The Literacy Transition From Three Cueing to Science-Based Reading

The three-cueing system, also known as MSV (Meaning, Syntax, Visual), has been utilized widely across classrooms for teaching reading skills. However, in light of the increasing focus on research behind effective reading instruction (also known as the science of reading), there have been legislative shifts and a reassessment of the role of three cueing in literacy instruction.

This blog post guides educational leaders through what three cueing is, the three-cueing system's relevance today, and an evidence-based alternative.

What is the Three-Cueing System in Reading?

The three-cueing system was once a common instructional framework in literacy education. It emerged from the whole language movement and later found its way into balanced literacy approaches.

Advocates for three cuing believe they’re referencing the idea that the brain can use multiple sources of information to solve unknown words. But as The Reading League points out, three cueing evolved into a method of literacy instruction, one NOT supported by research.

What Are the “Three Cues” in the Three-Cueing System?

Developed with the aim of providing educators with tools to foster a love of reading in their students, this method is reminiscent of the well-intentioned educational theories that gave rise to it. The system comprises three cues to help students decode written text: 

1. Semantic cues: Focus on gaining meaning from context and sentence-level cues.

2. Syntactic cues: Involve the grammatical features of the language.

3. Grapho-phonic cues: Deal with spelling patterns.

If a student, Dora, misreads the word “horse” as “house” in the sentence “The horse eats the hay in the barn,” here’s how the three-cueing system cues could be applied:

• Semantic cues (Meaning): The teacher asks Dora, “Does ‘house’ make sense in this sentence? What would be in the barn and eat hay?” This prompt encourages Dora to consider the overall context and realize that “house” might not be the correct word.

• Syntactic cues (Structure): The teacher says, “Look at the sentence again. What word would fit best grammatically as the subject here?” This guides Dora to consider the structure of the sentence, prompting her to re-evaluate her choice of the word “house.”

• Grapho-phonic cues (Visual): The teacher points to the word “horse” and asks, “Can you sound this out? What letters do you see?” This encourages Dora to focus on the spelling and phonetic elements of the word, helping her correct her mistake.

What Are the Three-Cueing System’s Limitations?

The three-cueing system has historically been a significant component of balanced literacy education. However, the recent attention around evidence-based instructional strategies and methods has led more and more educational leaders and policymakers to acknowledge that three cueing is not supported by research. The science of reading clearly shows this approach does not sufficiently focus on phonics-based methods (sounding out words), essential for honing students’ decoding skills.

Consequently, learners overly rely on looking at the pictures and guessing. This practice can lead to accepting errors known as miscueing. A student might guess “bunny” instead of “rabbit,” or “screamed” instead of “squealed,” relying on pictures in the book for clues. With the three-cueing system, these errors might be ignored, because the word is close enough in context for the story.

This can hinder a student’s ability to quickly and accurately decode unfamiliar words, impacting students’ overall reading fluency and comprehension.

The three-cueing system often prompts students to guess words based on context or specific letters. This can lead to confusion, particularly with words that have similar starting and ending letters but different letters in the middle. Students may struggle with comprehending complex texts and may misinterpret words. Moreover, this approach might limit vocabulary development.

Cognitive science and educational research have highlighted limitations like these in the three-cueing system. While all students can benefit and learn from explicit instruction in phonemic awareness and phonics, some student populations, like students with learning difficulties like dyslexia, or Emergent Bilingual students, are more likely to be left behind without it. 

This ultimately widens the educational gap, perpetuating inequalities among diverse student populations. Instead, by adopting approaches grounded in empirical evidence, educators will be better equipped to provide targeted support, thereby fostering more equitable and inclusive learning environments. The shift away from three cueing and toward evidence-based methodologies like Structured Literacy is an example of a more inclusive educational approach.

Navigating Changing Legislation: Bans and Opportunities

As the discourse around literacy instruction evolves, so does the legislative landscape. Policymakers in the majority of states have already enacted laws mandating evidence-based curriculum or teacher training, while some have even explicitly prohibited the use of the three-cueing system in public schools. 

States in Motion

A clear trend toward re-evaluating longstanding pedagogical practices in literacy instruction is emerging with lawmakers in these states enacting legislation explicitly banning three-cueing in public educational systems. 

A Race Against the Clock

While the timeline varies by state, most of these legislative changes have been proposed or enacted within the last two years. This quickening pace underscores the urgency facing districts. Delays adapting to these changes may result in conflicts with state mandates, posing financial and ethical challenges.

The changing legislative landscape offers district leaders an urgent challenge and a transformative opportunity. Leaders will need to quickly retrain teachers and update curricula to comply with new state mandates. Now is a timely opportunity for administrators to review and renew literacy instruction methods holistically, aligning them with recent scientific findings and inclusive practices.

The Path Forward: An Alternative Evidence-Based Reading Strategy—The Science of Reading

As a comprehensive body of research, the science of reading includes studies that investigate how children learn to read, pinpoints the causes of reading challenges, and suggests strategies to address them. It serves as a framework for effective reading instruction.

Among the methodologies that harness the insight of the science of reading, Structured Literacy stands out as one of the most effective. It demands explicit, systematic instruction tailored to cater to the diverse learning needs of all students, especially those encountering learning difficulties. By aligning the empirical findings of the science of reading with classroom practices, Structured Literacy paves the way for a more informed and efficient chapter in literacy education. This evidence-based approach will shape the next chapter in literacy education, aligning empirical insight with day-to-day classroom practices.

Structured Literacy: Instruction That Fosters Skilled Word Recognition

Structured Literacy is an umbrella approach coined by the  International Dyslexia Association®. Building on the empirical foundations established by the science of reading, Structured Literacy offers a sophisticated alternative to traditional methods like three cueing. This comprehensive framework incorporates sounds, letter patterns, word meanings, language comprehension, and background knowledge to support students. Developed through explicit, diagnostic, cumulative, and systematic instruction, these interconnected systems enable word decoding (word recognition) and a deeper understanding of text.

Explicit instruction is unambiguous in both its design and delivery, ensuring a clear and direct message. A systematic approach refers to a planned sequence of skills that progress from simpler to more complex components. Cumulative instruction builds upon previously acquired knowledge, serving to foster the automatic and fluent application of language knowledge to reading for meaning. Diagnostic (or responsive) instruction is individualized, reaching each student where they are on a personal level when they need a little extra help. Research shows that such an approach is beneficial for all learners, affirming Structured Literacy is indeed equitable and works for every student.

Structured Literacy’s inclusive and thorough approach helps educators adjust in real time to individual student needs, ensuring a more effective and equitable learning experience.

Why Structured Literacy Instead of MSV/Three Cueing?

The MSV/three-cueing model has faced criticism for its inadequate focus on the explicit, systematic instruction of phonics and phonemic awareness—key elements grounded in reading science. This lack is not merely a matter of preference; it is a critical omission illuminated by research that advocates for a foundational approach to reading. Put more directly, three cueing is not backed by any evidence.

In contrast, Structured Literacy zeroes in on the elemental components of words like letters, syllables, and morphemes. It adheres to a sequence that prioritizes decoding these elements before proceeding to word recognition and semantic comprehension. This nuanced focus on the foundational elements of literacy sets the stage for a more accurate and efficient recognition of words, thereby leading to a better grasp of their meaning.

This sequence—decoding first, then progressing to meaning making—is not only in alignment with the science of reading but also adheres to systematic and cumulative instructional principles. It underscores the necessity for a pedagogical approach that is grounded in a sequential, building-blocks methodology, which stands in stark contrast to the fragmented, guesswork-laden methodology that MSV/three cueing often embodies.

The Components of Structured Literacy

Research identifies several fundamental components crucial for reading proficiency, all of which are embedded in Structured Literacy:

• Phonological and Phonemic Awareness: Essential skills like rhyming, blending, and segmenting are foundational for reading.
• Phonics: The relationship between letters and sounds is vital for decoding words.
• Syllables: These units of sound in words are critical for spelling and reading proficiency.
• Morphology: Understanding word structure enables students to decode meaningful parts like prefixes, suffixes, and roots.
• Syntax: This element focuses on sentence structure, essential for both reading and writing.
• Semantics: Comprehension of word meaning is enhanced by employing context clues.

Evidence Supporting Structured Literacy

The efficacy of Structured Literacy is not just theoretical; it is empirically validated. The International Dyslexia Association coined the term Structured Literacy for comprehensive, evidence-based approaches (more than just phonics) that are a scientifically proven contrast to balanced literacy or whole language approaches. Through a Structured Literacy approach, educators can use the science of reading to help 95% of students become confident, capable readers.

Partnering for Success: Transcending Old Practices Through Evidence-Based Resources

Following recent legislative changes, it is clear time is of the essence for district leaders seeking to update reading instruction methodologies. Bans on the three-cueing system have generated a sense of urgency for finding evidence-based solutions. Structured Literacy provides an actionable alternative that teachers can use. Whether through curriculum changes, supplementary SAAS literacy products, or evidence-based professional learning, implementing an evidence-based approach to literacy instruction is achievable.

Directing Resources Where They Matter

Navigating the educational landscape amid legislative changes demands pinpoint accuracy in choosing instructional materials. Lexia® provides resources that align precisely with the science of reading and Structured Literacy. These tools are validated by rigorous research and are scalable across varied educational settings, offering a reliable pathway for instruction that meets ESSA standards.

Lifelong Learning for Educators

The scope of teaching literacy, especially to students with specific learning needs, makes ongoing professional learning imperative. Building a culture of continuous improvement will ensure educators are always armed with the latest, most effective instructional methods.

Leveraging Lexia's Solutions

Explore Lexia's literacy solutions to effectively meet teacher and student needs. Backed by empirical evidence, Lexia's products offer the exact strategies for a transformative literacy instruction approach.

Each Lexia product offers a distinct yet complementary avenue to integrate the science of reading and Structured Literacy into contemporary literacy education.

Lexia® Core5® Reading

Lexia® Core5® Reading provides personalized learning paths for each student, emphasizing foundational skills in phonemic awareness, phonics, and vocabulary—key pillars of the science of reading.

Lexia® PowerUp Literacy®

Lexia® PowerUp Literacy® is designed for struggling readers and adolescent learners. The program focuses on enhancing advanced literacy skills like comprehension and academic vocabulary, which are all grounded in the scientific evidence of what makes reading instruction most effective.

Lexia LETRS® (Language Essentials for Teachers of Reading and Spelling)

Lexia® LETRS® provides educators with a deep theoretical framework of the linguistic and cognitive processes contributing to proficient reading and writing, all backed by the science of reading.

Lexia Aspire® Professional Learning

Lexia Aspire® Professional Learning empowers teachers by providing the essential knowledge and techniques rooted in the science of reading. This allows them to effectively instruct a diverse student body with differing literacy skills. Additionally, teachers have the flexibility to select content specifically tailored to enhance their students' literacy achievements.

Transitioning From Three Cueing to Evidence-Based Approaches

The need for change from outdated methods to approaches like Structured Literacy is immediate, and the resources to effect that change are available now. Take advantage of Lexia's suite of solutions, built on years of evidence-based research. Your students, staff, and educational community deserve this commitment to excellence.