Letter Names Matter: Why the “Don’t Teach Letter Names” Narrative is Failing Our Kids

Some belief systems have become so deeply ingrained in educators and policymakers that no amount of real-world experience or evidence seems to shake them. One of the most persistent is the claim that kids don’t need to know letter names to learn to read — and that teaching them can even make reading harder.

This idea circulates widely on social media and in teacher training circles. Yet every state still lists naming letters as a kindergarten standard. The result? Generations of children, particularly those with dyslexia or other reading challenges, continue to fall through the cracks.

A Recent Twitter Exchange That Highlights the Problem

In a recent thread, former principal @Principal_Jon stated:

“Uncomfortable truth: Kids don’t need to know letter names to learn to read. Regrettable fact: Every state has naming letters as a kindergarten standard.”

I replied:

For goodness’ sake, stop this nonsense. I’ve explained in detail why letter names are important—especially for struggling readers and dyslexic children.

 

Many kids shut down from learning to read when it doesn’t make sense to them. They learn the sounds of letters but become confused when teachers or books use words that begin with the sounds embedded in the letter names — bee, deep, giraffe, jay, kay, pea, tea, and so on. This mismatch creates frustration and disengagement.

That’s likely why the percentage of kids leaving school functionally illiterate has remained stubbornly high for decades, despite endless “innovations” in reading instruction. These are the children we should be most concerned about.

 

The Giraffe Example and Early Reader Confusion

 

One responder (@emmmmmilyau) pushed back:

“Naming letters can make early reading HARDER, because G doesn’t make a ‘gee’ sound when you sound out d-o-g.”

 

My response:

Of course “G” doesn’t make a “gee” sound in “dog.” But how about giraffe? Words like bee, deep, jay, kay, pea, etc., appear early and constantly.

 

The key is sequence and clarity. Teach letter names first (as I successfully do with dyslexic students), then introduce pure sounds without extraneous vowels (no “duh” for /d/ or “guh” for /g/). This prevents confusion and builds a strong foundation.

I was taught this way more than 60 years ago, and it worked. Sally Shaywitz herself highlighted the problem in the New York Times with the flawed example of “duh-aah-guh” for “dog.” (See my earlier post: “Dog is Broken Down into Phonemes Duh-Aah-Guh”). LINK

 

What the Evidence Actually Shows

Research supports that knowing letter names facilitates learning letter sounds, not hinders it. Letter-name knowledge is a strong predictor of later reading success.

In my work with over 80 dyslexic students, I start with letter names. This allows us to orthographically map all 220 Dolch sight words using the names first, then layer on the sounds. It works reliably.

The real culprit isn’t letter names — it’s teaching sounds with added vowel noise (“buh,” “cuh,” etc.), which makes blending nearly impossible for many children.

Learning Letter Names and Sounds at the Same Time

As one experienced teacher (@ScottRagan) noted in the thread:

“EVEN MORE uncomfortable truth: Learning letter names and letter sounds is best done at the same time and adds almost no extra time or work. Pretending otherwise just showed that you’ve probably never taught reading.”

 

I agree. It’s not either/or — it’s both, in the right sequence.

Final Thoughts

The status quo in many education systems seems more interested in protecting outdated dogmas than in questioning why illiteracy rates haven’t improved. Educators repeating internet talking points without testing them on real struggling kids is doing real harm.

If you’re a parent or teacher working with a child who is frustrated with reading, don’t dismiss letter names. Try the approach that has worked for decades: clear letter names first, followed by pure, clean sounds without extraneous noise.

Related posts on this blog:

Letter Names or Letter Sounds LINK

How I Teach Dyslexic Kids (Part 2) LINK

Here are some additional comments on Twitter:

  

Ruth Joy @RuthJoy96960173

Not sure why kids should be deprived of knowing the names of the letters of the alphabet.

 

 

Jamie Class @JamieClass5

How do you even discuss reading without mentioning letter names? I say something like, “look again, it’s “I” not “a” in that word.” Or how would you teach syllable types?

 

Scott Ragan @ScottRagan

They absolutely should not be deprived. Guys like this hide behind some alleged educational experience and pretend to have expert knowledge when it's obvious they have nothing of the kind.

 

Rusty Parks @yaxamie

Replying to @MichelLuqman and @Principal_Jon

On one hand we have a well written article by an educator asserting what has worked for them in practice and has been verified by hundreds. On the other a “you didn’t prove a negative” One of these can, on face, be dismissed.

I’d love to hear your experiences in the comments. Have you seen letter-name confusion derail a child’s reading progress? Or have you found success with a names-first approach?

Share this post if you believe we should prioritize what actually works for the kids who need it most.