Written by Anne-Marie Spence
Introduction
The Science of Reading is a robust body of research that identifies evidence-based insights into how people learn to read, and how literacy instruction can be enhanced to support student success. Rooted in decades of study, this research confirms the instructional practices that are most effective in strengthening reading skills and, in turn, improving student achievement across subject areas.
In many high school settings, literacy instruction shifts away from explicitly teaching students to read and instead emphasizes helping them “read to learn” across a variety of subject areas. However, some students enter secondary school without fully developed word recognition and comprehension skills. When these foundational skills are missing, teachers may misinterpret these difficulties as a lack of effort or motivation, rather than recognizing that students are struggling with the core skills needed for understanding text.
Consequently, teachers must be able to recognize and target the essential skills that underlie reading proficiency. This article will provide an overview of two critical components of skilled reading—word recognition and language comprehension—and highlight how explicit morphology instruction can be used across subject areas to support student success.
A “Simple” View of Reading
Developed by Gough and Tunmer in 1986, the Simple View of Reading highlights that skilled reading requires strength in two areas: the ability to read words and the ability to make sense of language—both spoken and written. The model is expressed as:
| reading comprehension (RC) = decoding (D) × linguistic comprehension (LC)(Gough & Tunmer, 1986)(Note: Linguistic comprehension is often referred to as language comprehension in practice) |
In other words, if either decoding or language comprehension is weak, overall reading comprehension will be limited.
Although it is called the Simple View of Reading, applying it in classrooms is not always simple. Teachers need a deep understanding of how both decoding and language comprehension develop in order to effectively support students.
For high school students, this model explains why some learners may be able to “sound out” words fluently (strong decoding) but still struggle to understand complex texts if their vocabulary and background knowledge are limited (weaker language comprehension). Others may understand oral language well but struggle to decode multisyllabic words, slowing their reading and reducing comprehension. The Simple View reminds us that both strands must be supported to ensure success.
| Reflection Prompt: In your subject area, do you notice students who can decode fluently but still struggle with comprehension, or vice versa? How might this model help you think about their needs? |
Scarborough’s Reading Rope
Scarborough’s Reading Rope (2001) expands on the Simple View of Reading by showing how the strands of word recognition (phonological awareness, decoding, sight recognition) and language comprehension (background knowledge, vocabulary, language structure, verbal reasoning, literacy knowledge) are woven together to build skilled reading. As students develop reading proficiency, the strands become increasingly interdependent, reinforcing one another.
For secondary educators, this model reinforces that both sets of strands remain critical—even in high school. Weaknesses in either word recognition or language comprehension can limit students’ ability to engage with complex texts across subject areas.
Reflection Prompt:
Think about the students in your classroom. Do you notice learners who can decode words accurately but struggle with comprehension? Or students who understand language well but have difficulty with decoding? How might Scarborough’s Rope help you identify and support these different profiles of readers?
What Does This Mean for High School Literacy Instruction?
The Simple View of Reading and Scarborough’s Reading Rope highlight that both word recognition and language comprehension are essential for skilled reading. At the high school level, each presents unique challenges for teachers and learners.
Word recognition—which includes phonological awareness, decoding, and sight recognition—is essential for reading success. Yet, these foundational skills are rarely taught at the high school level outside of intensive intervention. Many secondary teachers have not had training to recognize weak word recognition skills, and with limited instructional time in semestered courses, they often feel pressure to prioritize curriculum content over reading instruction. Without opportunities for explicit, evidence-based support, students with weak word recognition skills are left behind.
Language comprehension—the ability to understand the meaning and structure of spoken and written language—relies on background knowledge, vocabulary, language structure, verbal reasoning, and literacy knowledge. While high school English courses often address these skills, with most courses limited to a single semester, teachers face pressure to cover all curriculum expectations. This makes it difficult to provide the kind of explicit instruction that struggling readers require.
For high schools, this means literacy instruction cannot be left solely to English or Special Education. All teachers need to recognize when word recognition or language comprehension is breaking down in their subject areas and weave in practices that strengthen both.
A Shared Responsibility
Given the importance of evidence-based reading instruction grounded in the Science of Reading, a key question follows.
| In our secondary setting, given the time constraints of our courses, who is responsible for delivering science-based reading instruction that meets the needs of all learners? |
In short, ALL teachers are responsible.
All educators must accept that literacy instruction is not solely the responsibility of the English department or Special Education teachers. Educators in every subject area can provide explicit, evidence-based reading instruction based on the Science of Reading while also meeting the curriculum expectations outlined for their courses.
| The principle is reinforced in the Ontario curriculum documents and by the Education Quality and Accountability Office:“Literacy instruction takes different forms of emphasis in different subjects, but in all subjects, literacy needs to be explicitly taught. Literacy, mathematical literacy, and inquiry/research skills are critical to students’ success in all subjects of the curriculum and in all areas of their lives” (Education Quality and Accountability Office [EQAO], 2021). |
This principle is also reinforced in the Ontario curriculum. For example, in the Grade 9 Science (SNC1W) curriculum, the Achievement Chart specifies that students must “use conventions, vocabulary, and terminology of the discipline in oral, visual, and/or written forms (e.g., symbols, formulas, International System of Units)” (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2022). Similarly, within the Scientific Research Process, students are expected to communicate findings “using appropriate vocabulary”. These expectations highlight that literacy instruction—especially vocabulary and terminology—is embedded across subject areas, not limited to English courses.
In Mathematics (MTH1W), students are required to “use mathematical terminology in explanations and arguments” (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2021), while in Canadian History since World War I (CHC2D), students are expected to “use appropriate terminology to communicate their understanding” (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2018).
These expectations highlight that literacy instruction—especially vocabulary and terminology—is embedded across subject areas, not limited to English courses.
Providing science-based literacy instruction that meets the needs of all learners is possible in the high school setting. This becomes manageable when teachers across subject areas each integrate a few components of skilled reading within the context of their curriculum.
| Reflection Prompt: How could you integrate a small, manageable literacy skill (such as decoding or vocabulary instruction) into the lessons you already teach in your subject area? |
Maximize Success Through Morphology Instruction.
When choosing a focus for high school reading instruction across subject areas, the most efficient approach to developing reading proficiency is to target both word recognition and language comprehension. To be effective, this focus must be accessible, relevant, and manageable for teachers in every discipline.
Morphology provides an ideal starting point. Applicable across science, mathematics, history, the arts, and more, it gives teachers a practical way to integrate literacy instruction into their courses. By helping students break down unfamiliar words into meaningful parts, morphology supports decoding while also building vocabulary knowledge and deeper comprehension.
What Does the Science of Reading Say About Morphology?
The Science of Reading shows that morphology plays an essential role in developing reading proficiency, particularly beyond the primary years. Skilled readers use morphology to decode unfamiliar words and to determine word meaning. Students with a strong grasp of morphology tend to have better overall comprehension—and, as a bonus, are often more efficient and accurate spellers.
As students progress through school, texts become more complex and vocabulary grows more challenging, with an increasing number of multisyllabic “big words” and discipline-specific words. Instruction is therefore needed to help students decode and make sense of these terms. For example, math introduces terms like monomial, polynomial, and variable, while science introduces words such as photosynthesis, respiration, and hydrocarbon. Morphology instruction provides students with tools to break these words into meaningful parts and understand their use across subjects.
| Examples of words that would benefit from explicit morphology instruction | ||||
| Mathematics | Science | Geography | History | The Arts |
| CoefficientTransversalPermutationDerivativeCircumferenceFactorization | HomeostasisHydrosphereTectonicChlorophyllEndothermicExothermic | TopographyErosionHydrosphereBiodiversityInterdependenceGentrification | IndigenousColonialismLegislationConfederacyAllianceSuffrage | SynchronizationIntonationCompositionAestheticsPerspectiveDramaturgy |
Students benefit from having a plan of action when they encounter difficult vocabulary. Rather than memorizing each word, they can break words into morphemes such as trans– (across), hydro– (water), therm (heat), sphere (ball/globe), –logy (study of), –ment (result of). This helps them connect word parts across subject areas and transfer knowledge to new contexts. In short, morphology equips students with efficient tools for decoding and vocabulary growth.
| Important Terms Morpheme: the smallest unit of meaning within a word.Morphology: the study of how words are formed through morphemes.Morphological Awareness: the ability to actively think about and work with the smallest meaningful parts of language, including root words, prefixes and suffixes.Affix: a prefix or suffix added to the beginning (prefix) or end (suffix) of a word or word part to form a new word. Affixes can change the meaning of words (e.g., re- + do → redo; teach + -er → teacher).Root: the main part of a word that holds meaning and can be combined with prefixes or suffixes to form new words (examples: struct, port, tele, ject, form). Note: some root words can stand alone (i.e., help) while others cannot (i.e., ject), but both hold meaning. |
| Reflection Prompt:Think of a term or phrase from your subject area that students often struggle to understand. How could breaking the word into its parts (prefix, root, suffix) help students make sense of it? |
Planning for Instruction: Where Do I Start?
1. Build Your Own Morphology Knowledge
Begin by familiarizing yourself with common prefixes, roots and suffixes used in academic vocabulary. Many trusted resources are available online to get you started. For example, LD@school notes that in structured literacy approaches, morphology instruction includes “the study of base words, roots, and affixes,” helping students connect word parts to meaning. You might also explore the Online Etymology Dictionary for word origins or consult the Academic Word List to prioritize which academic morphemes are most useful for students. Building your confidence with morphology first will make instruction easier. You might even create a reference list of the most common morphemes in the English language for quick reference.
2. Select Morphemes from Your Course Vocabulary
Scan your course curriculum and resources for words that would benefit from explicit morphology instruction. Once selected, make a simple chart listing each morpheme, its meaning, and example words for your subject area.
Below is a brief example of a chart for an SNC1W (Grade 9 Science – De-streamed) teacher:
| Morpheme | Meaning | Example of Words | Strand |
| bio- | life | biology, biodiversity | Biology |
| eco- | environment, house | ecology, ecosystem | Biology |
| photo- | light | photosynthesis, phototropism | Biology |
| -logy | study of | biology, ecology, geology | All |
| sphere | ball, globe | biosphere, atmosphere, hydrosphere, lithosphere | Earth & Space Science |
| homo- | same | homogeneous, homeostasis | Chemistry, Biology |
| -graph | write, record | seismograph, photograph | Earth & Space Science, Physics |
Tip: Be aware of words containing morphemes that also appear in other subjects. This helps students transfer their knowledge and see the wider benefits of learning morphology.
3. Create a Routine & Build Mastery through Repetition
Explicit morphology instruction takes only 5-10 minutes, 2-3 times per week. Before starting a lesson, introduce 2-3 words that students will encounter. For each word:
- Introduce target morphemes: Present prefixes, suffixes and roots with proper pronunciation and meaning. Share a few sample words that use those morphemes.Tip: As you introduce new morphemes with their meaning, add them to an anchor chart for easy reference
- Present and segment: Model how to segment the target word into morphemes so students can see how the parts combine.
- Determine word meaning: Link the meaning of morphemes to create a simple definition of the whole word.
- Word families: Generate related words with students by brainstorming examples that share the same morphemes. This helps them transfer new knowledge to different contexts.
- Review and repeat: After explicit instruction, continue to draw attention to target words and morphemes throughout the day’s lesson and in future lessons. Ongoing review and repeated exposure in meaningful contexts reinforce learning and support long-term retention for all learners. Research shows that students with reading disabilities may need double the number of exposures to new words to reach mastery (Ehri & Saltmarsh, 1995).
| Polynomial (MTH1W example) | |
| 1. Introduce target morphemes | poly = many nom = name/term al = related toSample words:polygon, polycentric, autonomous, nomenclature, thermal, historicalEach sample word contains one or more of the target morphemes, helping students see connections across contexts. |
| 2. Present and segment | poly / nom / (i)alNote: Sometimes we see an extra vowel in the middle of a word, like i or o. It’s just there to connect the morphemes and make the word easier to say. |
| 3. Determine word meaning | poly + nom + (i)al = Related to many terms. Specific to math, an expression with more than one algebraic term. |
| 4. Word families | Monomial, binomial, trinomial |
| 5. Review and repeat | Frequently review the target morphemes in selected words and new words as you encounter them. Challenge students to tell you their meaning. |
4. Collaborate with Colleagues
High school teachers can strengthen students’ reading skills by working together across disciplines to reinforce morphology instruction. When teachers coordinate, students benefit from multiple, meaningful exposures to prefixes, suffixes, and roots—key to building mastery. With a shared and coordinated approach, students build a broader bank of morphemes and gain more opportunities to decode and determine the meaning of difficult words in different contexts.
Below are some suggestions to coordinate instruction:
- Meet with colleagues to build a bank of common morphemes that will be taught across disciplines.
- Start small and co-plan. Share successes and challenges as you begin integrating morphology into lessons. Adapt as necessary!
- Agree on a simple morphology routine that all teachers will use 2-3 times per week.
- Look for overlaps when selecting target words/morphemes so knowledge is reinforced across subject areas.
- Make morphology visible across disciplines by creating and displaying anchor charts. Schools can also post common prefixes, suffixes, and roots in every classroom.
| Reflection Prompt:Which colleagues in your school could you partner with to reinforce common morphemes across different subjects? |
Conclusion
Explicit, evidence-based reading instruction at the high school level is important for all learners and essential for some. For struggling readers in particular, this instruction is critical. That means secondary teachers across disciplines must recognize the valuable role they play in supporting reading development.
Schools can maximize opportunities for literacy instruction by making it a shared responsibility among teachers in every subject area. One powerful and efficient approach is to embed morphology instruction across subject areas. Teaching students how to break down and understand complex vocabulary not only strengthens decoding and comprehension, but also empowers them to access content more confidently. Professional learning in morphology provides educators with practical, research-based strategies that can be applied within any discipline.
Reading success in high school is possible. When educators understand how students learn to read and commit to evidence-based practices, they ensure that every student has the opportunity to thrive—both in literacy and across all areas of learning.
About the Author
Anne-Marie Spence (she/her) is currently working as a secondary school Guidance Counsellor with the London District Catholic School Board. For over 20 years, she has helped students of all ages build confidence and skill through effective literacy instruction across the elementary and secondary panels. Her experience spans all divisions (K-12), including in French Immersion, and as a teacher of Special Education.
Anne-Marie’s professional journey reflects her deep commitment to literacy and student success. She spent six years with Ontario’s Provincial and Demonstration Schools Branch, teaching at Amethyst Demonstration School and later serving as a Central Resource Teacher with a focus on literacy. She has dedicated herself to sharing the importance of evidence-based practices with educators, parents, and students, and has led professional learning across Ontario on the science of reading and structured literacy.
Central to her mission, Anne-Marie is committed to supporting all learners through important educational transitions while equipping them for long-term success. She has a special interest in fostering practices that align with the science of reading and the science of learning in the high school setting.
Powered by LDAO
This article was reviewed and edited by LD@school, a signature initiative of the Learning Disabilities Association of Ontario (LDAO), a registered charity and provincial leader in inclusive and accessible education.
For over 60 years, LDAO has supported children, youth, and adults with learning disabilities (LDs) and related conditions such as Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD).
Designed for educators, LD@school provides evidence-based and practice-informed resources, along with classroom-ready strategies to help Ontario teachers create equitable, accessible learning environments for students with LDs, ADHD, and other learning differences.
LDAO also offers other signature platforms, including TA@l’école (for French-language educators), LD@home (for families), and LD@work (for adults and employers), supporting the LD community across the lifespan.
Bibliography:
Bowers, P., & Kirby, J. (2010). Effects of Morphological Instruction on Vocabulary Acquisition. Reading and Writing, 23(5), 515–537. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-009-9172-z
Education Quality and Accountability Office. (2021). Framework: Ontario Secondary School Literacy Test (OSSLT). https://www.eqao.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/framework-osslt.pdf
Ehri, L. C., & Saltmarsh, J. (1995). Beginning readers outperform older disabled readers in learning to read words by sight. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 7(3), 295–326. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03162082
Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7(1), 6–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/074193258600700104
Hennenfent, L., Johnson, L. J., Novelli, C., & Sharkey, E. (2022). Intensive intervention practice guide: Explicit morphology instruction to improve overall literacy skills in secondary students (ERIC Document No. ED628200). Office of Special Education Programs, U.S. Department of Education. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED628200
Ontario Ministry of Education. (2018). The Ontario curriculum, grades 9 and 10: Canadian and world studies (revised). Queen’s Printer for Ontario. http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/curriculum/secondary/canworld910curr2018.pdf
Ontario Ministry of Education. (2021). The Ontario curriculum, grade 9: Mathematics (MTH1W) (revised). Queen’s Printer for Ontario. https://www.dcp.edu.gov.on.ca/en/curriculum/secondary-mathematics/courses/mth1w
Ontario Ministry of Education. (2022). The Ontario curriculum, grade 9: Science (SNC1W) (revised). Queen’s Printer for Ontario. https://www.dcp.edu.gov.on.ca/en/curriculum/secondary-science/courses/snc1w
Scarborough, H. S. (2001). Connecting early language and literacy to later reading (dis)abilities: Evidence, theory, and practice. In S. B. Neuman & D. K. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (pp. 97–110). Guilford Press.