Think you may have omitted the 6th, and possibly most important element necessary for children to become good readers.
That of parental enthusiasm and encouragement.
However given that a lot of parents themselves are possibly not good readers this will be very difficult to implement.
Guess I was very lucky when young in that both my parents, despite their poor education levels, were avid readers themselves, pre TV and computer days, and passed this habit on to me.

This is one of my pet grievances. I accepted that I had to teach one of my sons to read, he was severely dyslexic and not once in his school years did I come across a teacher with any understanding of the condition. But years later, there were no excuses for the failure of several of my grandchildren being able to read beyond basic preschool level half way through primary school.
They were not dyslexic, not delayed, not absent from school. Yet I had to purchase a set of progressive readers, at a fairly large cost, and teach 3 of them to read.
Teachers had failed to pick up on their lack of reading skills and when pointed out to them commented, "but they always try hard".
Even the grandchildren who can read aren't terribly proficient. They have no knowledge of phonics, a poor vocabulary and terrible grammar.
Apart from the lack of phonic teaching, one of the biggest issues is the readers sent home with the kids. Unlike in my school years, the books are not progressive in content. Each book is a different topic, with different characters, the words do not build on words learned in precious books and the level is different every day.
I struggle with teachers complaining that I teach the kids the old ABC (short sounds) not the long American ABC sounds.
However, I have got them reading, and reading well, with a vocabulary that enables them to understand most information.
Complaints of lack of parental help at home don't wash. Nobody ever helped me to read at home. I learnt at school.

I had no formal training in education but 30 years ago when my daughters' teachers said that they were using a variety of methods to teach their pupils to read I went and bought the Hay Wingo series to teaching phonics. We just went through the 3 books and by the time they had finished (took a year) they could read perfectly. Another benefit was that I also learned a lot about the English language and how phonetic it really was.

"Written English is a code. Once children learn the code, they can read almost any word. Some children learn to read without much formal teaching in phonics; these children are the minority...."

Both my children were reading fluently before they started grade 1, Not because I formally "taught" them - both of them just appeared to "get it" and off they went.

My son, now 13, began to read fluently while still in kindergarten. He was a late talker (around 3) and yet reading fluently 22 months later.

I was amazed at the time that he could come up against a silent "k" in a word like "know" and still be able to read it, taking his cues from the rest of the words in the sentence.

I can remember not being able to read before I started school and desperately wanting to know how. Neither of my children have that memory.

Who is the person writing this article?
Has she ever taught a class- at primary level, for instance?

Does she have qualifications in teacher education or any experience thereof?

What is this "research" she refers to? Could we have some names and publications?

My understanding of research on reading is that many of us learn to read in very different ways. Even the experts disagree on how best to do it and so often it depends on the person leaning to read and his or her different attributes, strengths and weaknesses.

It's all very well saying these nice-sounding things in the article, but one suspects that Pyne is up to some tricky business. His record isn't very good in these matters. And if he's supported by the Murdoch Press I'm confident he is - as the teacher unions say- trying to distract us from implementing the Gonski review.

What a shame Gillard and Rudd did so little in education…except spend money and start enquiries. This Liberal Government seems little better.

Agree with the article, Big Nana and EQ!
Typically, the only detractor, thus far, challenges the qualifications of the writer!
However, we do find teachers, whose literacy is substandard, and in a few cases, it would seem, less competent readers and or spellers; than those they're trying to teach!
And only able to keep earning a "generous" pay packet, due to union activity!?
Teaching as an occupation, is all about kids and their advancement, not protecting (OFFICIALLY QUALIFIED) incompetent workers and drones, whose only consideration is the size of the pay packet and its protected continuation!
So much for much touted and relied on official qualifications and their real worth in this long overdue debate.
I have a dyslexic brother and but for Phonetics and super competent remedial teaching, he would still be unable to read, as was the case for my Father; who kept his shameful secret, well into his seventies, by having an excellent memory and pretending to read the news, when in fact, he was repeating it verbatim from a prodigious memory!
I understand that colored lenses, and different for each eye, is reportedly helping some students, to stop the whirl of letters, that often prevents learning in some cases!
And hear hear to more local autonomy, and Principals at long last enabled to jettison patently incompetent/hopeless teachers/deadwood!
Rhrosty.