It has been more than twenty years since the National Reading Panel Report (2000) provided recommendations for the teaching of reading based on a meta-analysis of suitable research. The report was commissioned at the end of the 1990s, just as the "whole language" reading movement that advocated for analytic phonics instruction and having students spend much of their time silently reading at their "independent" levels was common. The report recommended the explicit teaching of the "Big Five" components of reading instruction, phonemic awareness, phonics, comprehension, fluency and vocabulary, along with scaffolded reading instruction with challenging text. In the same year, another study concluded that elementary teachers had students reading silently 71% of the time and providing phonics instruction strategies associated with "whole language" such as contextual analysis. In this study, a survey was distributed to school superintendents across the country; 293 completed the survey resulting in a 72% response rate. Respondents indicated a clear and increasing preference for basal programs; a result that we believe reveals the impact of the NRP. Even so, about a quarter of the respondents indicated a preference for programs, and more than half were using assessments, more aligned with "whole language" approaches.