The Orton-Gillingham approach explained

By the IEP Atlas editorial teamLast updated November 1, 2026

Short answer

The Orton-Gillingham approach is a way of teaching reading and spelling that is explicit, systematic, cumulative and multisensory, adjusted lesson by lesson to the student's errors. It is an approach, not a single program; many published programs are built on it. The phonics teaching at its core has strong support, while evidence for the multisensory parts on their own is mixed.

Orton-Gillingham (often shortened to OG) is a teaching approach for students who struggle to read and spell, especially students with dyslexia. It is named after the neurologist and the educator who developed it in the 1930s. Today it is less a single method than a family: many programs are described as OG-based, and many tutors are trained in it.

OG falls under the wider label structured literacy: teaching the structure of language (sounds, letter patterns, syllables, word parts, sentences) directly and in a planned order. For where it fits in a school phonics plan, see the phonics interventions pillar guide.

The principles

Principle	What it means in a lesson
Explicit	The teacher states the pattern and models it; students are not left to discover it
Systematic and sequential	Patterns follow a planned order, simple to complex
Cumulative	Each lesson reviews earlier patterns, so nothing is dropped
Multisensory	Students see, say, hear and write the pattern, often with movement (tapping, tracing, writing in the air)
Diagnostic and prescriptive	The teacher watches each error and plans the next lesson around it
Synthetic and analytic	Students build words from sounds and also take words apart
Reading and spelling together	Every pattern is read and spelled in the same lesson

Most of these are not unique to OG. Explicit, systematic, cumulative phonics with reading and spelling together is what the National Reading Panel and the What Works Clearinghouse recommend in general.^[1]^[2] What is most associated with OG is the emphasis on multisensory practice and on individual, error-driven lesson planning.

What an OG lesson looks like

A typical one-to-one or small-group OG lesson runs 45 to 60 minutes. Programs differ, but the parts are similar:

Visual drill. The student sees letter cards and says the sound.
Auditory drill. The teacher says a sound; the student says and writes the letter or letters.
Blending drill. The student reads cards arranged into words.
New concept. The teacher introduces one new pattern with a rule and examples.
Irregular words. Often called red words, taught with tracing or writing while naming letters.
Reading. Words, phrases and a short controlled passage.
Spelling and dictation. The student repeats the word, says each sound or letter while writing it, then reads it back.

Each part is short. The teacher marks errors throughout and uses them to choose tomorrow's review.

What the evidence does and does not show

This is where accuracy matters, because OG is often described in stronger terms than the research supports.

Strong support: explicit, systematic phonics, taught in a planned order with practice in reading and spelling. This is the core of OG lessons, and it is well supported for young children and struggling readers.^[1]
Mixed or limited support: OG-branded programs as packages, and the multisensory components on their own. Controlled studies of OG programs are fewer, often small, and their results vary. Studies rarely separate the multisensory activities from the explicit phonics they come with, so it is hard to say what tracing or tapping adds by itself.
Not established: claims that any one OG program is necessary for students with dyslexia, or better than other structured literacy programs with similar content.

So the honest summary: what an OG lesson teaches is sound practice. Whether a particular OG program works better than another explicit, systematic program is an open question. To check a specific program, look it up in the National Center on Intensive Intervention tools charts, which rate intervention studies, and in the What Works Clearinghouse.^[3]

How OG fits into an IEP, and where rules differ

Topic	General rule	Where it varies
Naming a program in the IEP	Federal law does not require a specific method; the IEP describes services, which should be based on peer-reviewed research to the extent practicable^[4]	Some teams name a program; many describe the instruction instead ("explicit, systematic phonics, 5 times a week, 45 minutes")
Specially designed instruction	Adapting content, method or delivery to the student's needs^[5]
Dyslexia as a disability	Dyslexia is listed as an example within specific learning disability^[6]	States differ on dyslexia screening, definitions and handbooks
Teacher training	Not required by federal law	Some states require structured literacy training for reading teachers or interventionists; check your state education agency
Parent requests for OG	The team considers the request; methodology is generally left to the school if the plan is appropriate	Practice and dispute outcomes differ; this is general information, not legal advice

The IEP goal should measure the skill, not the program. "Will complete OG Level 3" is not a measurable goal. "Will read 18 of 20 unpracticed silent-e words" is. Templates on the phonics decoding goals page work with any program.

Scenario: one student, one school year

Eli is a fictional 3rd grader found eligible under specific learning disability in reading on September 8. His evaluation notes weak phonemic awareness and decoding, with strong listening comprehension. His parents ask for "Orton-Gillingham."

At the September 22 IEP meeting, the team writes services as "explicit, systematic, multisensory structured literacy instruction, 45 minutes, 5 days a week, small group of up to 3." His teacher is trained in an OG-based program and uses it. Baseline on September 15: 6 of 20 silent-e words correct, and 58 words correct per minute on a 3rd grade passage.

Date	Silent-e words (of 20)	Vowel team words (of 20)	Words correct per minute
Sept 15	6	2	58
Nov 10	15	5	64
Jan 12	19	11	71
Mar 16	19	16	79

Progress is steady, and the January progress report shows it. If Eli's lines had been flat by November, the team would look at what to change (time, group size, practice amount) rather than arguing about the program's name. Decisions come from the data.^[7] These numbers are illustrations, not norms.

Common misunderstandings

"OG is a program." It is an approach. Many programs use it, with different materials and sequences.
"OG is only for dyslexia." It was designed with dyslexia in mind, but its core (explicit, systematic phonics) helps many struggling readers.
"The multisensory part is what makes it work." That has not been shown. The explicit, systematic teaching is the part with strong support.
"Only a certified OG tutor can teach structured literacy." Training helps, and some programs require it. Teachers trained in other explicit phonics programs teach the same content.

For a comparison of OG-based and other programs, see multisensory reading programs compared. For goal wording, see phonics IEP goal examples and IEP goals for dyslexia. For the daily routine a non-OG teacher can use, see the explicit phonics lesson plan template and phonics intervention activities for 2nd and 3rd grade. The dyslexia glossary entry is a short explanation to share with families.

Frequently asked questions

Is Orton-Gillingham evidence-based?

Its core, explicit and systematic phonics taught in order with reading and spelling together, is well supported. Studies of OG programs as packages are fewer and mixed, and the multisensory parts have not been shown to add benefit on their own. Check each program in an independent review.

Can parents require the school to use Orton-Gillingham?

Parents can ask, and the team must consider the request. Federal law generally leaves the choice of method to the school if the IEP is appropriate. Rules and practice vary by state, so check your state's guidance or a parent training center.

What is the difference between Orton-Gillingham and structured literacy?

Structured literacy is the broader term for explicit, systematic teaching of sounds, letters, syllables, word parts and sentences. Orton-Gillingham is one approach within it, known for its multisensory practice and lesson plans driven by each student's errors.

Use it in IEP Atlas

Sources

Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching Children to Read, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD)
Foundational Skills to Support Reading for Understanding in Kindergarten Through 3rd Grade, What Works Clearinghouse, Institute of Education Sciences
Intervention & Assessment Tools Charts, National Center on Intensive Intervention
34 CFR §300.320: Definition of individualized education program, Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
34 CFR §300.39: Special education, Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
34 CFR §300.8: Child with a disability, Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
Progress Monitoring: Data & Goal Setting, National Center on Intensive Intervention

Written and checked by the IEP Atlas editorial team under our editorial policy. This guide describes general practice and federal rules. It is not legal advice; your state may add requirements, and the IEP team makes the decisions for each student.