This study investigated the difference in effectiveness in increasing first-grade reading achievement of a traditional reading program in which no words were taught and a program that began with formal reading instruction in preprimers and no reading readiness. The subjects were 137 pupils in six first-grade classes in a middle-class suburban community in central New Jersey. Pretests of readiness and intelligence indicated no significant differences between groups before training. One group received 6 weeks of readiness training and 10 weeks of reading instruction; the other group received 16 weeks of reading instruction in basal readers and no readiness training. The students were given as post-tests the reading subtests of the Stanford Achievement Tests and the Metropolitan Readiness Tests. It was concluded that omitting traditional reading readiness materials from the first-grade instructional program did not decrease reading achievement and may, in fact, have increased reading achievement. Therefore, it was suggested that first-grade reading instruction begin with formal reading lessons. A bibliography is included. (Author/NH)