A Photo Is Worth Eleven Words

Why Images Remain an Important Element of Literacy Instruction

By Shelley Evans-Marshall, MA, with Gladys Rosa-Mendoza

The photograph, like the one shown here, is black and white. The subject’s expression is stoic.

Mexican artist Frida Kahlo sits crouched on a step outside a doorway. She wears her characteristic Tehuana dress and layered jewelry. Her right hand clasps her left wrist. Her left elbow anchors her leg. Her left hand—rings on every finger—cradles her face, eyes cast downward.

The words of another Mexican (American) artist, Sandra Cisneros, echo across decades:

“… the way so many women sit their sadness on an elbow.”

In that moment, image and language converge.

Words describe. Images contextualize.

Together, they facilitate the making of meaning.

And that relationship is essential for literacy instruction.

The Science of Reading and the Image Debate

In education, many publishers are rapidly eliminating images from literacy instruction in homage to the Science of Reading (SoR).

The reasoning is straightforward:

If the word boat appears alongside an image of a boat, and a student reads aloud “boat,” how can we be sure they are decoding the word rather than naming the image?

The concern is logical. Decoding must be measurable. Phonics must be systematic. Guessing based on pictures does not replace foundational reading skills.

But in the rush to protect decoding, what is the effect on comprehension?

Decoding Is Not the Same as Understanding

Consider this example: A student successfully decodes the term ski lift.

Phonetically correct. Technically accurate.

But is there a cultural context for understanding? Without the money or the means to witness snow-covered mountains with mechanically powered suspended chairs, does the student comprehend the meaning of the term?

SoR does not reject images outright. It acknowledges that pictures can support vocabulary development and engagement but maintains that images should not serve as a primary strategy for reading development.

Fair enough.

But somewhere along the way, “support” is being interpreted in the negative.

And that interpretation deserves scrutiny.

The Critical Role of Images in Building Literacy

Let’s consider multilingual language learners (MLLs).

Images have long been recognized as a powerful strategy in second-language acquisition, particularly when English words lack cognates in a student’s first language.

Take the word siblings, with Germanic etymology. It does not share origins with the Spanish hermanos. A multilingual learner may decode siblings accurately. But without the cognate to anchor understanding, comprehension may or may not exist.

An image clarifies.

An image stabilizes meaning.

An image bridges languages.

Removing images from early literacy materials disproportionately impacts students who rely on visual scaffolding to build linguistic connections, and the practice affects not only MLLs but also students in need of cultural contexts.

Literacy Is Corporal, Not Skeletal

Structured, systematic phonics instruction is essential. That is not in question. However, literacy acquisition is not a skeletal system composed only of phonemes and graphemes.

It is muscular, cultural, contextual, and cognitive. It requires decoding, vocabulary development, cultural knowledge, visualization skills, and background schema.

Images contribute to several of these domains simultaneously.

The wholesale elimination of image-based strategies risks reducing literacy instruction to mechanical precision while stripping away cognitive richness.

The Big Question for Publishers and District Leaders

The issue is not whether phonics matters, because it does. The issue is whether we are mistaking the purity of letters and their sounds for literacy.

When we remove instructional supports such as images, we may inadvertently narrow access, particularly for multilingual learners and students building background knowledge.

The goal is not the use of one or the other. It is intentional integration.

Images should not replace decoding, but neither should decoding eliminate students’ access to meaning.

The Future of Literacy Design

As literacy leaders, publishers, and district decision-makers, we must ask:

• Are we distinguishing clearly between decoding and comprehension? Are we providing instruction and scaffolding in both?

• Are we preserving supports that build bridges to meaning?

• Are we designing materials for all learners?

A photograph may not teach phonics. But combined with language, it advances understanding.

Stay Connected with Contentra

Contentra shares expert perspectives on curriculum development, educational publishing, instructional design, and academic alignment.

Join education leaders, publishers, and curriculum specialists who subscribe to receive new insights as soon as they’re published.