I feel like my kid gets more of a phonics background in part due to her IEP, vs kids who don't have IEPs.

Even though I see some phonics based instruction in both classroom & IEP, I see a more phonics based focus coming from what me daughter's IEP teacher gives her vs the classroom. When it comes to Balanced Learning programs like Fountas and Pinnell, because there's both whole language & phonics elements, its the practice in the classroom which determines where the focus is. They teach kids to sound out unfamiliar words, then go back and consider the whole sentence to understand if it makes sense in context.

Science of Learning isn't a specific program, comparing Science of Learning to Fountas and Pinnell is like comparing Greek food to Vegan food. Greek could be vegan, and vegan doesn't have to be Greek.

> The science of reading is not a literacy method in and of itself. Rather, it is the existing body of knowledge about how we learn to read. This body of evidence proves again and again that nearly every child can learn to read with confidence, given explicit instruction in the components of reading.

One way of modeling those reading components is Scarborough's reading rope. Fountas and Pinnell uses all of this, and yet there's criticism of Fountas and Pinnell. Curriculum criticism and review is something schools take rather seriously, it's just wonky and not in the press. Name changes are easy to digest and politically controversial, so they get news coverage. School systems have moved away from a 100% whole language curriculum, and did it while addressing any number of other issues to varying degrees of success. The school system can definitely address a building name change while the nitty gritty of curriculum gets rehashed & reviewed and teachers receive guidance based upon that curriculum review.