[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-602335-105":59,"doc-detail-602335-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","science-of-reading-policies-international-impacts-and-impressions-essay","Science of Reading Policies: International Impacts and Impressions - Essay","","Debates around the Science of Reading often focus on research scholarship, yet productive dialogue requires clarity about shared literacy values and how these values can be addressed through instruction. Drawing on internationally accepted definitions and literacy scholarship, the study proposes a literacy values framework with 12 interdependent principles for literacy education. It applies this framework to two advocacy documents, identifying gaps in the literacy instruction types emphasized in Canada and Australia.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/science-of-reading-policies-international-impacts-and-impressions-essay/602335/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/science-of-reading-policies-international-impacts-and-impressions-essay/602335.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"dawugda","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-30","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":34},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What does the study propose for analyzing Science of Reading advocacy documents?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"It proposes a literacy values framework and 12 interdependent principles describing what literacy education should nurture and develop, then uses them to analyze advocacy documents.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"How many interdependent principles are identified, and what categories do they cover?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"The study identifies 12 interdependent principles, including communication capacity, knowledge of the world, comprehension and composition of text, creativity, empathy, criticality, multimodal/technological capacities, democratic citizenship, empowered literate identities, and necessary skills.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"Which advocacy documents are analyzed, and what key outcome is reported?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"The analysis applies the framework to The Right to Read (Canada) and The Reading Guarantee (Australia), revealing significant gaps in the literacy instruction types addressed and emphasized.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},602335,1792463901,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":34,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145},3985747870947,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_3d24733baf745e90a7e4bdd5f77d97b2","Science of Reading Policies: International Impacts and Impressions  \neducation policy analysis archives  \nA peer-reviewed, independent, open access, multilingual journal  \nArizona State University  \n\n| Volume 33 Number 76 | November 11 , 2025 | ISSN 1068-2341 |\n| --- | --- | --- |\n\nLiteracy Principles as a Tool for Policy Analysis: An Examination of the Values Embedded in Science of Reading Advocacy Documents  \nMarenAukerman  \nUniversity of Calgary  \nCanada  \n&  \nRachel Birch  \nUniversity of Newcastle  \nAustralia  \nCitation: Aukerman, M., & Birch, R. (2025) . Literacy principles as a tool for policy analysis: An examination of the values embedded in science of reading advocacy documents. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 33(76). [https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.33.8702](https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.33.8702) This article is part of the special issue Science of Reading Policies: International Impacts and Impressions, guest edited by Danielle Dennis and Rachael Gabriel.  \nAbstract: Debates around the Science of Reading have often been couched in consideration of research scholarship. However, before a meaningful dialogue centered on empirical evidence can fruitfully take place, there must be some clarity around shared literacy values, and around how those values might be addressed through instruction. Drawing on internationally accepted definitions and along tradition of literacy scholarship, we identify a literacy values framework, along with 12 interdependent principles describing what literacy education should nurture and develop: capacity for communication; knowledge and understanding of the world; repertoires of purpose; capacity for  \nunderstanding text; capacity for text composition; imagination and creativity; empathy; capacity for criticality; multimodal, embodied, and technological capacities; capacity for democratic citizenship; empowering literate identities; and requisite skills. An analysis using these principles was applied to two Science of Reading advocacy documents: The Right to Read report from Canada and The Reading Guarantee from Australia, revealing significant gaps in the types of literacy instruction being addressed and emphasized for literacy teaching and learning.  \nKeywords: Science of Reading; literacy; reading; values; education policy; Canada; Australia  \nPrincipios de alfabetización como herramienta para el análisis de políticas: Un examen delos valores incorporados en los documentos de defensa de la ciencia de la lectura Resumen: Los debates en torno a la Ciencia de la Lectura suelen estar planteados en relación con la investigación académica. Sin embargo, antes de que pueda producirse un diálogo significativocentrado en la evidencia empírica, es necesario aclarar cuáles son los valores compartidos sobre la alfabetización y cómo esos valores podrían abordarse mediante la enseñanza. A partir de definiciones internacionalmente aceptadas y de una larga tradición de investigación en alfabetización, identificamos un marco de valores de alfabetización, junto con 12 principios interdependientes que describen lo que la educación en alfabetización debería fomentar y desarrollar: capacidad de comunicación; conocimiento y comprensión del mundo; repertorios de propósito; capacidad decomprensión textual; capacidad de producción de textos; imaginación y creatividad; empatía; capacidad de criticidad; capacidades multimodales, corporales y tecnológicas; capacidad para la ciudadanía democrática; construcción de identidades lectoras empoderadas; y habilidades necesarias. Un análisis basado en estos principios se aplicó a dos documentos de defensa de la Ciencia de la Lectura: The Right to Read de Canadá y The Reading Guarantee de Australia, revelando brechassignificativas en los tipos de enseñanza de la alfabetización que se abordan y enfatizan en relacióncon la enseñanza y el aprendizaje de la lectura.  \nPalabras clave: Ciencia de la Lectura; alfabetización; lectura; valores; política educativa; Canadá; Australia  ","cbCaiootscSdrXjp","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaiootscSdrXjp","pdf",620433,35,"English","# Literacy Principles as a Tool for Policy Analysis\n## Literacy values framework and 12 interdependent principles\n## Application to Science of Reading advocacy documents\n## Findings: gaps in emphasized literacy instruction","[{\"question\":\"What does the study propose for analyzing Science of Reading advocacy documents?\",\"answer\":\"It proposes a literacy values framework and 12 interdependent principles describing what literacy education should nurture and develop, then uses them to analyze advocacy documents.\"},{\"question\":\"How many interdependent principles are identified, and what categories do they cover?\",\"answer\":\"The study identifies 12 interdependent principles, including communication capacity, knowledge of the world, comprehension and composition of text, creativity, empathy, criticality, multimodal/technological capacities, democratic citizenship, empowered literate identities, and necessary skills.\"},{\"question\":\"Which advocacy documents are analyzed, and what key outcome is reported?\",\"answer\":\"The analysis applies the framework to The Right to Read (Canada) and The Reading Guarantee (Australia), revealing significant gaps in the literacy instruction types addressed and emphasized.\"}]","Science of Reading Policies: International Impacts and Impressions - Essay | PDF",1792094496,88]