She is the Director of the Center for Dyslexia, Diverse Learners, and Social Justice at the UCLA School of Education and Information Studies. Although we couldn’t connect for an interview for this article, Dr. Wolf sent me “’Elbow Room’: How the Reading Brain Informs the Teaching of Reading,” a recent white paper she wrote for the Shanker Institute.

The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP, 2025) shows that eighth grade children are reading at the lowest levels in more than three decades and fourth graders at their lowest levels in two decades.

Is it a teaching problem? It is a real concern, especially in Oklahoma where over 5,000 emergency certified teachers are in classrooms.

A term making its way from research to the public sphere is “The Science of Reading” (SOR). Many mistakenly believe that SOR is a specific phonics teaching curriculum, which picks at the scab of the old phonics vs. whole language debate about the best way to teach kids to read.

Science of Reading is not one or the other, phonics or whole language. Nor is it a specific curriculum; although, there are programs that use the approach in the curriculum. Science of Reading uses brain-based research on how neural pathways are built in the brain as individuals learn to read. Phonics instruction is one component, not the totality.

In “Elbow Room,” Wolf invites educators and policymakers to move beyond the “false binaries in literacy debates and see reading development as dynamic, requiring multiple emphases and areas of expertise in our teachers. The key for educators is knowing what to prioritize – when, and for how long – based on each learner’s strengths and needs.”

She goes on to say, “SOR refers to a body of knowledge based on decades of empirical data from various disciplines that supports the importance of the explicit, systematic teaching of phonics and of multiple foundational skills for most readers.”

Teaching Struggling Readers

Mindy Smith, former reading professor at NSU and owner of Lavender’s Bleu Reading Tutoring Center in Tulsa, says that she was initially biased about SOR because she thought it didn’t fit her belief system. But the more she researched it and learned from her tutors who have specialized training in SOR, the more it made sense to her.

“It encompasses how the brain works in learning to read,” Smith says. “I work with kids that struggle, and they need more intensive, systematic instruction. My bias was ‘where does good literature come in?’ It’s not left out. SOR teaches decoding very systematically, but literature is used as the base. This has been the key that has opened the door.”

Smith describes a boy who had been coming in for tutoring since age 7. “I lost sleep wondering how to help him,” Smith says. “What we were doing wasn’t working.”

A tutor who was trained in SOR began working with the boy, using SOR principles.

“He was barely, barely reading,” Smith says. “Within two months, he could read paragraphs. He’s 15 now and not quite on grade level, but he can keep up with his work. He’s my poster child for Science of Reading.”

Smith says that with SOR, kids become great decoders with phonemic awareness first, and then literature is used to practice and to develop a love of reading. Using a cyclical plan where students learn, use what they learn, and then cycle back for a quick review works best for her clients.

“Our state should get on board with the brain research and continuity to how they’re approaching literacy,” Smith says. “The systematic phonics instruction is the foundation, and then you can do what you want to do. It’s nothing new – the science of reading has been around forever, but not the WHY of it, which is the brain research.”

As Maryanne Wolf says, “Phonemes need letters. Phonics needs semantics, syntax, and morpheme knowledge. Words need stories. The reading brain connects all of these processes, and so should our teaching.”

Wolf’s goal is that all children should become fluent, deep readers. Deep reading cultivates critical thinking, inferential reasoning and empathy, among other things.

What Can We Do?

Effective literacy instruction is not a checklist or a miracle. Both Smith and Jackson-Cole emphasize the need for teacher training in brain research and literacy, giving teachers not just the tools, but the autonomy and flexibility to use those tools to monitor and adjust reading instruction for each child. Doing so requires commitment and consistency over time, from educators, administrators and policymakers.

Jackson-Cole, like Smith, is continuing to learn about the brain and literacy. She attended training last summer that she would like to share as a lead teacher in her school in Edmond. While she doesn’t see herself as an administrator, she does think that experienced teachers who are trained in SOR can become leaders and mentors in their schools.

Parents can help, too. Early circuitry that prepares a child’s brain for reading starts from birth when parents and caregivers read, sing and talk to their children before they ever enter school.

To Wolf, literacy is a social justice issue. “The richness of the child’s language environment, whatever the first, second or third language in the home, prepares the child to encode and can accelerate or impede the time when the alphabetic principle is gained,” writes Wolf. “It is unacceptable in American schools that later reading levels can be predicted by the ZIP codes of early childhood.”

Is there a miracle to turn reading scores around in a month, a year or even five years? No. But we do now know the approach, and we know that we are all part of the solution, including parents.

Mindy Smith puts it this way: “Parents have to have a buy-in, too,” she says. “Spend time talking with kids. Read books and stay off of screens. What’s the priority in your home?”

“In an age in which distraction and disinformation compete with the perception of truth and beauty, deep reading is an act of resistance,” Wolf writes. “It is toward this shared goal that all our methods of teaching should unite.”

 Betty Casey is the associate publisher and editor in chief of TulsaKids Magazine. She has been with TulsaKids over 20 years.