Submit SoR Program

Submit your SoR Program today!

Contact Us

Thanks for submitting!

Send the initial email and we will be in touch to raise an invoice and gather information for your dedicated page. 

The page will link directly to your own website, to drive traffic via google, and offer direct contact details. YOU choose which information is provided, including promotional videos and testimonials. 

We are also compiling a comparison chart to show the differences between DfE validated SSP SoR aligned programs and will request specific information if not readily available on your web site (Scope and Sequence etc)

SSP Programme Page Listing fees: 
£245 per year. 

Science of Reading (Sor) Programs worldwide

SoR Programs show those Science of Reading aligned programs that have been accredited or validated - eg DfE Validated Systematic Synthetic Phonics (SSP) Programmes.

In the US and want teachers to find your accredited SoR aligned programs? Submit it below.  


Submit Your Non-UK SoR Aligned Program
What are schools looking for in an 'evidence-based' program?
Drawing from the seminal work of the National Reading Panel on evidence-based reading instruction in Grades K–12, the International Reading Association (IRA) defined evidence-based instruction as a program or instructional practice that is derived from rigorous research and has demonstrated a record of success.
However, others state that
'it is currently impossible for schools to select basal reading programs that adhere to strict evidence-based standards'.

'Evidence-based decision making regarding effective literacy programs and practices for classroom use can be difficult. Often, there is no evidence of effectiveness for a program or the evidence is of poor quality. For instance, of the five most popular reading programs used nationwide (i.e., Units of Study for Teaching Reading, Journeys, Into Reading, Leveled Literacy Intervention and Reading Recovery; Schwartz, 1999) only Leveled Literacy Intervention and Reading Recovery, both interventions for struggling readers, have studies that meet WWC standards. The evidence indicates that there were mixed effects across outcomes for Leveled Literacy Intervention and positive or potentially positive effects for Reading Recovery (e.g., Chapman & Tunmer, 2016). Classroom reading programs are typically built around the notion of evidence-informed practices – teaching approaches that are grounded in quality research – but have not been subjected to direct scientific evaluation. As a consequence, it is currently impossible for schools to select basal reading programs that adhere to strict evidence-based standards (e.g., ESSA, 2015). As an alternative, schools must develop selection criteria for choosing classroom reading programs informed by the growing scientific evidence on instructional factors that support early reading development (e.g., Castles et al., 2018; Foorman et al.2017; Rayner et al., 2001).'
Download How the Science of Reading Informs 21st Century Education

In order to submit a program please outline how SoR informed instructional factors support early reading development.

It might be useful to view this (updated) curriculum evaluation document from

The Reading League. 

'This curriculum evaluation tool features components that align with the Simple View of Reading (Gough & Tunmer, 1986) and Scarborough’s Rope (Scarborough, 2001). Word Recognition and Language Comprehension are broken down into subcomponents and writing and spelling, as well as assessment, are included. Green Flags indicate instructional practices that are aligned with the science of reading. Red Flags indicate instructional practices that are not aligned with the science of reading. If the curriculum you are evaluating features a particular Red Flag, place an X in the adjacent red box. If many/most of the red boxes are checked for a particular component, it is likely that the program is not aligned with the Science of Reading. Keep searching!

NOTES: This tool is to be considered a “living document” meaning that it will be periodically updated based on user feedback, suggestions for optimizing use, etc. We thank those who contributed to its content.'
Visit web site 

Disclaimer: are not affiliated with The Reading League.