It started 12 years ago when Emily Angiletta, Stephanie Timek and Emily Silluzio were first time teachers at the Meriden, Connecticut school, staying late to plan lessons 鈥� long after the custodians shuttered the building. 

The teachers were hired under the leadership of a new principal with a new vision of what student success would look like in a low-income school. The three educators were in their 20s, fresh out of college and trying to figure out what it meant to be effective in the classroom.

More than a decade later, their friendship is like a sisterhood or a sports team: They call each other only by their last names and can practically finish each other’s sentences with a smirk and a head nod that says 鈥測eah, that鈥檚 what I was going to say.鈥� 

Together, they鈥檝e experienced getting married, losing a parent and having children. They have  also lived through the highs and lows of the classroom 鈥� some years 鈥渟oaring through expectations鈥� and others questioning if their teaching had worsened. 

鈥淲e were all learning together, struggling together, learning from our mistakes, growing together,鈥� Silluzio said, 鈥渁nd I think that’s a huge part of what led to our unity. We were in the same boat.鈥�

The Barry teachers鈥� close relationships show not only what a culture shift in one school has done for staff, but also students. The friendship and strong working collaboration are the results of a bold plan set in motion by their former principal Dan Crispino, who helped transform the school from 5% proficiency to a in 2019. 

Now, Crispino has been tasked with scaling Barry鈥檚 academic success across the district. 

The Meriden school district, in many ways, is similar to Angilleta, Timek and Silluzio 鈥� learning, struggling and growing together. 

An almost decade-long overhaul of the district has been a systematic transformation 鈥� rooted in consistency across classrooms and campuses, accountability, hands-on oversight, relationship and trust.

It鈥檚 about finding ways to put their students 鈥渋n a position to do things that people don’t believe are possible,鈥� said Crispino, now the district鈥檚 director of school leadership. 鈥淭heir backgrounds 鈥� all these things 鈥� are tough and you can鈥檛 control everything. But, what you can control is when they鈥檙e ours and that we鈥檙e giving them every single freaking thing possible to help them be successful and to get ahead of whatever challenges.鈥�

While there鈥檚 often an expectation that students in urban districts won鈥檛 perform well because of , which affect school funding levels and supporting high student needs, Meriden is Connecticut鈥檚 and is beating the odds in how successful it’s been at teaching kids to read.

Despite being made up of nearly 鈥� more than three quarters of whom are from low-income families 鈥�  kids in seven of the district鈥檚 eight elementary schools are reading at higher levels than expected, according to a data project focused on Bright Spot schools launched by 社区黑料.

The data analysis highlighted schools that were among the top 5% of their state in outscoring their expected reading proficiency based on the percentage of children who qualified for free or reduced priced lunch. 

Connecticut was home to 25 exceptional schools. And of the state鈥檚 top five Bright Spot schools 鈥� three were in Meriden, including its highest need campus, Pulaski Elementary School, which has a poverty rate of 87.7% and expected just 16.4% of students reading on grade level but instead had nearly 54%.

In the last seven years, the school system has reworked its master schedule and implemented a rigorously supervised accountability model from district and school leaders who are in classrooms daily. Staff across the district have meticulously tracked student progress and have improved collaboration to make data more accessible among one another. 

The district has also incorporated instructional coaches, who are assigned by grade and travel between campuses. Their role, beyond meeting with educators several times a week, is bearing the weight of lesson planning every unit by outlining curriculum and other resources. 

The initiatives are part of an underlying mission: Alignment. 

No matter the school building or the classroom, all third grade classes across the district are learning the same material on the same schedule 鈥� even if it looks a little different teacher by teacher. They鈥檙e meeting with the same coaches and district leadership. 

System alignment through relationship building

Whether it鈥檚 children who have lost a parent, are experiencing homelessness, learning English or have a disability, Meriden staff have successfully worked with many such students 鈥� including Enzo, a third grade student at Pulaski Elementary School.

He doesn鈥檛 know what he wants to be once he gets older, but he knows he enjoys math and science. Enzo knows all about the Fibonacci Sequence, he said, explaining how 鈥渙ne plus one is two, and two plus one is three, and three plus two is five, and five plus three is eight,鈥� going all the way up to 13 plus eight.

He admitted he thought reading was boring, but he couldn鈥檛 sit still when he talked about a book he鈥檚 reading at home.

鈥淚t’s called 鈥榃hat Cats Want,鈥欌�� said Enzo, 8. 鈥淚’m on page 102.鈥�

He鈥檚 more than halfway through the book and he likes to read 鈥渢wo or four鈥� pages before he goes to sleep. His favorite tidbit of information from the book is to be careful when you let your cat outside.

鈥淣umber one, they can get run over. Number two, they can get lost. And number three, a stranger cat can attack them,鈥� Enzo said, holding up three green marker stained fingers. But, 鈥淚 remember [everything] from page one.鈥�

Earlier this school year, Enzo lost his father. But through services at his school, including an individualized schedule that allows him to work for 30 minutes, then take a two minute break, he鈥檚 been able to stay on track in the classroom.

But before a student like Enzo can be successful, the needs of educators must be met.

Before taking on his central office job in 2020, Crispino spent more than 20 years as a first grade teacher and as a principal at Barry for a handful of years. When he began working as a district administrator, and was asked to mirror his success at Barry across campuses, union relationships were among his top priorities.

鈥淚 would never ask anyone to do anything that I wouldn’t do or have done myself,鈥� Crispino said. 鈥淵ou don’t want surprises. They’re your human resource. They’re delivering what you’re trying to put forth. If you don’t have their support, then it’s never gonna work.鈥�

Time and expectations were the biggest concerns from educators, both in Meriden and across the country, with surveys showing staff often feel like they鈥檙e in a school day.

Step one, in Meriden, was overhauling its master schedule, which originally 鈥渨as not, physically, mathematically, possible,鈥� Crispino said. Teachers were being asked to start reading at 12:30, the same time recess was supposed to end, so everyone鈥檚 transitional time looked different and there was no uniformity when students were actually supposed to be back in the classroom and at work. 

鈥淭hat had to go away,鈥� Crispino said. 

Though it seemed simple, just taking the first step in building in five minute transitions made the schedule 鈥渧iable, conducive and real,鈥� Crispino said, which helped align schools and teachers on expectations. They also built in a reteach day at the end of every unit for concepts that had students struggling.

Next was making oversight a norm. 

Crispino and his building principals spend most of their time in classrooms, at least four times a day. It began as a practice that at first 鈥渨asn鈥檛 pretty,鈥� Crispino said, with many complaints from union leaders who said administrators spent too much time in the classroom, but has since shifted to educators stopping them when they walk by to see if they want to check their recent data collection.

鈥淲e鈥檙e not there to get you, there鈥檚 a difference,鈥� Crispino said. 鈥淔or support and accountability, we鈥檙e going to be there.鈥�

Coaches that changed, and streamlined, the game

With administrators who better understand what鈥檚 going on in the classroom, it means resources can be allocated better. In Meriden, Crispino has spearheaded bringing in instructional coaches who are assigned by grade levels and rotate among campuses.

鈥淲hen I was a first year teacher, 鈥� I had to go home and write all my little lessons. I had no one to help me. I was on my own. Your admin would come in doing observations and you鈥檇 either have it or you don’t,鈥� Crispino said, 鈥渁nd that’s different now.鈥�

Veronica Germe recalled being a teacher in the state capital鈥檚 public school system. In Hartford, a district home to more than 15,000 students, she remembered how she only saw her principal in her kindergarten classroom once during the entire school year and how 鈥渧isibility is the biggest difference鈥� between the two districts.

Germe, now a K-3 grade English language arts and math coach in Meriden, is part of a team of about a dozen other elementary instructional coaches who are responsible for supporting both new and veteran teachers by managing lesson planning and acting as a resource for implementation.

鈥淲e鈥檝e almost become a catch all in the district for all the questions K-5,鈥� she said. 

In many districts, instructional coaches may be brushed off by educators, but in Meriden, the group has worked hard to develop a relationship where they鈥檙e 鈥渁lmost like a teammate,鈥� Germe said. 鈥淲e鈥檙e not evaluating them. We鈥檙e there in it with them. We鈥檙e helping and we want to get to know the students too. 鈥� Their scores are our scores.鈥�

The coaches organize curriculum into bite-sized emails that are delivered before a unit. The emails give an overview of the lessons for that unit, with breakdowns of assessments, test questions to pay attention to, review slides, videos and pacing guides. The emails also explicitly outline state standards, which allows teachers to better target their instruction.

They meet with teachers every week for at least one planning session for upcoming lessons, and observe and offer advice during classroom time. The group of coaches are also able to provide pacing calendars and resources to help teachers differentiate instruction based on class needs.

Last year, Connecticut implemented a that limited the curricula elementary schools could use to teach reading. When the district fully shifted its K-3 curriculum, it was painless 鈥� 鈥減henomenal鈥漞ven 鈥� Crispino said, thanks to a rollout supported by union leaders and the instructional coaches that gave educators 鈥渆verything they would need.鈥�

Despite budget constraints, the district has committed to leaving their elementary instructional coaches untouched, and funded by Title I, a federal grant for schools with high-concentrations of low-income students.

Investing in these coaches for early grades gives all teachers and children 鈥渆qual footing,鈥� Crispino said, where everyone gets the same emails and meetings, then gets to decide what they鈥檙e doing with the resources. 

In mid-March, if you walked into Meriden鈥檚 Pulaski, Nathan Hale, or Thomas Hooker elementary schools during its rotational reading blocks, you would鈥檝e seen almost the same snapshot in the three campuses.

While teachers have autonomy on the use of laptops, printed worksheets or using dry erase boards, the 60-minute period across a dozen classrooms generally looked the same.

During the reading rotation block, a small group of students, usually six or less, would be sitting in one corner of the room working on answering questions about a text with their teacher. In another corner, you鈥檇 see a paraeducator, tutor or reading coach with another small group.

Scattered across the classroom, students would be working alone with a loose leaf piece of paper, called 鈥渆vidence paper鈥� and taking notes and analyzing stories about komodragons, the galaxy or Harriet Tubman. Pairs also worked on poster boards or white boards figuring out vocabulary, grammar, main ideas or comparing and contrasting two texts.

After 20 minutes, it was time to rotate, and every student knew what to do without being asked twice.

The scenes were a direct mirror of how everyone鈥檚 鈥渟peaking the same language,鈥� as Crispino would say, in every elementary building across the district. 

鈥淭he coaching, the admin, the feedback, the curriculum that’s easily accessible, these emails, 鈥� eliminated a lot of excuses, and when we did that, we created this high standard of excellence,鈥� Crispino said. The alignment 鈥渂uilt independence. It built accountability. It built engagement. It built a vibrant learning environment.鈥�

Innovation and scalability

Last year, Angilleta, Timek and Silluzio came into a meeting with administrators rehearsed and prepared to propose a departmentalized approach to third grade, where every student would rotate among the three educators for different subjects, similar to a middle and high school model. 

The presentation wasn鈥檛 even needed, Crispino and the school鈥檚 principal Kimberly Goldbach said, laughing. It was an automatic yes.

鈥淧art of me was like 鈥榊ou’d be an idiot to change what’s working,鈥� but then I said, 鈥榊ou’d be an idiot to not be innovative and creative enough to know when there’s a time to think outside the box,鈥欌�� Crispino said. 

It鈥檚 paying off. Their third grade class 鈥渉ad the highest scores they ever had,鈥� Crispino said. 鈥淚 think our scores are going to get even better because we’re being creative and innovative at the elementary level with departmentalizing.鈥�

Beyond the academic piece, Timek also said she鈥檚 hopeful the approach will give children, particularly those with high-needs, more resources.

鈥淚t gives these kids another chance to have a teacher that they’re not stuck with all day long. You might have a closer relationship with one kid versus the other, but the other kid can go to another class and be closer with that teacher,鈥� she said. 鈥淭hey have more adults in their corner that they trust and they know that’s providing them a good education and that they can go to if they have a problem.鈥�

The district is working to add nearly two dozen more educators into the departmentalized approach.

When asked about the scalability of Meriden鈥檚 success in other schools across the state and country, Crispino, the district superintendent Mark Benigni and various principals said it was possible, but with a few caveats.

鈥淐an districts have a schedule like we do? Yes, but you have to make sure you’re consistent with it. Can you have instructional coaches do the work we’re doing? Yes. Should admin be in rooms? Yes. Should the central office support and understand the work happening in the trenches? Yes,鈥� Crispino said. 鈥淵ou have to push [your staff and kids] to an uncomfortable place, 鈥� to challenge each other, have professional dialog and have high expectations, but then give them the resources to be successful.鈥�

The science of reading is being taught in classrooms across Ohio, but the state鈥檚 education department stresses it will likely take time to track students鈥� progress.

The Ohio Department of Education and Workforce聽is particularly interested in tracking the progress of the current kindergarten students.

鈥淭his year鈥檚 kindergartners will be the first class that all four years going up to third grade, they鈥檙e going to get the science of reading,鈥� state education department director Stephen Dackin said to the Capital Journal. 鈥淭hat鈥檚 a pretty good barometer of where we will be as a state in terms of our implementation and then increased outcomes in literacy.鈥�

Ohio鈥檚 science of reading law took effect in 2023 through the state鈥檚 two-year operating budget, which gave $86 million for educator professional development, $64 million for curriculum and instructional materials, and $18 million for literacy coaches.

Ohio school districts were required to teach the science of reading curriculum starting with the 2024-25 school year. The science of reading is based on of research that shows how the human brain learns to read and incorporates phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension.

鈥淲hile we are certainly making great progress, this is not easy,鈥� Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine said earlier this month during his state of the state speech. 鈥淩etraining seasoned teachers, who were taught the wrong way and now have to learn new methods, is certainly an exercise in perseverance. This shift takes time.鈥�

Ohio鈥檚 literacy scores were down from last year, with 61.3% of third graders reading at or above grade level compared to 64.5% from the 2023-24 school year, according to the most recent that were released in September.

鈥淭he report card data is lagging data, so it reports on data from the previous school year, and obviously, not all districts have probably been at the point where they鈥檝e implemented the science of reading in their districts last year,鈥� Dackin said.

He said the education department is not surprised by a dip in performance.

鈥淪ometimes you鈥檙e asking teachers who鈥檝e been teaching reading for 20 years to suddenly change what they鈥檙e doing and implement something that鈥檚 new to them,鈥� Dackin said. 鈥淲e know it takes a while to do this. That doesn鈥檛 mean there鈥檚 not a sense of urgency in our state, but we also anticipate that folks are going to need some support in helping to implement.鈥�

have passed laws or implemented new policies related to evidence-based instruction since 2013, according to Education Week. the second-worst state for fourth-grade reading in 2013 to being ranked 21st in 2022 after implementing science of reading policy.

College prep programs

A unique facet of Ohio鈥檚 science of reading law is the third-party audit of teacher preparation programs.

鈥淥ur law is the toughest in the country,鈥� DeWine said during his state of the state speech.

Ohio colleges and universities teacher preparation programs were required to be fully aligned with teaching the science of reading by Jan. 1, 2025, but 10 colleges were found to be not aligned, according to an .

Bowling Green State University, Central State University, Cleveland State University, Defiance College, Ohio Christian University, Ohio Dominican University, Ohio University, Ohio State University, University of Toledo, and Wright State University were not in alignment.

Ohio State University had , the most of any university, according to the audit.

鈥淢y concern is how seriously Ohio State is taking this process,鈥� Ohio House Rep. Tom Young, R-Washington Township, said during a recent Ohio House Workforce and Higher Education Committee.

鈥淏y the way I look at it, you鈥檙e not taking it very seriously at all,鈥� he said. 鈥淭hings hang in the balance here, and I鈥檓 very serious about this, and I鈥檓 not going to play games with it.鈥�

Erik Porfeli, professor and interim dean of Ohio State鈥檚 College of Education and Human Ecology, said the university is taking this seriously.

鈥淲e mobilized quickly and addressed all 17 (issues),鈥� he said.

Binaya Subedi, professor and interim chair of Ohio State鈥檚 Department of Teaching and Learning, said there has been professional development with faculty every week this semester.

鈥淲e are concerned,鈥� he said. 鈥淎fter the audit report, we have systematically reorganized our curriculum.鈥�

Any college or university that does not become fully aligned by next December will have their approval revoked by Ohio Department of Higher Education Chancellor Mike Duffey.

鈥淲e need all universities in compliance or we risk incongruity of literacy outcomes throughout the state for our kids,鈥� Ohio House Rep. Tracy Richardson, R-Marysville, said during a recent Ohio House Workforce and Higher Education Committee.

鈥淥hio State, you cannot drag on this issue. We will be following up.鈥�

Five colleges and universities were found to be partially in alignment and 33 higher education institutions were found to be in alignment, according to the audit.

鈥淚 have confidence that every college will be in full compliance by the end of this year,鈥� DeWine said during his state of the state speech.

Having educator training programs be compliant with the science of reading means school districts won鈥檛 have to retrain teachers, Dackin said.

Parents for Reading Justice and OH-KID President Brett Tingley said holding the universities responsible is real accountability.

鈥淥ur literacy crisis does not begin in the classroom鈥攊t begins in teacher preparation programs,鈥� she said during a recent Ohio House Workforce and Higher Education meeting.

鈥淲hen a child learns to read, you change the trajectory of that child鈥檚 life, and when a state gets reading right, you change the trajectory of the state itself.鈥�

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Ohio Capital Journal maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor David Dewitt for questions: info@ohiocapitaljournal.com.

Lawmakers in Lansing are moving aggressively to address Michigan鈥檚 K-12 literacy crisis with multiple pieces of legislation that target training for teachers, retention for struggling third graders, and consequences for teacher preparation programs.

The legislative action comes as Gov. Gretchen Whitmer has made addressing literacy a priority for 2026, her last year in office. During her State of the State address last month, Whitmer detailed steps already underway to improve literacy and recommendations in her budget proposal for the coming fiscal year. Among them is additional money she wants to invest in high-impact literacy tutoring, high-quality curriculum, literacy training for teachers, and hiring of literacy coaches.

鈥淭his is a serious problem,鈥� Whitmer said in the address. 鈥淥ur kids deserve better.鈥�

Just 38.9% of third graders were proficient on the English language arts portion of the Michigan Student Test of Educational Progress last year. It was the lowest performance of third graders in the exam鈥檚 11-year history, Chalkbeat and Bridge Michigan reported.

On the national front, just 24% of Michigan fourth graders were proficient in 2024 on the National Assessment of Educational Progress, or NAEP, an exam known as the 鈥渘ation鈥檚 report card.鈥� That compares to 30% being proficient nationally. Michigan students鈥� performance has been stagnant and declining even as other states that have invested heavily in early literacy have improved. Michigan now ranks 44th in the nation for fourth-grade reading on the NAEP.

This isn鈥檛 the first time Michigan lawmakers have taken aim at the state鈥檚 challenges with literacy. In 2016, fueled by similarly troubling test results in reading, lawmakers passed a Read by Grade 3 law that required early intervention, the hiring of literacy coaches, and the retention of third graders struggling to reade. The retention rule has since been rescinded. Ten years since that broad effort, Michigan鈥檚 student literacy problem continues.

Here are the literacy initiatives being considered in Michigan

would require that by the 2031-32 school year, all K-5 educators who provide, support, or oversee instruction, including in literacy, must have been , which refers to a body of knowledge that emphasizes phonics along with building vocabulary and background knowledge. The bill doesn鈥檛 specify a specific training program, but says the current training being encouraged for Michigan teachers 鈥� Language Essentials for Teachers of Reading and Spelling, or LETRS 鈥� meets the requirements of the legislation.

would require that, beginning Sept. 30, 2027, an individual seeking a teaching certificate in Michigan must have completed a teacher preparation program that included training in the science of reading.

would bring back the third-grade retention policy Michigan previously had in place. The bill would require struggling third graders, who would be identified based on their state test scores, repeat the grade. There would be some 鈥済ood cause鈥� exemptions, such as for students with disabilities whose educational plan team leader exempts them from the requirement. Michigan鈥檚 previous third-grade retention law, which went into effect during the 2020-21 school year, was rescinded in 2023 when Democrats controlled the legislature and the governor鈥檚 office. They argued the law was punitive and wasn鈥檛 working.

During a Wednesday hearing of the House Education and Workforce committee, Rep. Nancy DeBoer, a Republican from Holland who chairs the committee, said reading gives children the independence to pick up a book and go anywhere.

鈥淯nless you鈥檙e in the state of Michigan and you鈥檙e three-quarters of the students in eighth grade who can鈥檛 read or do math in a competent manner,鈥� she said. 鈥淭hat is a tragedy we are responsible for.鈥�

DeBoer introduced the bipartisan bill that would make training in the science of reading a requirement for K-5 teachers.

The state has funded LETRS training, but thus far hasn鈥檛 made it a requirement. In September, the State Board of Education urged that it become a mandate for all K-5 teachers, saying the lack of one 鈥渉as led to inconsistent participation of Michigan educators and inconsistent access to instruction based on the science of reading for Michigan鈥檚 students.鈥�

The science of reading also figures prominently in a bipartisan bill introduced by Rep. Tim Kelly, a Republican from Saginaw Township. He described the bill as 鈥渁 long overdue rescue mission for the next generation of Michigan鈥檚 workers, citizens, and leaders.鈥�

Kelly said Wednesday that teacher preparation programs that don鈥檛 equip teachers with the tools needed to teach children to read have forfeited their right to operate in Michigan.

鈥淲e must stop subsidizing failure,鈥� Kelly said.

This story was originally published by Chalkbeat. Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news site covering educational change in public schools. Sign up for their newsletters at .

Members unanimously approved the legislation, another sign that improving reading outcomes is a goal shared by both Republicans and Democrats. 

鈥淭his is how I learned how to read in the 1960s,鈥� said Democratic Rep. Lucy McBath of Georgia. 鈥淲hen implemented correctly, the science of reading has been proven to help children learn to read and to write more effectively.鈥�

The bill defines the science of reading as instruction that teaches phonics and phonemic awareness, and also builds vocabulary, fluency, comprehension and writing skills. The legislation would prohibit grantees from allowing , the practice of prompting students to identify words based on pictures or other clues in a sentence. The bill now moves to the full House.

鈥淲e should not be using federal literacy funds to promote discredited approaches to literacy,鈥� said Rep. Kevin Kiley of California, a former Republican now running for reelection as an independent. 

The committee鈥檚 passage of the bill follows a before House appropriators in which both Democrats and Republicans the growth in reading outcomes in southern states like Mississippi and Alabama and asked experts how to spread that progress more broadly. The House proposal, however, is not the only effort underway to revamp the long-running Comprehensive Literacy Development Grant program. Some advocates say updated legislation should also require schools receiving grant funds to screen children for reading difficulties, inform parents whether their children are reading below grade level and assign reading coaches to low-performing schools.

鈥淚f we鈥檙e going to update it, let鈥檚 do it right,鈥� said Ariel Taylor Smith, senior director of the National Parents Union鈥檚 Center for Policy and Action. She expects that a Senate plan would also ensure that teacher preparation programs follow the science of reading. 鈥淟et鈥檚 actually check in on whether teacher preparation programs are doing right by kids and using the most recent research.鈥�

The nonprofit will dig further into those issues next week at on Capitol Hill featuring leaders from Tennessee and the District of Columbia, both of which have implemented reading reforms, like pointing districts to and providing to teachers on how students learn to read. 

An 鈥榠mplementation war鈥�

Experts welcome Congress鈥� interest in the issue. But broad agreement that students need phonics-based instruction doesn鈥檛 mean the debate over the best way to teach reading is settled.

There鈥檚 still a reading war, but not between the phonics and whole language camps, said Karen Vaites, a literacy advocate who highlights lessons on reading reform from states that have seen growth on the National Assessment of Educational Progress. 

Now, she said, there鈥檚 an 鈥渋mplementation war.鈥�

鈥淓verybody agrees on phonics, but how much phonics? How much instructional time should it get?鈥� she asked. 鈥淒o you do teacher training first or do you do curriculum paired with teacher training?鈥�

Another proposal under consideration would require the U.S. Department of Education to reserve 10% of the grant awards for states whose fourth grade reading scores on NAEP rank in the lowest 25% for two consecutive administrations of the test. Vaites questioned whether such states would make the best use of the funds. 

鈥淚 worry a lot about throwing dollars toward the people that by demonstration have the least leadership capacity,鈥� she said.  

, part of a 2010 federal budget agreement, was the first iteration of the state literacy grant program. , tracking awards to 11 states in 2017, found that not all states directed funds toward the highest poverty schools or used the money to buy reading programs based on research. Overall, the study found no significant differences in reading performance between schools that received the funds and those that didn鈥檛, but there were small positive effects in Louisiana and Ohio. 

Striving Readers preceded the Comprehensive Literacy State Development grants, . But the program hasn鈥檛 been revised in a decade. Smith, with the National Parents Union, said the program should reflect the latest knowledge about what鈥檚 working in classrooms. 

鈥淲e鈥檝e learned a ton about the science of reading,鈥� she said.

Kari Kurto, national director of policy and partnerships for the Reading League, a national nonprofit promoting the science of reading, said the grant program is important because it鈥檚 one of the only ways state education agencies 鈥渃an truly influence鈥� what happens in classrooms. She said she appreciates that the bill includes her suggestion that instruction should also support students鈥� oral language skills. 

鈥淭his legislation will go a long way toward solidifying our nation’s commitment to evidence-based literacy instruction,鈥� she said. 鈥淎s a Democrat, I am so thrilled to see this movement finally receiving the bipartisan support we always dreamed of.鈥�

Concerns over local control

While every state has taken some action to improve reading instruction, recent examples in two states show that concerns remain over one-size-fits-all approaches.

California passed a reading reform bill last year, but not before lawmakers agreed to that kept the state from mandating teacher training and state-approved curricula. The California Teachers Association said an earlier version of the bill would have interfered with local control and worried the plan overemphasized phonics at the expense of other literacy skills.

In Massachusetts, and object to portions of 鈥渢hat attempt to legislate the specific curriculum that schools would be expected to purchase and implement.鈥� The is also opposed.

Any federal legislation won鈥檛 delve into specific reading programs. prohibits it, but Vaites said there are still ways to strengthen the grant program.

鈥淚 think we’re all trying to figure out the mechanism that is going to hold state leaders accountable in a way that isn鈥檛 just sprinkling dollars around,鈥� she said. 

That, more or less, is the key to translating the science of reading into classroom practice, according to a new book by Doug Lemov, Colleen Driggs and Erica Woolway called . The authors work together at , an organization built on Lemov鈥檚 bestselling by the same name.

The new volume is meant to be a practical guide for classroom teachers. It offers concrete tips and embedded QR codes that take readers to videos of teachers putting those strategies into practice.

The authors are attempting to tackle a big problem: how to boost students鈥� knowledge. They cite suggesting that books 鈥� even children鈥檚 books 鈥� use more uncommon words than come up in most adults’ conversations.  In practice, that means, 鈥渕ost of the words a student learns in their lifetime will be learned via encountering them in their reading.鈥� The more kids read, and the wider variety of books they are exposed to, the better off they鈥檒l be.  

When people hear the 鈥渟cience of reading,鈥� they might (mistakenly) equate it with phonics, but the authors spend little time on those core foundational skills. In fact, they take systematic phonics instruction in grades K-3 as the assumed starting point for literacy instruction and note that their book is about 鈥渢he science of reading beyond phonics (emphasis theirs).鈥�

This is an important shift. In , students have made impressive gains on early reading skills, thanks in part to widespread changes in state policy pushing for new curriculum and early screening  assessments. Meanwhile, fourth and eighth grade reading scores continue to decline, and 12th grade reading comprehension recently fell to all-time lows.  

Lemov, Driggs and Woolway suggest this is partly an assessment problem. If students can鈥檛 answer a question about a reading passage, that may be due to many potential problems. It might be because they didn鈥檛 understand the question 鈥� or they lacked key background knowledge embedded in the text 鈥� or they didn鈥檛 understand the vocabulary words 鈥� or the passage used an unfamiliar syntax that the student couldn鈥檛 follow.

While daunting, this multitude of potential reading challenges also helps provide a roadmap for improvements.

Lemov, Driggs and Woolway start with a critical foundation: attention. They note that, 鈥淵ou can only learn about what you are paying attention to. Attention is always a prerequisite to learning.鈥� But reading and books are losing the war for kids鈥� time and attention. That鈥檚 partly why the authors support a 鈥渉igh text, low tech鈥� approach to limiting distractions in schools, and why Lemov was of school cellphone bans.

So how can teachers get kids immersed in reading? It鈥檚 not as simple as putting good books in front of students, because if they can鈥檛 read the words on the page quickly and easily, they will struggle to comprehend and make meaning out of the text. The authors cite that found, 鈥渞eading fluency predicted all school marks in all literacy-based subjects, with reading rapidity being the most important predictor.鈥�

In response, the authors suggest that, 鈥淭he best way by far to improve fluency is to provide students opportunities to hear, read and reread text aloud.鈥� They cite the strong research evidence behind the practice of , which has positive impacts even for high school students.

Lemov, Driggs and Woolway devote a full chapter to how educators can put this research into practice, including teacher and student read-alouds, along with carefully constructed and monitored independent student reading time. For instance, a teacher helping children learn how to pronounce a new word during a read-aloud might say: 鈥淭hat word is pejorative. Try that: pejorative. Good. Pejorative means expressing disapproval.鈥� This type of repetition can help students store the new word in long-term memory. In scientific terms, this process is called 鈥渙rthographic mapping鈥� and it鈥檚 a key component of how readers train their brains to connect words with their meaning.

Writing can also help students develop into strong readers, particularly when it鈥檚 tied to what they are already learning. But not just any writing; students need to be explicitly taught how to structure sentences, use precise vocabulary and write with style and panache. Drawing on concepts from , the authors suggest that teachers deploy 鈥溾�� exercises to help students extend their initial responses to explain why something is happening, any complicating factors and the final outcome.

Recently, there鈥檚 been a lot of in the literacy world about whether students should be taught to read using whole books or if it鈥檚 fine to mix books and excerpts or other short passages. On one side, researcher Tim Shanahan there鈥檚 no evidence that whole books are superior to excerpts at building reading ability or do more to build student reading stamina. He also notes that excerpts allow for greater breadth than a single book that may offer more in depth.

Lemov, Driggs and Woolway are unapologetic advocates for Team Book. They approvingly cite dyslexia researcher about how digital technologies are reshaping our brains, and how deep reading can counter those effects. They point out that stories help readers remember things better than just a series of disjointed facts and figures. And, channeling , they value the collective culture capital that students can access when they have read Shakespeare鈥檚 plays or George Orwell鈥檚 dystopian novels.

Regardless of which side of this argument you find more persuasive, Lemov, Driggs and Woolway have done teachers a service by providing numerous tips and examples of how to put the science of reading into practice in their classrooms. 

At an event to promote , the California Democrat revealed that he 鈥渃annot read a speech鈥� and feels he hasn鈥檛 overcome dyslexia even after a decades-long struggle. His learning disability has in his home state, but Newsom鈥檚 phrasing would soon lead to a flurry of headlines.

鈥淚鈥檓 just trying to impress upon you, I鈥檓 like you,鈥� he told the Atlanta audience. 鈥淚鈥檓 no better than you. You know, I鈥檓 a 960 SAT guy.鈥�

A raft of conservative influencers and media figures seized on the remark to accuse Newsom, currently in the 2028 Democratic primary field, of insulting his African American supporters by association with his own reading challenges. (Black residents make up a plurality of Atlantans, though the crowd Newsom addresses was reportedly .) South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott, an African American Republican and close ally of President Trump, for stereotyping their own voters as academically underachieving. 

The tempest soon passed, with the governor dismissing the criticism as 鈥淢AGA-manufactured outrage.鈥� Yet the episode stood out as a wobbly foray from a Democratic star into the evolving discussion around literacy education. 

Over the past few years, lawmakers in over a dozen states around what experts call the science of reading, a long-running corpus of research reflecting what is known about how people learn to recognize and use written language. Many of the early leaders in that movement have been Republican-controlled states like Mississippi and Louisiana, generating widespread plaudits for the so-called Southern Surge in standardized test scores. But the problems surrounding early literacy is one that voters around the U.S. recognize, with achievement in the subject still mired in a post-COVID slump.

With Democrats preparing for both a slew of gubernatorial campaigns this fall and a race for the presidential nomination next year, a question remains over how to address reading within the wider portfolio of K鈥�12 education priorities. Most blue states, including California, have taken action on the science of reading, but some voices on the left have also been skeptical of the academic progress made in the South and elsewhere. With his personal background and national profile, Newsom could make the issue his hallmark. Some political observers are waiting for him and others to step into the spotlight.  

John White, the former state superintendent of Louisiana and a longtime voice for reading reforms, said he was puzzled by the apparent reluctance of leaders in both parties to put their achievements in that area front and center. He struggled to name a politician who has built a brand predominantly around the science of reading.

鈥淟iteracy is a complicated issue, not like cutting taxes or landing a new corporate headquarters,鈥� White argued. 鈥淚f you don’t articulate what’s been accomplished, and you don’t place big political stakes on it, there’s no political gains to be reaped from it.鈥�

Linda Diamond, a former teacher and veteran advocate for evidence-based reading instruction in California, said she believed that lawmakers in most blue states have woken up to the need for improved reading legislation. The mission now, she added, was for presidential contenders like Newsom to preach that gospel from a national pulpit.

“I think the message to convey to Democrats is to take this up, make it a winning issue,鈥� she said, acknowledging what she called her governor鈥檚 鈥渦nfortunate turn of phrase.鈥� 

鈥淪ure, look at the Republican states that have done so well on reading. But don’t let the myopia of thinking that it’s only Republicans distract from the fact that the greatest harm [of literacy failures] is being done to children in poverty.鈥�

鈥榃e need to see action鈥�

Local Democrats鈥� legislative agenda on K鈥�12 schools has been fairly busy over the last few years. 

In 2023, Newsom signed a bill to mandate dyslexia screenings for children between kindergarten and second grade, making California the 40th state to adopt such legislation. The legislature last year, passing a law that will provide elementary school teachers training in the science of reading and mandate the use of teaching materials that reinforce that pedagogy.

But those steps were taken only after years of intra-Democratic battles in Sacramento. The state as a laggard when it comes to literacy reforms, and previous bills had been sunk by a coalition of advocacy groups for English learners and the California Teachers Association. That faction argued that universal dyslexia screening would over-identify students with the disability and that mandates for evidence-based teaching would threaten educators鈥� autonomy.

Megan Potente, head of the nonprofit group Decoding Dyslexia鈥檚 California branch, said she was heartened by the recent legislative activity and considered Newsom an inspiration to children diagnosed with the condition. Still, she added, the party needed to speak more loudly on the issue 鈥� both in California and elsewhere.

鈥淭he topic has been elevated, as it needs to be, but we need to see action,鈥� Potente said. 鈥淚 hope that the Democratic Party can uplift it and not ignore the successes of other states, as they’ve done so far, and really hone in on how they’ve achieved what they’ve achieved.”

At least one prominent Democrat has questioned whether blue states have anything to learn from those that have pursued strategies based explicitly on the science of reading. While running her winning campaign for governor of New Jersey, then-Democratic Rep. Mikkie Sherill seen in Louisiana and Mississippi, calling schools there 鈥渟ome of the worst in the entire nation.鈥� 

The bad feelings run both ways, with Republican Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves to send Newsom assistance from his state鈥檚 core of reading tutors after the book forum last week.

It鈥檚 possible that Newsom鈥檚 personal experience with dyslexia could give him credibility in speaking for the interests of the tens of millions of Americans who struggle to read. Reeves鈥檚 predecessor as governor, Phil Bryant, cited his own early setbacks in the subject as the reason he pursued a lengthy slate of new reading laws in 2013. But in the wave of partisan brickbats against Newsom, some have even whether he truly is dyslexic, pointing to alleged inconsistencies in previous recountings of when he was assessed. 

In his memoir, Young Man in a Hurry, Newsom describes grappling with the condition 鈥渙ne of the struggles of [his] life, writing that his difficulty spelling in childhood could cause him to 鈥渞un out of the room screaming that I didn鈥檛 know what was wrong with my brain.鈥�

White called Newsom鈥檚 frankness about his diagnosis a 鈥渄ouble-edged sword鈥� in the context of U.S. politics. Though he hoped it could lead to bipartisan cooperation with others who have focused on dyslexia awareness 鈥� including of Louisiana 鈥� he warned that the needs of dyslexic children could be 鈥渓ost in the partisan swirl.鈥�

鈥淲hile the issue will benefit from the attention, it is almost inevitable that it will be wrapped up in questions of veracity and identity politics and ugliness,鈥� he concluded.

But new studies bolster the evidence that done well, virtual models can be just as effective at moving students forward as face-to-face instruction.

In Massachusetts, first graders who spent 15 minutes a day online with a tutor from stayed on track a year later without additional tutoring, according to exclusively with 社区黑料. Students gained, on average, at least five additional months of learning over their expected growth. 

Another virtual program, , produced positive results for the lowest-performing students in the Kansas City, Missouri, schools. Students who received one-on-one tutoring from certified teachers made greater progress than those who didn鈥檛 receive the extra help, .听

鈥淰irtual models are getting stronger,鈥� said Amanda Neitzel, an associate professor at Johns Hopkins University and author of the Ignite Reading study. 鈥淚f you go back just a few years, we had no examples of evidence-proven models and now we are getting them.鈥�

In addition to following Ignite Reading for two years, she recently published a study showing that elementary school students in Texas and Louisiana who received virtual tutoring from , outperformed their peers and gained nearly three additional months of learning.

Results like those have broadened the conversation about how to bring students who are missing critical reading skills up to speed. 

鈥淭utoring can work in many ways and in different settings,鈥� Kevin Huffman, CEO of Accelerate, said earlier this month at the nonprofit鈥檚 annual conference. 

When the organization began funding tutoring research four years ago, there were doubts, he said, about whether virtual programs could compete with in-person models. There鈥檚 more confidence in online versions now, but as with tutoring in general, progress depends on whether providers feature the components of a high-dosage program 鈥� meaning they were offered for roughly 90 minutes a week, during the school day with a trained tutor. Ensuring kids get all the tutoring hours a program is designed to deliver is also key.

鈥淲e obsess over student attendance,鈥� said Jessica Reid Sliwerski, Ignite Reading’s founder. Now in 24 states, the program focuses on building phonics skills and reading fluency.

In the Johns Hopkins Ignite Reading study, which focused on 13 Massachusetts school districts, 85% of students who mastered foundational reading skills 鈥渄uring the crucial first grade window鈥� were still keeping up at the end of second grade, Neitzel wrote. But if students didn鈥檛 meet expectations on time, they couldn鈥檛 catch up. Some were just too far behind.

鈥淢any kids start our program still not knowing basic kindergarten skills, like letter names and sounds,鈥� Sliwerski said. That means tutors have two years of content to get through.

To Sliwerski, the findings demonstrate that third grade, when many states decide whether students are strong enough readers to advance, is too late to intervene. If kids struggle to decode unfamiliar words, they won鈥檛 be able to comprehend more complex reading assignments. 

鈥淲e are so caught up in 鈥榬eading by grade three鈥� that we aren鈥檛 honoring that kids are actually supposed to have fully cracked the code and be able to fluently read grade-level text at the end of first grade,鈥� she said. 鈥淲e act like kids have all the time in the world, when they don鈥檛.鈥� 

The 5,700-student Chelsea Public Schools was among the Massachusetts districts using Ignite Reading as part of a project funded by One8, a nonprofit that helped schools get high-dosage tutoring off the ground. The state the program.  

At first, 鈥渙ur teachers were a little skeptical,鈥� said Superintendent Almi Abeyta, a former kindergarten and first grade teacher. 鈥淭hey were like, 鈥榃e just got off of remote learning. Why are we going to put kids on a computer again?鈥� 鈥� 

Then they saw the data. Students made similar gains on DIBELS, a widely used early literacy assessment, whether they were Black, Hispanic, English learners or had a disability, the study found.

鈥楢 great opportunity鈥�

Results like those are why the Fallbrook Union Elementary School District, near San Diego, California, is now spreading the program to all of its elementary schools as part of its First Grade Promise initiative. 

In a pilot, Fallbrook STEM Academy, which serves a high-poverty population, enrolled 20 second graders in the program. Many of the students speak Spanish at home, didn鈥檛 attend preschool and lack access to books, flash cards and other early reading materials, said Principal Ana Arias. She called each parent to ask that they get their children to school a little early so they could meet with a tutor.

鈥淚 phrased it as an opportunity 鈥� a great opportunity 鈥� but I needed their commitment,鈥� Arias said. 鈥淲e have so many kids in the classroom and there’s so much need. It’s very rare to have a teacher meet one-on-one with a student every single day.鈥� 

At the beginning of this school year, the 20 students were reading at a kindergarten level. By November, 19 had advanced to a first grade level, and she鈥檚 hoping they鈥檒l be on par with their peers by the end of the school year. 

鈥楾ranscend time zones鈥� 

The latest findings build on those that Harvard University and City University of New York researchers published last year. Whether tutoring is remote or in-person, , matters less than whether the tutor is well qualified and students attend sessions regularly.

Virtual models even have some advantages over in-person programs, experts say. Schools have to pay an in-person tutor whether or not the student is present. But virtual programs 鈥渢ranscend time zones,鈥� Sliwerski said, and can redeploy a tutor to meet with another student.  

If the tutor is absent, 鈥渨e have a substitute ready to go,鈥� she said. 鈥淭he technology underpinning the program ensures the child receives the exact lesson they were supposed to get.鈥�

In Kansas City, consistency was key to the strong results. Students in first through fourth grade across 14 schools met with their tutors for 30-minute sessions at least three times a week for 20 weeks during the 2024-25 school year. The more sessions completed, the stronger the growth. Some students gained more than two months of additional learning and were less likely to be placed in special education. 

On average, the students who participated in the Hoot program and those in the comparison group began the school year two grade levels behind. While many are still struggling readers, their progress was significant, said Carly Robinson, a senior researcher at Stanford University and a co-author of the study.

鈥淭his wasn’t a boutique pilot,鈥� she said. 鈥淚t’s tutoring operating inside a district system that is messy, and it still proved to be effective.鈥�

The district had to contend with technical glitches and unexpected snow days that forced students to miss some sessions.

Not all virtual programs have been able to overcome disruptions. 

In a large suburban district in Texas, some students meeting with virtual tutors during the 2021-22 school year did worse in reading than their peers who didn鈥檛 receive the intervention. Scheduling conflicts, like school assemblies, and tutor turnover, contributed to the disappointing results.

鈥楢 higher bar鈥�

Those challenges grow even more complex in the middle grades with electives and block schedules where students don鈥檛 have the same classes every day. But Rahul Kalita, co-founder of Tutored by Teachers, said maintaining relationships between tutors and students is essential. 

He hopes to contribute to the research base on virtual tutoring by participating in a randomized controlled study, funded by Accelerate and focused on math in two large Indianapolis middle schools. 

鈥淚t felt like the right opportunity to test our model under a higher bar of rigor,鈥� he said.

On top of virtual programs refining their practices, districts, he said, 鈥渉ave also become more sophisticated buyers of tutoring.鈥� Multiple districts across the country pay providers higher rates if students make measurable progress or pass state tests. 

In addition, there鈥檚 growing agreement that literacy tutoring, whether virtual or not, is more effective if it’s part of a strong early reading program that includes a curriculum based on the science of reading and screening students for dyslexia or other learning difficulties. 

鈥淵ou can鈥檛 throw tutoring at the problem,鈥� Sliwerski said at the Accelerate conference. 鈥淚t has to be part of a very intentional system.鈥�

In one classroom, students identified literal and nonliteral language: an exercise in labeling text features. Students defined the types of language and carefully annotated the text with examples of both kinds, concluding with a perfunctory discussion.

In the other classroom, students identified literal and nonliteral language, but went further, grappling with what Neil Armstrong meant by 鈥渙ne giant leap for mankind鈥� and connecting the famous phrase to the broader significance of the moon landing. The teacher engaged students by asking them if they, third graders firmly located on planet Earth, were part of the 鈥渕ankind鈥� of whom Armstrong spoke as he stepped onto the moon. The power of the text and the instruction echoed through that classroom.

Both teachers used the same high quality instructional materials. Only one truly supported students in building meaning. Across classrooms and districts, this pattern repeats, according to a.

In nearly two-thirds of 111 observed comprehension lessons, the work that students did supported only surface-level comprehension 鈥� a literal or task-oriented, partial understanding of the text that stops short of the deeper and fuller comprehension work readers need to engage in to succeed in later grades and beyond. Only 24% of lessons fostered robust comprehension, the kind that integrates literal and inferential understanding into a cohesive mental model of the text.

In other words: the curriculum is there. The materials are being used. But, in many classrooms, the meaning-making is missing.

SRI鈥檚 research focused on four large school districts that have implemented high quality curricula 鈥� including Core Knowledge Language Arts, Wit & Wisdom, and EL Education 鈥� for several years. Researchers surveyed 539 teachers who reported near-daily use of their district-adopted curriculum.

Students in these districts are reading and discussing knowledge-rich texts. On paper, this is what policymakers hoped for when states began recommending adoption of such curriculum.

But SRI also sent observers into classrooms in those four districts. The observations showed that teachers spent high proportions of class time on comprehension instruction, and that lessons featured many opportunities for student participation and highly engaged students. These findings represent the notable successes of the districts鈥� comprehension-focused curriculum implementation. But the comprehension instruction often stopped with the task 鈥� finding details, answering literal questions, naming text structures 鈥� without guiding students toward the bigger ideas and themes that define deep comprehension.

High quality instructional materials can lay the foundation for robust comprehension instruction. But they cannot deliver it on their own.

This is not just an instruction problem; it鈥檚 a systems problem. Curriculum designers, district leaders and instructional coaches may be unaware of the extent to which systemic practices determine the depth of comprehension instruction. SRI鈥檚 findings point to multiple well-meaning school and district forces that unintentionally nudge instruction toward the shallow end.

SRI researchers found narrow 鈥渟tandards-aligned,鈥� 鈥渄ata-driven鈥� approaches guiding teachers to focus on discrete skills and individual standards, despite the reality that comprehension standards are not individually measurable. There鈥檚 also insufficient teacher time spent discussing, analyzing and mastering the texts 鈥� and their content 鈥� as they prepare to teach knowledge-rich curriculum

Administrator classroom walkthrough observation rubrics and checklists often reward the most visible aspects of a comprehension lesson 鈥� posted objectives, student participation andx curricular materials in use 鈥� rather than what actually matters: Are students making meaning?

In short, well-intentioned systems may be signaling to teachers that addressing standards, completing tasks and tests, and simply using curriculum materials are the most important goals. But SRI鈥檚 findings suggest that these efforts might distract teachers from the true goal of teaching students to understand texts.  

SRI鈥檚 analysis of the 24% of observed lessons that did foster robust comprehension points to six teaching practices that matter. These practices include engaging students in text-specific analysis, modeling meaning-making, leveraging prior knowledge, providing instructive feedback, creating opportunities for text-based reasoning and structuring peer learning. These practices were more tightly correlated with robust comprehension 鈥� suggesting they could be steps toward how teachers might shift their practice toward that goal.

None of these are new ideas. Educators have talked for years about modeling, text-based evidence, and rich peer-to-peer discussion. What is new is the clarity with which we observed how these practices must be oriented toward the big ideas of a text 鈥� not merely toward a task 鈥� to move instruction from surface to substance.

For example, in one lesson, a teacher used strong instructional modeling to show students how to collect key details and paraphrase a main idea. Then, she showed students how to do it in a history text about how new navigational technologies facilitated European exploration of the New World, truly unlocking robust comprehension.

For policymakers and system leaders who championed high quality materials as a lever for literacy improvement, these findings offer both a warning and a roadmap. Fortunately, the districts involved have the literacy leadership and professional learning infrastructure to make key shifts toward robust comprehension instruction. Three next steps for literacy leaders stand out:

1. Define and communicate a clear vision for robust comprehension instruction. Districts must go beyond 鈥渇idelity鈥� to curriculum and articulate what deep understanding looks like for students and what it demands from instruction. Discussion, writing, knowledge-building, and standards are all part of the story, but ultimately, robust comprehension must be the target.

2. Reorient professional learning around the knowledge-building texts and their meaning. Teachers need structured opportunities to build the historical, literary, and scientific content knowledge necessary to facilitate robust understandings of the knowledge-building texts. Their professional learning should require deep, collective unpacking of all the nuances in the texts. .

3. Align observation and assessment systems to priorities for instruction. If tools and interim assessments measure only surface features, surface-level instruction will persist. Systems must adopt tools that can discern whether instruction leads students toward robust comprehension and use that data transparently to support improvement.

These changes are not small lifts, but they are essential.

Perhaps the most hopeful finding in the study is this: Lessons that supported robust comprehension didn鈥檛 just deepen learning, they increased student motivation and engagement. Students liked these lessons more. The students in the robust One Giant Leap lesson could see themselves in the Apollo mission 鈥� and on the moon.

In short, the path to better literacy outcomes is also a path to more joyful teaching and learning.

SRI Education and 社区黑料 both receive financial support from the Charles and Lynn Schusterman Family Philanthropies

Wielding chainsaws, they helped the 97-year-old former Colorado governor clear out fallen timber this year to make a path for some four wheelers. 

鈥淭hey just enjoyed the working relationship back then, and they enjoy the friendship now,鈥� Romer said in a recent interview. 

But when they finish the day鈥檚 projects, it鈥檚 not unusual for the group to relax over wine and cheese and trade war stories about Romer鈥檚 tenure. Under his leadership, the district saw several years of steady gains in reading on both and . Fighting bureaucracy and a powerful teachers union, he required elementary schools to use Open Court, a phonics-based program that embraced what is known today as the science of reading. The district trained teachers to use it and hired reading specialists to make sure they stuck to the curriculum. 

鈥淔or six years, we concentrated on that. It was the most important thing we did,鈥� Romer said. But the teacher鈥檚 union chafed against the program鈥檚 rigid design and eventually demanded over the curriculum. 鈥淭hey didn’t want us to be screwing around in classrooms. They wanted the door shut. We forced those doors open.鈥�

Nearly 20 years later, those stories have a new relevance as reading scores are once again on the rise. The current superintendent, Alberto Carvalho, has taken a similar, top-down approach to literacy with a program from curriculum provider Amplify. District leaders say they鈥檝e learned from the past about the dangers of a lockstep approach to teaching reading, but some wonder whether teachers are getting the support they need. 

Tackling a new curriculum is 鈥渘ot an easy shift, and the ongoing support is needed,鈥� said Francisco Villegas, chief academic officer at the Partnership for Los Angeles Schools, a nonprofit that manages 20 high-need schools in the district. 鈥淭here are fewer dollars, and that likely will have implications for what the district is able to provide.鈥� 

The Partnership schools adopted the Amplify program in 2018-19 and began to see in English language arts on the state test. Since 2022, seven of the Partnership鈥檚 11 elementary schools have seen double-digit increases in the percentage of students meeting or exceeding state standards. At a in September, Carvalho called the Partnership a 鈥渢errific incubator鈥� that influenced the district鈥檚 curriculum choices. 

But systemwide, leaders are to balance the budget and layoffs are expected. Compared to the Open Court years, training on the reading curriculum districtwide is more 鈥渉it or miss,鈥� said Maria Nichols, president of the district鈥檚 principals union. LAUSD offers opportunities, both online and in-person, for professional development. School leaders, however, often don鈥檛 know which courses teachers have taken or whether they鈥檙e using what they鈥檝e learned, she said. 鈥淲e are PD rich and implementation poor.鈥�

鈥極n the same page鈥�

Romer鈥檚 team implemented Open Court at a time when was pouring millions into training to teach reading. A $133 million from the U.S. Department of Education provided even more. Nearly all of the district鈥檚 12,000 elementary school teachers participated in and many completed follow-up sessions throughout the year.

鈥淚t was phenomenal,鈥� Nichols said. 鈥淲e were treated as professionals. There was a lot of money back then.鈥�

Former board members, among Romer鈥檚 annual visitors, said Open Court was a way to ensure all students, in an urban district where kids often change schools, would receive strong instruction. Marlene Canter, who served on the board from 2002 through 2008, said that regardless of teachers鈥� level of experience or the college they attended, 鈥渆verybody would be on the same page.鈥�

For some teachers, that played out literally. Many found Open Court . There was a specific set of cards with letter sounds to post on the wall and a recommended U-shaped classroom layout that, according to a teacher guide, left 鈥渁 large open space on the floor for whole-group and individual activities鈥� and provided 鈥渁n easy 鈥榳alk-around鈥� for the teacher.鈥� Critics viewed the , deployed to ensure teachers followed the curriculum, as 鈥淥pen Court police鈥� ready to catch them veering off script. 

鈥淭hey took my fun and creativity away,鈥� former teacher Stuart Goldurs complained in a . 鈥淚 became an instructional robot.鈥� 

Ronni Ephraim, who served as Romer鈥檚 chief instructional officer, said the change upset some teachers. The district asked them to replace storybooks that had been favorites in their classrooms for years with Open Court phonics-based 鈥渞eaders,鈥� workbooks and classroom libraries. Despite the objections, the district saw struggling schools improve and outpace the state. 

鈥淚 don’t think top-down is bad,鈥� Ephraim, now a consultant, said about curriculum choices. 鈥淚 think the board and the superintendent have to believe in it, and then they have to make sure that everybody is prepared to teach it as designed.鈥�

鈥楤ig disconnect鈥�

Critics said the program was ineffective with English learners. Over time, performance flatlined, and the district replaced Open Court with a program. 

Rob Rucker is among the LAUSD teachers who worked for the district during the Open Court years and is now adjusting to Core Knowledge Language Arts. A third grade teacher at 135th Elementary School in Gardena, one of several small cities within the district鈥檚 boundaries, he said some novice teachers valued Open Court鈥檚 structure. They didn鈥檛 yet have enough experience to write lesson plans of their own.

鈥淚 actually liked Open Court,鈥� he said. 鈥淚t was very straightforward and easy for teachers to understand.鈥�

The Amplify program still covers the basic skills students need to decode words and recognize parts of speech. It鈥檚 also what reading experts describe as a knowledge-building curriculum. The units introduce students to early civilizations, like the Vikings in Scandinavia, and science content, such as the solar system and animal habitats.

That鈥檚 where Open Court fell short, said Nichols, with the principals鈥� union.

鈥淲hen we tested kids, they could read beautifully,鈥� she said, 鈥渂ut they couldn’t understand what they were reading.鈥�

For a student population like LAUSD鈥檚, with 86% living in poverty and one in five still learning English, strengthening kids鈥� knowledge of the world is 鈥済oing to be the real game changer,鈥� said Barbara Davidson, president of StandardsWork, a think tank, and executive director of the Knowledge Matters Campaign. Since 2015, the campaign has been a leading voice for integrating history, science and the arts into reading curriculum. 

Rucker said his students were already familiar with stories like 鈥淎lice in Wonderland鈥� and 鈥淎laddin,鈥� so it wasn鈥檛 hard to keep them interested in a lesson on classic fairy tales. Getting them to relate to lessons on ancient Rome has been more challenging.

According to a district spokesperson, 鈥渢he goal is to ensure that every school has access to the literacy expertise and coaching capacity it needs.鈥� But other than a two-day training from Amplify, Rucker said he hasn鈥檛 had any additional support on how to implement the program, he said. He thinks his school would benefit from an English language arts coordinator teachers could lean on when they need someone with more experience, but because of enrollment loss, many schools have lost administrative positions. 

Some teachers feel Amplify is out of reach for struggling students, leading them to patch in other materials to make the material more relevant. 

During a recent lesson on early American irrigation systems, Kareli Rodriguez, who teaches at Stoner Ave. Elementary School on the west side of town, used pictures and videos to help her fifth graders grasp the idea. Excitement over the Dodgers鈥� successful World Series run helped her pique kids鈥� interest in a passage on Yankees鈥� relief pitcher Mariano Rivera.

But it鈥檚 鈥渘ot realistic,鈥� she said, for teachers to get through a lesson in the recommended 90-minute time slot with so many students working below grade level. A district coach modeled a lesson for the teachers last school year, Rodriguez said, but she couldn鈥檛 finish it in time either.

鈥淚 think that’s a big disconnect that the district needs to understand,鈥� she said. 鈥淚t鈥檚 definitely rigorous, but most of the students are always playing catch up.鈥�

Still, like most other schools in the district, Stoner Avenue saw improvements in reading. Fifty-two percent of fifth graders met or exceeded expectations, compared to 41% last year. 

Literacy advocates hope those gains will convince leaders 鈥� as Romer did with Open Court 鈥� to stick with Amplify. 鈥淥ur push is going to be to say, 鈥榊ou got to stay the course,鈥� 鈥� said Yolie Flores, president and CEO of Families in Schools, a nonprofit that for research-backed teaching materials. Her group breaks down the science of reading for parents so they鈥檒l know how to talk to teachers about the curriculum and help their kids at home.

District leaders gathered in October to celebrate the district鈥檚 recent improvement. Outside the auditorium at Maywood Elementary School, as students rushed back to class after lunch, Deputy Superintendent Karla Estrada took a moment to talk about lessons learned since the Open Court years, like taking feedback from teachers.

The district, she said, wants them to follow the Amplify curriculum 鈥渨ith integrity鈥� while recognizing they often have to make decisions in the moment, depending on their students. 

鈥淭hey let me know where something is not quite what they want,鈥� she said. 鈥淏ut no curriculum is going to do everything for you.鈥�

The 鈥溾�� report, conducted by nonprofit research organization SRI, examined literacy instruction in districts in Texas, Maryland, North Carolina and Virginia that have been using materials rooted in the popular phonics-based literacy approach for at least five years. 

Through numerous classroom observations, teacher surveys and interviews with district officials in Aldine Independent School District, Baltimore City Public Schools, Guilford County Schools and Richmond Public Schools, researchers found a majority of reading lessons lacked 鈥渄epth鈥� 鈥� meaning foundational skills were mainly limited to working on single words rather than reading them in sentences. 

Comprehension lessons in later elementary grades also mainly focused on completing a task, such as identifying a main character, rather than using a text for discussion and understanding its purpose.

鈥淵ou’re not able to really think about the unpacking of a complicated sentence. You’re not thinking about really intentional vocabulary instruction or the building of kids鈥� word knowledge over time,鈥� said Dan Reynolds, one of the lead authors of the report. 鈥淯ltimately, how should we be framing kids to read? Are we teaching our K-4 kids that reading is just tasks? Are we teaching them that they just need to label stuff and fill out graphic organizers?鈥�

In recent years, has passed science of reading laws, including many that have limited the type of programming and instructional materials a school can use 鈥� a move that has drawn that it鈥檚 too restrictive and that the instruction faces its own limitations.

The report defined surface literacy skills as a student鈥檚 ability to complete tasks and understand texts based on their literal meeting while robust instruction would further push a child to understand, evaluate and synthesize what they had read for its significance. 

The study said its 鈥渃omprehension observations alone are more rigorous than nearly all studies conducted in the last 50 years.鈥� It鈥檚 not expected to be representative of reading instruction across the country, Reynolds said, but 鈥渨e have four big districts in four different states, and we saw this pattern happening in all four of them with three different curricula.鈥�

The study also found that teachers struggled with implementing comprehension-focused learning materials and said many times the curriculum was too dense, required substantial planning or may not have been developmentally appropriate. Professional development opportunities for these educators were also limited.

Researchers reported less than a quarter of observed comprehension lessons were engaging in robust learning. More than two-thirds of the lessons focused on 鈥渟urface-level鈥� comprehension. 

鈥淚t seems that these curriculums are designed to build knowledge and they don’t develop meaning, and so then why read about the Civil War or about insects?鈥� said Katrina Woodworth, director at SRI鈥檚 Center for Education Research & Improvement. 鈥淭he point is to both teach reading and to build students’ knowledge base so that they have more scaffolding for future learning of both content and meaning.鈥� 

The SRI researchers also found that many review tools that measure comprehension don鈥檛 make a distinction between surface-level and robust instruction and skills. So, while educators are tasked with meeting a baseline standard, like having a child compare and contrast a text, it may be 鈥渦nintentionally encouraging teachers to focus on surface-level goals,鈥� the report said.

Without distinction, it weakens instruction for students and can later manifest as a skills disadvantage, Reynolds said.

鈥淒istricts had done so much to get the kids all the way there [with literacy], but it was losing voltage in the end,鈥� Reynolds said. 鈥淚f we can actually shift the way that districts are thinking about improving their comprehension instruction, they can take that all the way home and deliver really high quality comprehension instruction because so many pieces are already in place.鈥�

Reynolds and one of his fellow co-authors, Sara Rutherford-Quach, said they saw glimpses of 鈥渕agic鈥� in the classroom when students understood a passage in wide-ranging contexts, which is the type of instruction they鈥檙e hoping to see districts incorporate more of in early grades.

鈥淭he kids were way more engaged,鈥� Rutherford-Quach said. 鈥淪urface-level is important and necessary in some cases, 鈥β燽ut it really is fundamentally different when you start talking about meaning and making it matter to the kids, and you see that they’re invested in it.鈥�

Reynolds added that it鈥檚 unlikely robust comprehension could make up 100% of lessons in the classroom, but 鈥渨e are thinking that if we can shift that needle from 24% robust lessons up to 50 or 60, then that would be a real catalyst for comprehension growth.鈥�

The report recommended district leaders create 鈥渁 shared vision for robust comprehension and define what it means for students, teachers, schools and the district,鈥� and align how to best measure the extent of learning. It also called for better professional learning structures that could help model and rehearse robust comprehension work. 

Previous reporting from 社区黑料 found the percentage of recent high school graduates who lack 鈥渞obust鈥� comprehension skills is the highest it’s ever been, according to 2023 data. The sooner districts can engrain literacy skills that go beyond just explicit tasks, the easier it will be as they continue through the K-12 system, Reynolds said.

鈥淚 see the distinction between surface level and robust comprehension as critical to comprehension in fifth grade, but I also see it in the kids when they’re in 12th grade. Surface level comprehension and robust comprehension is the difference between a two on the AP exam and a three,鈥� he said.

For decades, too many of our children were taught to read using methods that research has shown to be ineffective. The result was predictable. Year after year, nearly half of city students left elementary school unable to read proficiently, with the deepest harm falling on low-income communities, English language learners, and children with dyslexia and language-based learning disabilities.

NYC Reads, launched just two years ago, is the city鈥檚 first serious attempt to change that trajectory. It replaces 鈥渂alanced literacy鈥� with instruction grounded in the science of reading, a body of research showing how children actually learn to decode, comprehend and enjoy written language. Teachers are receiving new training, curricula are being aligned to evidence and families are beginning to see the benefits.

The early results are promising. This year, reading proficiency among New York City students in grades 3 to 8 rose more than 7 percentage points 鈥� one of the largest single-year gains in recent memory. An evaluation of over 1,000 teachers who completed The Reading Institute鈥檚 Science of Reading Intro Course found a 34% increase in knowledge of reading science concepts, which they are now applying in classrooms across the city. Behind these numbers are children who are not only able to read books, but also tackle word problems in math, understand passages in science texts and see themselves as successful learners.

Educators themselves are telling us this shift matters. Teachers who once felt ill-prepared to help struggling readers now report 鈥渁ha鈥� moments as they change daily instructional practices, replacing outdated strategies like guessing at words with evidence-based methods that build fluency and confidence. For students who had begun to fall behind, the difference is life changing. That is the kind of momentum New York cannot afford to lose.

National research shows that third-grade reading proficiency is a . Children who cannot read fluently by the end of third grade are four times more likely to drop out of high school. They are less likely to pursue higher education, more likely to face unemployment and more likely to be entangled in the criminal justice system. The stakes could not be clearer. Literacy is not just an academic issue; it is an economic and social justice issue.

That is why the city cannot afford to let this progress stall. The new mayoral administration will face pressure to put its own stamp on education policy. But abandoning NYC Reads, or even watering it down, would mean turning back the clock to the failed practices of the past and leaving another generation of students behind.

I was encouraged to see Mayor-elect Mamdani speak positively about NYC Reads during the campaign. Now I urge him to make an early, public commitment to sustain and strengthen NYC Reads. This means fully funding the initiative, ensuring that teachers receive the ongoing training they need, and reporting progress transparently. 

It also means having a schools chancellor with a proven record of championing literacy programs grounded in reading science. If Chancellor Melissa Avil茅s-Ramos remains in her post, or if another literacy-focused chancellor is appointed, that could be a strong signal that the city is serious about preserving reforms already underway, including reading curriculum changes under NYC Reads.

New York City already has elected officials pushing in the same direction 鈥� from Assemblymember Robert Carroll鈥檚 legislation expanding dyslexia screening and early intervention to Assemblymember Jo Anne Simon鈥檚 efforts to ensure that teacher preparation programs use evidence-based methods in their literacy courses. The next mayor must match that commitment.

As a reading scientist, Brooklyn College professor and founder of The Reading Institute, I have seen firsthand how quickly children can grow when teachers are equipped with the knowledge and tools that research supports. When schools align instruction with how the brain actually learns to read, students who once struggled begin to thrive, and educators regain a sense of confidence in supporting all students.

Literacy is the gateway to opportunity. It is the foundation for every subject, every grade, and every pathway into the workforce. New York has begun to show what鈥檚 possible when we finally take reading science seriously. For the sake of our children, our city and our future, NYC Reads must stay.

This story was originally published by Chalkbeat. Sign up for their newsletters at

Mayor Eric Adams鈥� shakeup to elementary school reading curriculums had a clear goal: to align instruction with the 鈥渟cience of reading,鈥� the catchphrase for a longstanding body of research.

But in the , some literacy experts worried that there wasn鈥檛 enough emphasis on the basic theory and research behind the . As hundreds of schools transition away from , many teachers have craved guidance.

A free training program available to New York City teachers aims to fill that gap, helping thousands of educators parse the fundamental principles of the science of reading. The program, now in its second year, was developed by , a nonprofit launched by Katie Pace Miles, a Brooklyn College professor.

鈥淚 wanted to make sure that it wasn鈥檛 just about the how鈥氣�� Miles said. 鈥淣o matter what curriculum they have, they鈥檝e got to know: What are the tenets that actually move the needle for readers?鈥濃��

Miles underscored that the training could also help address a long-term challenge: Curriculums often come and go during a teacher鈥檚 career. Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani, who will take control of the city鈥檚 schools on Jan. 1, has , though he has indicated teachers should have more flexibility around how to implement it in their classrooms.

The emphasizes phonics 鈥� how students learn the relationships between sounds and letters 鈥� a . Other segments cover vocabulary, comprehension, writing, and reaching neurodivergent learners. Video footage from three New York City public schools is woven throughout the training to show how teachers are using the science of reading in real-world classrooms.

The introductory course has free slots for nearly 1,200 New York City teachers for the remainder of this school year (it is also free for all CUNY students). When the slots are filled 鈥� or for teachers outside the city鈥� the cost is $25. Of the 2,800 people who took the course last school year, more than 2,000 were from the city鈥檚 public schools. (The course is funded by the Benedict Silverman Foundation, which , and the Heckscher Foundation for Children.)

Experts say the training could help fill gaps for teachers who did not receive adequate instruction in their teacher preparation programs about how children learn to read, as schools of education for failing to embrace the latest research on reading. New York State officials have said they鈥檙e working .

Cut to the video: Recorded literacy lessons inspire change

At P.S. 189 in Washington Heights, Principal Johanny Grullon has embraced the additional training, setting aside time during the school鈥檚 existing Monday training blocks.

Now, virtually all of the school staff are taking Miles鈥� science of reading course, including art, music, and gym teachers.

鈥淓verybody plays an important role in teaching students how to read,鈥� Grullon said. 鈥淭he gym teachers aren鈥檛 gonna take out flashcards 鈥� but I want them to think about: What can I do in my daily routines as kids are warming up to develop vocabulary?鈥�

The science of reading intro course has won attention from other states. Last school year, P.S. 189 showed off the training program to the governors of Rhode Island and Colorado, along with a representative from New York Gov. Kathy Hochul鈥檚 office.

Julia Rosa, the library teacher at P.S. 189, was one of the first educators at the school to complete the training and helped convince her colleagues it was worth the time.

The video footage from other New York City classrooms helped persuade her to shift some of her approaches 鈥� and try new ones. When her students ask her to spell words during writing exercises, she used to reflexively give them the answers, worrying that veering into spelling exercises would district from the lesson. But videos of students making confident spelling guesses help convince her to change.

In another video, Rosa saw a phonics lesson that involved students using their fingers to trace out letters in blue sand. That activity seemed like it would make a mess in a room with over 20 children. But soon, she was off to the dollar store to buy tupperware containers to try it herself.

鈥淪eeing it done 鈥� it gives you more confidence to try it,鈥� she said.

Education Department officials said they hope the training will help teachers reluctant to change their practice and give them a more solid foundation as they deploy the new curriculums.

Staten Island鈥檚 superintendent is encouraging educators to take the training, and nearly 1,000 teachers in the borough are enrolled. Allison Angioletti, a district achievement and instructional specialist in the Staten Island superintendent鈥檚 office, said she hopes the training helps teachers tailor their lessons and navigate curriculums that are often packed with more content than can fit in a traditional literacy block. On Staten Island, teachers are required to use Into Reading, the .

鈥淚 want them to be good decision makers,鈥� said Angioletti. 鈥淚 want them to keep the parts that are most helpful to kids about how they learn how to read.鈥�

Literacy experts said the relatively short course was unlikely to spur major changes in student achievement by itself. But Tim Shanahan, a former Chicago Public Schools official who oversaw that district鈥檚 training efforts, said it is still important.

鈥淭here are lots of things that need to happen to raise reading achievement,鈥� he said, 鈥渁nd one of them is professional development.鈥�

Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news site covering educational change in public schools.

鈥淭he kids know exactly what to expect, and they’re so much more confident when they come to a word that they don’t know, or a big word in text, because they’ve been taught all of those little, tiny skills that they need, and the concepts of how words are made up,鈥� Hoard said, who teaches at Emma L. Smith Elementary. 鈥淚t’s not like a guessing game for them anymore.鈥�

A small mid-Michigan district of 1,075 students, Stockbridge is among the first districts in the state to fully embrace training its teachers and building a curriculum that is supported by the science of reading, a body of research explaining how children develop reading and writing skills. This instruction relies heavily on phonics in the early years of schooling before building other essential skills like fluency, vocabulary, comprehension and the syntax of grammar and sentence structure in the later elementary grades.

After the district鈥檚 teachers and literacy coaches on how to implement the curriculum, they built a new foundation to teaching literacy that helped third-grade students increase English proficiency by 12% on standardized tests.

Now in its second year of structured literacy strategies, including daily small group and one-on-one literacy interventions and games that are scored with data tracked in real time, Stockbridge Assistant Superintendent for Curriculum and Instruction Amy Hodgson said the new approach has worked so well, the district has implemented a similar teaching method in math through daily, classwide interventions. 

Building those skills in the younger grades will help them have success across subjects as they get older, she said.

鈥淚f students don’t have fluency and automaticity in math or reading, it’s very difficult for them to have the cognitive load to access the higher skills that are being demanded of them in life and in standardized testing and in all these other places,鈥� Hodgson said. 鈥淚f I’m asked to do calculus, or if I’m asked to read a complex text, and I’m still sounding out words, there’s an exhaustion that comes with that.鈥�

A shifting focus to phonics

The school district is part of a recent nationwide shift back toward phonics-focused curricula and rather than a balanced literacy approach that incorporates a 鈥渨hole language鈥� method focused on meaning and context of words.

While the two approaches should be seen in some respects as complementary and integrated, Harvard Professor of Cognition and Education Catherine Snow said they are typically pitted against each other, with schools choosing to change approaches when a new 鈥渓iteracy crisis鈥� emerges.

鈥淚t’s kind of a pendulum shift every 15 or 20 years that you get some report saying our kids can’t read, and whatever is the dominant procedure at the time gets suppressed in favor of the other one, but in both cases, they go too far with it,鈥� said Snow, an expert on language and literacy development in children.

鈥淵ou can’t just do code-focused instruction, because you will drive the kids crazy and you will teach them that reading is about pronouncing words correctly, not about meaning. You can’t just do whole language instruction, because many kids need a little bit of help getting into the system. They need someone to explain to them very systematically.鈥�

Along with 39 other states across the country, Michigan has embraced the science of reading, a buzz term that is neither a program nor an instructional approach, said Kim St. Martin, director of the Michigan Multi-Tiered System of Supports Technical Assistance Center and consultant to the Michigan Department of Education. Instead, it is a body of research schools can choose to build their curriculum, training and assessments around, she said.

In 2024, Michigan passed a pair of K-12 literacy laws aligned with this research in an effort to boost third-grade reading scores and better identify and support students with dyslexia. In addition to aligning its curricula and assessments with lists approved by the state鈥檚 Department of Education, notes that instruction must not include methods or curricula that emphasize memorizing words or prompt students to guess unknown words using pictures.

Commonly used within whole language and balanced literacy programs, this 鈥渢hree-cueing鈥� system model relies on word meaning and sentence context; as such, it does not serve students well in learning the foundations of reading and writing, St. Martin said.

“If I’m a second-grader, when I’m reading the words, there’s nothing wrong with me having pictures in text for the purpose of me getting a visual representation in my mind of understanding what it is that this text is about,” St. Martin said. “What is inappropriate is if I’m using the picture to try to decode the word, because that would prevent me from understanding how to put together the letter-sound combinations to read that word.

鈥淯nfortunately, there have been strategies that have been taught for several years that frankly, are causing kids to guess and to use those types of three-cueing strategies.鈥�

Michigan has committed toward creating a committee that will vet curricula aligned with the science of reading and allow schools to purchase materials approved by the committee. The state also provided $34 million to train elementary teachers on how to teach the curricula via Language Essentials for Teachers of Reading and Spelling (LETRS), with more than 5,000 teachers and literacy coaches completing the training to date.

The laws and funding efforts are concentrated on providing teachers with the tools they need to teach all aspects of reading to young learners, Michigan Department of Education Literacy Unit Manager DeNesha Rawls-Smith said.

鈥淲e believe that it is foundational for students that are learning to read to decode unknown words,鈥� Rawls-Smith said. 鈥淏ut again, we don’t believe that phonics, or word recognition in and of itself, makes a good reader. We believe that a good reader has the ability to recognize unknown words, and they have a knowledge about language. So together with word recognition and language comprehension, you have a reader that can read and understand what they’re reading.鈥�

How a child learns best

After studying years of student achievement data, Stockbridge K-6 Literacy Coach Cindy Stacy learned the school was doing the same thing and getting the same results that were 鈥渘ot amazing.鈥�

The district used state grant funds to invest in the , an approach initially developed to support students with dyslexia which has proven successful with other students as well. It worked with Institute for Multi-Sensory Education instructors to train its teachers and literacy coaches.

鈥淧rior to this latest shift, most elementary education programs focused on balanced literacy,鈥� Stacy said. 鈥淭here was a small piece of phonics. There was a whole language approach. There were leveled readers. With the science of reading, the whole paradigm just shifted.鈥�

While laying the initial groundwork was difficult, Stacy said mornings at Smith Elementary are now more intentional and bustling, with students reaching for their 鈥淥G bags鈥� that allow them to trace letters into their own sand trays. 

In Michelle Hedding鈥檚 kindergarten class, students are asked what sound letters make before tracing the letter in the sand tray. Different three-letter combinations are broken down by individual letters on a TV monitor, with Hedding asking students to pronounce the word before ultimately asking them if they鈥檙e 鈥渞eal or nonsense鈥� words.

In grades K-5, students receive at least 90 minutes of reading and 20 minutes of writing instruction per day, Stacy said, with several who need more individual support pulled into small group or one-on-one intervention periods for 25-30 minutes. In grades 3 to 5, there is more focus on language and reading comprehension, vocabulary, background knowledge and verbal reasoning.

During intervention periods, literacy interventionist Amy Taylor will drill down on concepts like the sounds that different blends of letters make and how a 鈥渕agic鈥� e at the end of a word like face or home makes the preceding vowel in the word 鈥渟ay its name.鈥�

Taylor, who has been with the district for 20 years, said the transition was difficult due to the belief from some teachers and staff that the use of sight words, or commonly used words children can memorize from sight, was an effective way to teach all students.

鈥淢y kindergarten class at the time, they were learning how to read — but the difference was, they didn’t know why,鈥� Taylor said. 鈥淚t was all memorization. They did not peel a word apart and talk about the different whys: why the word is 鈥榩inch.鈥� So, when we started the [new curricula], that was life changing for our learners and for us.鈥� It’s just changed our whole way of looking at a child and how they learn best.鈥�

But how gradual is too gradual?

In a powerful new book, researcher Tim Shanahan argues that America’s classroom literacy practices move far too slowly. In , he contends that protecting students from difficult texts puts them on a treadmill with no exit.

Shanahan is a former director of reading at Chicago Public Schools, served on the National Reading Panel and writes the blog. In his new book, he walks through a number of problems with the leveled reading approach:

Kids can鈥檛 learn much from texts they can already read well

Shanahan dedicates his first chapter to a long history of how kids have been taught to read in the United States. From family Bibles in the 1700s to the McGuffey鈥檚 Readers used in one-room schoolhouses in the 1800s to the 鈥渕odern鈥� grade-level configurations beginning in the early  1900s, the texts given to students learning to read have gotten progressively easier. Beginning in the 1950s, the dominant idea became that of 鈥渓eveled readers,鈥� which attempted to match children with texts appropriate for their instructional level. Made infamous in recent years by Emily Hanford鈥檚 Sold a Story , the most popular version was the Fountas and Pinnell program, which sorted kids (and books) into an A-to-Z continuum.

Shanahan鈥檚 concerns start with how students are placed into these levels. Teachers listen to kids read aloud and count how many words they read correctly. Afterward, they ask questions to make sure the students understood what they read. These first steps make sense, but the issue comes with the false precision and subsequent placement decisions. Depending on the assessment and program being used, students may be placed in levels where they can already read 90% to 95% of the words in the assigned texts and understand 75% of the content.

Shanahan insists that being overly focused on readability in this way at the beginning of a lesson undermines learning. He writes, 鈥淎ssigning students to challenging texts and making them successful 鈥� that is, making sure they can read and understand the text by the end of the lesson 鈥� is the key to raising reading achievement.鈥�  

‘Just right’ reading levels are instructionally meaningless

Most teachers will be familiar with the idea of using 鈥溾�� to slowly introduce new concepts that are in the student鈥檚 鈥�.鈥� These frameworks strongly imply that learning can take place only when the material is neither too hard nor too easy.

But these break down once you start getting into practicalities. For example, when someone says a book is 鈥渏ust right鈥� for a student, what does that mean exactly? Students鈥� ability to understand a passage will be tied to their background knowledge in the subject, their interest in it and how the passage is written in terms of vocabulary, sentence length or word repetition.

This presents a measurement problem when it comes to the classroom. For example, researcher Matt Burns found that the widely used Benchmark Assessment System was in identifying struggling readers. Shanahan notes that many commercial assessments have very large measurement errors, meaning a fourth grader may be assigned to reading levels ranging from grades 2 to 6. That鈥檚 too wide a range to be instructionally useful.

Instead, teachers should work with grade-level texts

Shanahan argues that leveled-reading advocates are missing the forest for the trees. By being so consumed with trying to determine what level a child is at, they assume selecting an easier text is the only appropriate way to help that student learn. But there are other, better options. To help students stay on grade-level material, teachers can pre-teach some key terms, slice the text into manageable chunks or use re-reading to make sure kids eventually understand. In short, the difficulty of a text is relevant to the amount of help students might need, but they shouldn’t avoid the challenge.

Moreover, having children work hard to read a text reinforces good literacy skills. Shanahan notes that 鈥渏ust right鈥� texts eliminate the responsibility readers have to make important decisions and adjustments as they go along. When good readers confront challenging text, they slow down, re-read, make inferences, break words down into their component parts or look up words they don鈥檛 recognize. Grade-level texts require kids to practice these skills; leveled-reading materials do not.

Leveled books are well-meaning but wrong-headed

Leveled-reading advocates are very concerned about student motivation. They fear that children who face too difficult of a task will tune out or even start to question their own abilities.

But Shanahan points to a body of research suggesting that motivation can be driven by a number of factors, including the novelty of a text, how relevant it feels to a student and, yes, its level of rigor and challenge. Kids can even feel a sense of accomplishment after they鈥檝e mastered a challenging text. Shanahan suggests that, rather than starting a lesson with material that students can already read, it would be better to begin with a more difficult passage and then work until students can read it fluently. The goal should be achievement and progress, not the mere act of reading.

More kids deserve grade-level texts

Shanahan argues that assigning students to instructional-level text 鈥� as opposed to text tied to their actual grade level 鈥� is essentially a backdoor way of holding  students back without doing the paperwork or alerting their parents. When I spoke with him, he made clear this wasn鈥檛 any type of judgment on the text itself. Books are neither good nor bad. The problem comes when fifth graders are stuck reading third grade texts.  

This can also make it impossible for kids to catch up once they fall behind. As Shanahan writes, it will be hard for those students to ever read more challenging books, 鈥渨ithout exposure to the more advanced content, vocabulary, grammar, and the discourse and structure that more advantaged kids are experiencing.鈥� Giving struggling readers shorter, simpler texts in effect deprives them of the very practice they need to improve.

 Shanahan is not na茂ve in assuming these instructional changes will be easy to implement. In fact, he spends a good amount of time offering advice for teachers about how to incorporate more grade-level texts in their classrooms. Nor is he sanguine about policymakers solving these problems. He notes that the Common Core attempted to do in policy what he鈥檚 encouraging in the book 鈥� make sure more students have access to grade-level texts. Those efforts ultimately backfired as teachers became even to resort to easier instruction-level texts. To me, that suggests the root of the issue may be cultural norms in schools and schools of education. To combat that, more educators would need to embrace the challenge of providing grade-level texts to all kids.

Ultimately, Shanahan emphasizes that leveled-reading advocates have confused the goal and focused too much on reading as an isolated skill. But literacy is not a subject matter on its own, like math, science or history. It is a tool for learning about the world. It鈥檚 a good one, for sure, but the goal should be to teach kids to read so they can read to learn new things. That requires introducing more challenge than kids today are getting.

A school is no different.

In my Texas school district, I can walk into a classroom and, in the first five minutes, tell you if effective reading instruction is happening. I don’t need to see the lesson plan or even look at the teacher. I just need to look at the kids. Are they engaged? Are they in a routine? Are they getting the “reps” they need?

For too long, districts have been losing the game before it starts. They buy a new playbook (i.e., a curriculum) as a 鈥渉ail Mary,鈥� hoping for a fourth-quarter miracle. Still, they ignore the fundamentals, practice and team culture required for sustainable success.

Chapel Hill Independent School District is committed to educating all children to compete in an ever-changing world. To that end, we鈥檝e made literacy a nonnegotiable priority across all campuses. We anchor our approach in research-based practices and a culture of continuous learning for both students and staff.

We鈥檙e building for the long run: a literacy dynasty. But our literacy success hasn’t come without putting in the work. We have a relentless focus on the fundamentals and, most importantly, a culture where every player 鈥� every teacher and administrator 鈥� fits our system.

Trust the Analytics, Not Your Gut

In reading instruction, we can’t make assumptions; all instruction has to start with the fundamentals. For decades, instruction was based on gut feelings, like an old-school coach deciding whether to go for it on fourth down or punt based on a hunch. But today, the best coaches trust the analytics, not their gut. They watch the game film.

Chapel Hill is an analytics district; we do our research. And our game film is the science of reading.

Many years ago, we started using structured literacy for a small group of students with dyslexia. It worked so well that we asked ourselves: If structured literacy is effective for a small group of students with dyslexia, shouldn鈥檛 it be essential for all students?

We didn鈥檛 just adopt a new curriculum; we redesigned our literacy infrastructure 鈥� from structured literacy professional development for every teacher to classroom coaching and a robust tiered system of support to ensure no student falls through the cracks.

That logic is our offensive strategy. It’s why we use tools like the Sold a Story podcast to show our staff why we’ve banned the strategies of a bygone era, like three-cueing. We have to be willing to reprogram the brain to align with what research proves works. But having the right playbook is only half the battle.

A great playbook is useless without the right team to execute it.

This is the most crucial part: “First who, then what.” In the NFL draft, teams don’t always draft the most talented player available. They conduct interviews and personality assessments and ultimately draft the player who best fits their system鈥攖he cultural fit.

Tom Brady is arguably the greatest quarterback of all time, but he couldn’t run a read-option offense, which requires a fast, running quarterback. He wouldn’t fit the system, and the team would fail. But put Brady in a play-action offense, sit back and watch the magic happen.

We operate the same way. When we interview, we’re not just looking for a teacher with excellent credentials and experience; we’re looking for a “Chapel Hill Way鈥� teacher. It鈥檚 a specific profile: someone who believes in our philosophy of systematic, explicit, research-based instruction.

This culture starts with our team captains: our campus principals. We need them to believe in our playbook, not just buy in because the district office said so. We invest in their development so they can champion literacy daily, monitor instruction and ensure every classroom executes our playbook with fidelity. It鈥檚 their conviction that turns a curriculum on a shelf into a living, breathing part of our culture.

Talented teams win games. Disciplined, team-first organizations build dynasties.

Building a dynasty requires sacrifice. When an educator joins our team, whether they鈥檙e a rookie or a seasoned veteran, we ask them to let go of the 鈥淚’ve always done it this way鈥� mindset. That’s the equivalent of a player prioritizing their personal stats over a team win.

It鈥檚 a team-first mindset. It’s about a willingness to put personal preference aside to build a championship team. For Chapel Hill ISD, our championship is ensuring every child learns to read.

Our team-first philosophy has translated into measurable results: Across campuses, students are gaining the foundational skills they need, and data shows growth for every subgroup, including students with dyslexia and multilingual learners. We want students to become a product of our expectations, rather than their environment. Our district, which serves a diverse population, including a high percentage of students classified as low socioeconomic status, consistently scores above the state average in third-grade reading.

At Wise Elementary, our largest campus[MOU1] , 56% of third graders met grade-level standards, and 23% scored above grade level on the 2023-2024 STARR assessment. And we had similar results across the district.

So to my fellow education leaders: Before you shop for a new playbook, ensure you have the right team culture in place. Define your culture. Draft the right players. Build your team. Coach your captains. And obsess over the fundamentals.

That’s how you win.

Even with millions spent on new textbooks, and teachers required to take online science of reading training, third grade English Language Arts proficiency fell from 62% in spring of 2023 to 61% earlier this year.

A jump in 2024 to 65% proficiency turned out to be a mirage, as third graders fell right back again last school year.

It鈥檚 still unclear whether the scores are cause for alarm or just a as Ohio joins the flood of states shifting to phonics-heavy lessons to help students decode and understand words better. Some supporters of the science of reading believe small gains should happen almost immediately, even if it takes longer for large improvements statewide.

鈥淲e haven’t seen much progress yet,鈥� said Chad Aldis of the Fordham Institute, one of the advocates of adopting the science of reading. 鈥淭his is disappointing.鈥�

Others urge patience, with some districts that adopted the science of reading early, saying they are on the verge of students showing improvements.

In the Elyria school district about 30 miles west of Cleveland, educators are hoping their patience will soon pay off. 

Andrea McKenzie, Elyria literacy specialist acknowledged that scores haven鈥檛 improved since the district switched to the science of reading in 2022. But she said this year鈥檚 third graders, the first to be using the new curriculum since kindergarten, are on track for an 11 point jump in proficiency rates, according to scores on standardized progress tests.

鈥淭his is the moment I have been waiting for,鈥� McKenzie said. 鈥淚’ve been waiting for these students to get to third grade to see this through, so I feel like this is the year.鈥�

Though most schools adopted the science of reading right after DeWine started his push early in 2023, Ohio law gave schools until this fall to fully make the switch. Teachers need time to adjust and embrace a new approach. And even Mississippi, whose 鈥渕iracle鈥� reading gains are the model for Ohio and other states, took a few years before making gains that caught notice.

鈥淟ast school year, we had districts who were in very different places in their implementation of science of reading,鈥� said Chris Woolard, chief integration officer of the Ohio Department of Education and Workforce. 鈥淲e had some of those early adopters that have been doing this for a few years. We had others who are (still in) early stages.鈥�

He stressed that this ongoing school year is the first that all schools must be fully using the science of reading, a 鈥渞eally important鈥� consideration when evaluating results

Melissa Weber-Mayrer, Ohio鈥檚 chief of literacy, said this year is 鈥減ivotal鈥� since schools now have to be fully using science of reading, but she also cautioned that it could be three to five years before scores grow statewide.

鈥淟ooking locally, we will see things start to move,鈥� she said. 鈥淏ut it might be in a grade level, in a school, maybe in one elementary building within a larger district.,鈥� she said.

Elyria, a district of just under 6,000 students, could be one of those pockets. The district鈥檚 four elementary schools were named Science of Reading Champions by DeWine last spring for quickly adopting materials and instruction, even as that district鈥檚 reading scores are still not rising.

Third grade reading proficiency in that district fell from 45.8% of students in 2023 to 43.8% on state tests this spring.

But the district has been pushing hard to adopt the science of reading, with the school board voting in 2022 to shift to the Core Knowledge Language Arts curriculum and start using it that fall.

The district had 34 teachers start two-year Language Essentials for Teachers of Reading (LETRS) training 鈥斅燼 program many consider the gold standard of science of reading 鈥斅爄n 2022, with 30 more starting in 2024 and another 22 starting this school year.

The district also hired two literacy specialists in 2022 to help the one already there work with teachers on reading lessons and with students that need extra help.

The change now has kindergarten teacher Lindsay DeCoster giving students focused lessons on聽letters, their sounds and how to move their tongues and teeth to pronounce them.

鈥淚n the past, we have been skipping over this part鈥� like they don’t need to know how to rhyme, they don’t need to know initial sounds and things like that,鈥� DeCoster said. 鈥淚f you don’t understand how your mouth needs to look and what your mouth needs to do to make those sounds, then you’re not gonna be able to.鈥�

DeCoster, now in her 17th year as a teacher, said LETRS training improved her teaching immensely.

鈥淚 just didn’t know what I didn’t know as far as everything that really goes into teaching a child how to read,鈥� she said. 鈥淲e’ve now broken it down to the smallest, smallest component.鈥�

With so many states adopting the science of reading in just the last few years, experts were unable to point to many strong studies showing how fast scores change after adopting the science of reading. That鈥檚 partly because districts and schools adopt new curricula, add coaches, and train teachers at different speed and intensity, often varying within a single school, as in Elyria.

But Stanford University professor Thomas Dee, who studied how low-performing schools in California improved using that state鈥檚 Early Literacy Block Grants, said changes can happen quickly if classroom methods truly change too.

He found that low-performing California students improved by about a third of a year鈥檚 worth of learning over two years, after changing the curriculum, training teachers,and adding tutoring and afterschool programs using the grants..

鈥淚 think it’s reasonable to expect measurable improvements in student literacy to follow fairly quickly on the heels of evidence-aligned changes in teacher pedagogy,鈥� Dee told 社区黑料. 鈥淭he major concern I have is that state declarations for the Science of Reading may not translate quickly鈥攐r indeed ever鈥攊nto responsive changes in classroom practices.鈥�

Teachers, he said, can fall back into old practices of having students 鈥済uess鈥� at words using context or pictures – practices that Ohio banned in its 2023 state reading law – but which can鈥檛 be tracked.

Aldis also noted that Ohio is not gaining in another important way that can show progress聽鈥� whether lower-scoring students are doing better and closing the gap to becoming proficient. Fordham reported last month that the opposite is happening. More third graders are scoring as 鈥渓imited,鈥� the state鈥檚 lowest rating, an equivalent to an F, than before 鈥� 20.9% this year compared to 19.1% in 2023.

One factor, Aldis said, could be Ohio dropping its requirement in 2023 that third graders must read well to advance to fourth grade, which motivated students and teachers to show gains on a deadline.听

Casey Taylor, the literacy policy director for ExcelinEd, the education advocacy group formed by former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, worked on reading efforts in the early days of Mississippi鈥檚 shift, as well as in North Carolina, which started a similar push in 2021.

She said Mississppi saw some gains in schools that used literacy coaches extensively within two years, but she cautioned, 鈥淚t still took several years before we really started to see those performance levels shift at a broad, systemic approach.鈥�

Mississippi, the second-worst worst state in reading when its literacy campaign launched in 2013, didn鈥檛 really excel for six years, she said.

鈥淲e saw some gains in the 2015 NAEP, but it wasn’t until 2019 that the nation really took note, because that was the first time we reached the national average on fourth grade reading,鈥� she said.

North Carolina, she said, has started seeing gains on standardized progress tests teachers give their students, but not on tests like the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) yet.

Though he wants to see faster improvement in Ohio, Fordham鈥檚 Aldis agreed with Taylor in one major way – making real gains takes a long-term commitment. 

Ohio, Aldis said, has a history of abandoning improvement projects that don鈥檛 show quick results and moving on to something else.

鈥淭hese reforms are just too important to follow that same path,鈥� Aldis said. 鈥淲e need to stick with it.鈥�

North Carolina is one of several states that have passed legislation in recent years to align classroom reading instruction with the research on how children learn to read. But ensuring all students have access to research-backed instruction is a marathon, not a sprint, said education leaders and researchers from across the country on

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for 社区黑料 Newsletter

Though implementation of the state鈥檚 reading legislation has been ongoing since 2021, more resources and comprehensive support are needed to ensure teaching practice and reading proficiency are improved, webinar panelists said.

鈥淭he goal should be to transition from the science of reading into the science of teaching reading,鈥� said Paola Pilonieta, professor at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte who was part of a team that studied North Carolina鈥檚 implementation of its

That legislation mandates instruction to be aligned with 鈥渢he science of reading,鈥� the research that says learning to read involves 鈥渢he acquisition of language (phonology, syntax, semantics, morphology, and pragmatics), and skills of phonemic awareness, accurate and efficient work identification (fluency), spelling, vocabulary, and comprehension.鈥�

The legislature allocated more than $114 million to train pre-K to fifth grade teachers and other educators in the science of reading through a professional development tool called the Language Essentials for Teachers of Reading and Spelling (). More than 44,000 teachers had as of June 2024.

Third graders saw a two-point drop, , in reading proficiency from the 2023-24 to 2024-25 school year on literacy assessments. It was the first decline in this measure since LETRS training began. First graders鈥� results on formative assessments held steady at 70% proficiency and second graders saw a small increase, from 65% to 66%.

鈥淟ETRS was the first step in transforming teacher practice and improving student outcomes,鈥� Pilonieta said. 鈥淭o continue to make growth in reading, teachers need targeted ongoing support in the form of coaching, for example, to ensure effective implementation of evidence-based literacy instruction.鈥�

Teachers鈥� feelings on the training

Pilonieta was part of a team at UNC-Charlotte and the Education Policy Initiative at Carolina (EPIC) at UNC-Chapel Hill that studied and districts鈥� of that training. The team also studied teachers鈥� knowledge of research-backed literacy practices and in small-group settings after the training.

They asked about these experiences through a survey completed by 4,035 teachers across the state from spring 2023 to winter 2024, and 51 hour-long focus groups with 113 participants.

Requiring training on top of an already stressful job can be a heavy lift, Pilonieta said. LETRS training looked different across districts, the research team found. Some teachers received stipends to complete the training or were compensated with time off, and some were not. Some had opportunities to collaborate with fellow educators during the training; some did not.

鈥淭hese differences in support influenced whether teachers felt supported during the training, overwhelmed, or ignored,鈥� Pilonieta said.

Teachers did perceive the content of the LETRS training to be helpful in some ways and had concerns in others, according to survey respondents.

Teachers holding various roles found the content valuable in learning about how the brain works, phonics, and comprehension.

They cited issues, however, with the training鈥檚 applicability to varied roles, limited differentiation based on teachers鈥� background knowledge and experience, redundancy, and a general limited amount of time to engage with the training鈥檚 content.

Varied support from administrators, coaches

When asking teachers about how implementation worked at their schools, the researchers found that support from administrators and instructional coaches varied widely.

Teachers reported that classroom visits from administrators with a focus on science of reading occurred infrequently. The main support administrators provided, according to the research, was planning time.

鈥淢any teachers felt that higher levels of support from coaches would be valuable to help them implement these reading practices,鈥� Pilonieta said.

Teachers did report shifts in their teaching practice after the training and felt those tweaks had positive outcomes on students.

The team found other conditions impacted teachers鈥� implementation: schools鈥� use of curriculum that aligned to the concepts covered in the training, access to materials and resources, and having sufficient planning time.

Some improvement in knowledge and practice

Teachers performed well on assessments after completing the training, but had lower scores on a survey given later by the research team. Pilonieta said this suggests an issue with knowledge retention.

Teachers scored between 95% to 98% across in the LETRS post-training assessment. But in the research team鈥檚 survey, scores ranged from 48% to 78%.

Teachers with a reading license scored higher on all knowledge areas addressed in LETRS than teachers who did not.

When the team analyzed teachers鈥� recorded small-group reading lessons, 73% were considered high-quality. They found consistent use of explicit instruction, which is a key component of the science of reading, as well as evidence-backed strategies related to phonemic awareness and phonics. They found limited implementation of practices on vocabulary and comprehension.

Among the low-quality lessons, more than half were for students reading below grade level. Some 鈥減roblematic practices鈥� persisted in 17% of analyzed lessons.

What鈥檚 next?

The research team formed several recommendations on how to improve reading instruction and reading proficiency.

They said ongoing professional development through education preparation programs and teacher leaders can help teachers translate knowledge to instructional change. Funding is also needed for instructional coaches to help teachers make that jump.

Guides differentiated by grade levels would help different teachers with different needs when it comes to implementing evidence-backed strategies. And the state should incentivize teachers to pursue specialized credentials in reading instruction, the researchers said.

Moving forward, the legislation might need more clarity on mechanisms for sustaining the implementation of the science of reading. The research team suggests a structured evaluation framework that tracks implementation, student impact, and resource distribution to inform the state鈥檚 future literacy initiatives.

This first appeared on and is republished here under a .

L.A. Unified surpassed pre-pandemic math, reading and science levels on 2024-25 state test scores released Thursday and closed the gap with the rest of California, even as the state鈥檚 test scores rose overall.

District officials attributed the increases to tactics such as targeted funding for struggling schools, small group instruction, tutoring and using the phonics-based science of reading.

But disparities remain. 

While LAUSD students narrowed achievement gaps between Black, Hispanic; and white and Asian students, inequities persist, with 68.9 percent of white students meeting reading standards compared to 41 percent of Latino students, who make up most of the district鈥檚 enrollment. Overall, 53.3 percent of the district鈥檚 540,000 students are still not reading at grade level, compared to 51.2 percent of the entire state. 

The district also continues to face challenges including falling enrollment, financial troubles and threats from the federal government.  

Still, officials celebrated the increases across the state and in L.A. Unified in particular.

鈥淭his is a proud moment,鈥� said Governor Gavin Newsom at a press conference with LAUSD superintendent Alberto Carvalho held inside the Alexander Science Center School in Exhibition Park, a neighborhood in the south region of L.A., where many students are low income. 鈥淲e鈥檙e not only moving in the right direction; we鈥檙e leading in that respect.鈥�  

L.A. Unified students made big gains in reading on the exams, outpacing those made by the state as a whole, and achieving a 46.5% reading proficiency level on 2024-25 Smarter Balanced assessments, up from 43.1% the previous year and 44.1% in 2018-19.

Likewise, 36.8% of LAUSD students achieved math proficiency on the 2024-25 state exams, up from 32.8% the previous year and 33.5% in 2018-19.

Statewide, reading proficiency rose to 48.8% and math proficiency rose to 37.3%. LAUSD, a huge and diverse urban school district, historically underperforms the state overall and serves a higher percentage of higher-needs students. 

鈥淟os Angeles Unified is having a very special moment in history, one without precedent,鈥� said Carvalho. 鈥淭oday, we celebrate the fact that we can proudly say that as Los Angeles goes in terms of education, so goes the state of California.鈥�  

Carvalho said the district鈥檚 early adoption of approaches aligned with the science of reading helped boost students鈥� test scores. Newsom cited  he signed Thursday to promote the use of phonics-based techniques for teaching reading in all California schools.

As the largest school district in California, LAUSD鈥檚 new test scores helped lift those of the state overall and capped a string of positive metrics for the district. Carvalho, who boasted of L.A. Unified鈥檚 progress in his opening of schools address, just reupped his contract with the district to remain superintendent for another four years.

In an interview with reporters on Wednesday, Carvalho explained that the district鈥檚 improvement was not only due to using the science of reading, but also to tactics that targeted increased funding at underperforming schools, providing needier students with extra tutoring and supplemental training for teachers.

鈥淲e outperformed last year鈥檚 already improved performance,鈥� said Carvalho, 鈥渨ith Black, Latino, low income, poor kids, students with disabilities, performing better than pre-pandemic levels.鈥�

Black students showed the strongest gains overall on the Smarter Balanced assessments, and Latino students also made larger gains compared to both white and Asian kids in reading and math on the exams.

LAUSD Deputy Superintendent of Instruction Karla Estrada said LAUSD鈥檚 improvements were also the result of the district鈥檚 deployment of small group instruction, wraparound social services, and efforts to boost attendance.

Carvalho said the district is already looking to redouble those efforts.

鈥淲e are already examining and analyzing and detailing over the practices that we believe produce these results, and refining the approach to actually accelerate the rate of improvement that we鈥檝e seen,鈥� Carvalho said. 鈥淭his is strategic. It is deliberate. I believe it settles a number of contentious unknowns of the past.鈥�

Former LAUSD board member David Tokofsky, who consults with districts and labor groups on policy and operations, said LA Unified鈥檚 latest test scores are impressive, but the district and the state can still do better to achieve stronger results.

鈥淭he gap between Black and brown kids and white and Asian kids continues to be expansive,鈥� said Tokofsky of the new scores. 鈥淭he good news is the gap between the state scores and the district scores has been reduced to near nothing.鈥�

While this may work for some schools, in our district, Rockwood School District in Missouri, we鈥檝e chosen a different path. We keep students together in their class during whole-class instruction 鈥� regardless of ability level 鈥� and provide support or enrichment by creating flexible groups based on instructional needs within their grade level.

We鈥檙e building skilled, confident readers not by separating them, but by growing them together.

Children, like adults, learn and grow in diverse groups. In a Rockwood classroom, every student contributes to the shared learning environment 鈥� and every student benefits from being part of it.

Our approach starts with whole-class instruction. All students, including English multilingual learners and those working toward grade-level benchmarks, participate in daily, grade-level phonics and comprehension lessons. We believe these shared experiences are foundational 鈥� not just for building literacy, but for fostering community and academic confidence.

After our explicit, whole-group lessons, students move into flexible, needs-based small groups informed by real-time data and observations. Some students receive reteaching, while others take on enrichment activities. During these blocks, differentiation is fluid: A student may need decoding help one day and vocabulary enrichment the next. No one is locked into a static tier. Every day is a new opportunity.

Students also engage in daily independent and partner reading. In addition, reading specialists provide targeted, research-based interventions for striving readers who need additional instruction.

We build movement into our instruction, as well 鈥� not as a brain break, but as a learning tool. We use gestures for phonemes, tapping for spelling and jumping to count syllables. These are 鈥渂rain boosts,鈥� helping young learners stay focused and engaged.

We challenge all students, regardless of skill level. During phonics and word work, advanced readers work with more complex texts and tasks. Emerging readers receive the time and scaffolded support they need 鈥� such as visual cues and pre-teaching or exposing students to a concept or skill before it’s formally taught during a whole-class lesson. That can help them fully participate in every class. A student might not yet be able to decode or encode every word, but they are exposed to the grade-level standards and are challenged to meet the high expectations we have for all students.

During shared and interactive reading lessons, all students are able to practice fluency and build their comprehension skills and vocabulary knowledge. Through these shared experiences, every child experiences success.

There鈥檚 a common misconception that mixed-ability classrooms hold back high achievers or overwhelm striving readers. But in practice, engagement depends more on how we teach rather than who is in the room. With well-paced, multimodal lessons grounded in grade-level content, every learner finds an entry point.

You鈥檒l see joy, movement, and mutual respect in our classrooms 鈥� because when we treat students as capable, they rise. And when we give them the right tools, not labels, they use them.

While ability grouping may seem like a practical solution, research suggests it can have a lasting downside. of nearly 12,000 students found that those placed in the lowest kindergarten reading groups rarely caught up to their peers. For example, when you group a third grader with first graders, when does the older child get caught up? Even if he learns and progresses with his ability group, he鈥檚 still two grade levels behind his third-grade peers.

This study echoes what researchers refer to as the in reading: The rich get richer, and the poor get poorer. Lower-track students are exposed to less complex vocabulary and fewer comprehension strategies. Once placed on that path, it鈥檚 hard to catch up. Once a student is assigned a label, it鈥檚 difficult to change it 鈥� for both the student and educators.

In Rockwood, we鈥檙e confident in what we鈥檙e doing. We have effective, evidence-based curricula for Tier I phonics and comprehension, and every student receives the same whole-class instruction as every other student in their grade. Then, students receive intervention or enrichment as needed.

At the end of the 2024鈥�25 school year, our data affirmed what we see every day. Our kindergarteners outperformed national proficiency averages in every skill group 鈥� in some cases by more than 17 percentage points, according to our data. Our first and second graders outpaced national averages across nearly every domain. We don鈥檛 claim to have solved the literacy crisis 鈥� or know that our model will work for every district, school, classroom or student 鈥� but we鈥檙e building readers before gaps emerge.

We鈥檝e learned that when every student receives strong Tier I instruction, no one gets left behind. The key isn鈥檛 separating kids by ability. It鈥檚 designing instruction that鈥檚 universally strong and strategically supported.

We recognize that every community faces distinct challenges. If you鈥檙e a district leader weighing the trade-offs of ability grouping, consider this: When you pull students out of the room during critical learning moments, the rich vocabulary, the shared texts and the academic conversation, you are not closing the learning gap, but creating a bigger one. Those critical moments build more than skills; they build readers.

In Rockwood, our data confirms what we see every day: students growing not only in skills, but also in confidence, stamina and joy. We鈥檙e proving that inclusive, grade-level-first instruction can work 鈥� and work well 鈥� for all learners.

The Indiana Department of Education is the latest to try 鈥渙utcomes-based contracting鈥� 鈥� a pay-for-performance strategy that hires companies to tackle thorny education issues and pay them largely based on how much students improve.听

Indiana鈥檚 task: Helping catch up from missing school during the pandemic.

State education secretary Katie Jenner said she and her staff looked at other states for guidance on how they solved middle school reading troubles, but found none successful enough to copy. 

But companies and non-profits contacted her all summer offering solutions after the state announced that middle school reading scores fell last year, she said.

鈥淣ot a day goes by that I’m not pinged multiple times by vendors across our country who have the next best thing since sliced bread,鈥� Jenner told the state school board last month. 

鈥淧ut your money where your mouth is,鈥� Jenner said. 鈥淚f you are awesome and outstanding, move the needle. Help us move the needle for kids, rather than us just writing a check for millions of dollars and it still being status quo.鈥�

Jenner鈥檚 not saying yet how the state will structure contracts 鈥� how much pay will be guaranteed and how much incentive-based 鈥� or even if the state will put out a formal request for proposals for the work. But several other states, including Texas, Florida and Arkansas, have examples and lessons on how to do it, as does the Center for Outcomes-Based Contracting created in 2024 by the Atlanta-based Southern Education Foundation.

鈥淚t brings clarity, aligns goals, and ideally creates real accountability across both the provider and the district,鈥� said Mike Cohen, CEO of Cignition, a virtual tutoring company that met many of its contracted learning goals in Denver. 鈥淭hat said, there are definitely risks 鈥� especially when external factors like student attendance or district scheduling are out of the vendor鈥檚 control.鈥�

He added: 鈥淚f students don鈥檛 show up, it鈥檚 very hard to deliver outcomes, no matter how strong the instruction is.鈥�

The center suggests having at least 40 percent of a contract dependent on clearly-defined student gains, though results so far have been mixed and advocates are still refining how to set goals and compensation.

The model is gaining in popularity. After backing a pilot with just four districts in 2022, the Southern Education Foundation now counts 60 districts and regional or state education agencies as testing the strategy.

Whether this model helps students learn more is unclear. Research is limited, so evidence of success remains anecdotal. Because some students usually improve and others don鈥檛, schools typically pay per-student bonuses for a percentage of students, while vendors receive no extra pay for the remainder.

The that about half of the learning goals spelled out in member contracts in 2025 were achieved, with vendors earning about 68 percent of possible bonuses.

鈥淎s this work has started to scale, we’re starting to see that the rigor and integrity of the contracts are being maintained, and we’re seeing more and more outcomes for kids, which is the whole point of the work,鈥� said center executive director Brittany Miller.

The idea of basing pay on performance isn鈥檛 new. Salespeople have long been paid by commissions, while executives and athletes have bonuses as big parts of their contracts. But school districts and states don鈥檛 often build contracts with outside companies around results.

That started to change right after the pandemic when some districts started hiring tutors with incentives as they used pandemic relief money. Two of those 鈥� Ector County Independent School District in Odessa,Texas, and Duval County Public Schools in Jacksonville, Florida 鈥� saw many students make strong gains, while others didn鈥檛.

Duval County is still using the approach, the district told 社区黑料, and now offers 50% guaranteed pay and 50% incentive-based. 

鈥淭he approach is working well, boosting student growth in math,鈥� said district spokesperson Sonya Duke-Bolden, with fewer 9th grade students needing math help than before.

Ector County hasn鈥檛 used the model once its pandemic tutoring contracts ended, however, and is still evaluating if it would use it again.

The Denver Public Schools are in a similar position, after Cohen鈥檚 Cignition achieved strong results and the other didn鈥檛 and was unable to collect much of the bonus pay. 

after studying eight districts that adopted the strategy as they used pandemic-relief money for high-dosage tutoring. Researchers wrote that districts and vendors worked together closely and tracked student data intensely since pay was so dependent on results. 

Vendors told researchers they appreciate a chance to showcase their curriculum, staff or online learning program, but are hesitant to embrace the contracts when results are so dependent on students actively participating and on imperfect measures of gains.

鈥淥BC fosters collaboration, improves service alignment with student needs, and enhances data tracking,鈥� researchers found. 鈥淗owever, financial risks for vendors and the complexity of implementation pose challenges.鈥�

As with most outcomes-based contracts, Indiana鈥檚 will center on struggling students, who often have attendance and motivation problems too, so gaining results won鈥檛 be easy.

鈥淲e’re already working with a population of students that we would deem not at grade level or struggling in some capacity when it comes to their reading skills,鈥� said Anna Shults, chief academic officer of Indiana鈥檚 education department. 鈥淭hese are students that have been probably given a plethora of support along their entire educational continuum, and it’s just still not working.鈥�

Shults said the state will look to the , a part of the non-profit American Institutes for Research, or the , an arm of the U.S. Department of Education, for vendors that have promise. Districts could then choose to tap into a still-undetermined pool of state dollars to hire tutors.

Jenner is also seeking donations and grants to help cover contracts.

Even as she sorts out the details, Jenner is excited by the concept, on broader education issues. She told the committee it鈥檚 a careful way to take on the state鈥檚 reading problem.

鈥淲e will only pay if a partner helps us deliver outcomes for our students,鈥� Jenner said. 鈥淚t’s our responsibility to make sure in Indiana we are getting a return on investment.鈥�

That鈥檚 great news, right?

Not so fast. According to a variety of other exams, including formative assessments from Curriculum Associates and and the national NAEP exams, student reading scores have continued to decline.

So are kids making progress in reading, or not?  

The answer may depend on what aspect of reading you look at. That is, not all reading tests measure the same thing. Amplify鈥檚 is primarily composed of short, one-minute assessments evaluating whether kids know their letter sounds and can understand how those sounds combine into words. Children who master these basic skills are more likely to be better readers than those who don’t.

But reading for comprehension depends on more than just decoding letters into sounds. Your brain might be able to decode words like 鈥渞ibonucleic鈥� or 鈥渟emiquincentennial鈥� but may have long forgotten the knowledge of biology and history necessary to understand their meaning.

Under what鈥檚 known as the , comprehension depends on two factors: decoding (sounding out words) and language comprehension (understanding the meaning of words and sentences). Critically, if kids can鈥檛 decode a word, they won鈥檛 be able to understand it. This is fundamental. However, even if students can decode a word, if they don鈥檛 recognize it, they won鈥檛 know what it means.

In other words, both skills matter. And yet, many states have a disconnect between the policies they鈥檙e pursuing to improve reading outcomes and the tests they鈥檙e relying on to tell them if those policies are working.

Let鈥檚 start with the policy side. According to an EdWeek , 40 states and the District of Columbia passed 鈥�science of reading鈥� laws between 2013 and 2022. Thanks in part to reporting from the Sold a Story podcast, 26 states strengthened those laws or adopted new ones in just the last few years.

However, it鈥檚 proven much easier to change policies around decoding and phonics than to improve more complex skills. A 2023 of what鈥檚 actually in those state reading laws found that they rarely emphasize oral language or writing, and just six states touched on the development of background knowledge. While many of the 鈥渟cience of reading鈥� bills provide additional money or supports, they may not be to affect reading comprehension scores.

There’s a historical parallel here. In the early 2000s, the Bush-era Reading First initiative spent $1 billion a year to change how reading was taught in schools. An evaluation of the program found that it in the sense that teachers modified their classroom instructional practices to be more aligned with research. Student decoding skills also improved by a noticeable degree, but it wasn’t enough to meaningfully change reading comprehension scores. Congress eventually the program. 

States may be on a similar trajectory right now. Each has its own test of reading comprehension in grades 3 to 8. But those are not equipped to measure discrete skills like decoding or vocabulary.

Part of the problem is that comprehension is tied up in so many other facets of language and knowledge. As , how well students comprehend any given reading passage is inherently linked to their vocabulary and background knowledge on that particular topic. If the passage happens to be about dolphins or , kids who know more about those subjects will look like they have better reading comprehension skills than those who don’t simply because of their incoming background knowledge.

So how can states get out of this trap? There鈥檚 really only one way forward 鈥� they need to break their reading tests down into more discrete, manageable chunks.

In the early grades, they would need to understand how many of their kindergartners and first graders are mastering basic decoding skills. Many states now require universal screening tests of exactly these skills, but they rarely report the scores publicly or share them with parents. In England, they do this through a very simple 40-word phonics check that is administered to every 6-year-old. The 2025 results aren鈥檛 out yet, but in prior years more than 80% of English 6-year-olds passed. How many American kids could meet the same standard? We don鈥檛 know, but any state or district could adopt its own version of the phonics check. At the national level, NAEP could implement one as well.

States might also want to copy how and other structure their testing systems. Instead of having kids read totally unfamiliar text passages, like we do in America, these systems rely on a core body of content that they expect all kids to master. Then, they test kids on their ability to understand and make connections across what they鈥檝e learned. No state does this right now, but they could. Similarly, states could take a harder look at their tests in subjects like civics, history or science, which could function as discipline-specific reading exams that are arguably more important for the real world than asking kids to 鈥渇ind the main idea鈥� from short, disconnected reading passages.

Without closing the gap between what skills they want students to demonstrate and what they鈥檙e actually measuring on their tests, state leaders will have no clue if students are mastering decoding or being prepared for higher-order skills. Those same leaders may also continue to wonder why they aren鈥檛 seeing gains in reading comprehension scores. 

Five years after the start of the pandemic, young Indiana students have made great leaps in their reading skills, but the state鈥檚 middle school students are floundering and sinking.

State tests taken this spring have touched off celebrations of progress with third graders, whose reading proficiency rates had their biggest jump in 12 years, mostly through a state program to train and coach more teachers in the science of reading.

But sagging English scores on state ILEARN tests for middle school students 鈥� scores that match results in other states and the decline in 8th grade reading scores from 2022 to 2024 on the National Assessment of Educational Progress 鈥� have Indiana education officials searching for a way to help older students so their struggles don鈥檛 persist into high school and affect their lives. 

鈥淭he third, fourth, fifth grade (scores) are moving,鈥� state education secretary Katie Jenner told the state school board this summer. 鈥淲here we’re seeing the major lag in data are our late middle schoolers, seventh and eighth grade.鈥�

These students, who were in second and third grade when the pandemic hit in spring 2020 鈥� grades in which students learn key reading skills like sounding out and 鈥渄ecoding鈥� what words mean 鈥� simply haven鈥檛 caught up from schools being closed and most classes forced online for a year. Those grades had a big drop in reading scores from the pandemic and have only fallen further behind since.

The pandemic knocked down the state鈥檚 7th grade English proficiency rate from just under 50% in 2019 to just over 41% in 2021, for example. The decline has continued, with just under 38% of 7th graders scoring as proficient in English this spring.

鈥淲e have to remember, these are our students who intermittently came to school during the pandemic,鈥� said state board member Pat Mapes. 鈥淲e have still not caught up the skill set that they’ve lost during that time. This is kind of just what we’re going to see for a while, until we can get their skills developed.鈥�

The answers won’t be easy. The state has a tight budget, so it may need to seek grants from donors who have already invested heavily in reading for young students. And while there are theories about why older students are having trouble 鈥� including the pandemic blocking them from learning to decode and understand words 鈥� experts nationally say there are no great examples of schools or states that have helped these students catch up to use as models.

States such as Florida and Virginia are trying to help struggling middle schoolers by creating individualized reading plans, said Casey Taylor, senior policy director of early literacy for ExcelInEd, the education advocacy organization founded by former Florida Governor Jeb Bush. She also praised Alabama for piloting more coaching in reading for middle school teachers, but said the efforts haven鈥檛 produced enough data to trumpet them as solutions.

鈥淭hose are a few of the examples that we’re looking at, but we don’t have a model to point to as a successful approach in full yet,鈥� Taylor said.

Indiana鈥檚 education secretary Jenner, though, still pledges to offer a plan soon to help these students, using what limited evidence she can find.

鈥淭here’s not a state we can copy and paste, who has figured it out,鈥� she told the state board, while promising, 鈥淥ur eye鈥檚 on that ball. Stay tuned.鈥�

Reading scores in Indiana have been controversial for several years, after they started declining in 2015. Improving reading skills has been a major focus of state officials who required schools to shift to using science of reading strategies in 2023. 

The state鈥檚 Republican supermajority reinstated in 2024 a requirement to have third graders with poor reading scores repeat third grade that Democrats removed in 2017.

The state also started requiring more second graders to take IREAD exams 鈥� the state鈥檚 reading-only tests for young students 鈥� instead of just in third grade, to give early warning of struggles.

The Lilly Endowment, the charitable foundation created by the founders of the Eli Lilly pharmaceutical company, gave the state $60 million in 2022 to help schools shift to the science of reading for kindergarten through second grade, donations that are still paying for ongoing work.

The Lilly donations and tax dollars are paying for one effort that Jenner and others are crediting for a jump in third grade IREAD scores this year 鈥� the Literacy Cadre program that launched in 2022 to help teachers learn and then improve their skills with science of reading.听

Marian University and the University of Indianapolis have staffers that help schools with reading strategies and train school staff to then train teachers. The cadre started with 41 schools in 2022 and has grown to 564 today.

All the efforts combined boosted reading proficiency among third graders from 82.5% in 2024 to 87.3% in 2025, a jump the state school board said was the largest since IREAD started in 2013.听

Schools in the cadre saw a seven percentage point jump in reading proficiency from 2024 to 2025, nearly twice the 3.6-point increase for non-Cadre schools.

School districts that have received help from the cadre credit the guidance with helping them focus on ways to improve.

鈥淭hey basically trained us,鈥� said India Williams, a reading coach with the Evansville Vanderburgh school district. 鈥淭hey came and trained myself and the principals, then we went and trained the teachers, and the teachers worked with the students, and the students learned. 鈥�

But the cadre and Lilly鈥檚 donations were all focused on young readers 鈥� students who mostly started school after the pandemic 鈥� not students who had lost time in class when they would typically master reading skills.

Several national experts say many students never learned to 鈥渄ecode鈥� words 鈥� to use phonics to figure out what a written word sounds like 鈥� a skill that science of reading lessons focus on. They refer to a 鈥渄ecoding threshold鈥� in which students can make sense of words easily enough that their brains can focus on learning from what they read instead of just deciphering the words.

It鈥檚 what some call a shift from learning to read to reading to learn.

鈥淚f a student is unable to decode longer, more complicated text, all of their attention will be devoted to decoding text, and they won鈥檛 be able to comprehend what they鈥檙e trying to read,鈥� researcher Rebecca Sutherland said when releasing a study on the issue last fall. 鈥淭he findings give us a clearer understanding of what supports many older students need to read on grade-level.鈥�

If that鈥檚 the issue in Indiana or elsewhere, there鈥檚 no quick fix.

鈥淎s persuasive as the decoding threshold thesis might be, the wish for a magic wand to wave at curriculum and standards hints at a serious problem: There is no immediate or obvious solution at hand to address the issue,鈥� Robert Pondiscio, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, wrote for 社区黑料 in March.

Middle school teachers don鈥檛 always know how to teach skills like decoding, since they are often more focused on teaching higher level reading skills like comprehension and interpreting literature, Pondiscio and others noted.

ExcelInEd鈥檚 Taylor said bringing some strategies being used for young readers to middle schools could help.

鈥淔or most kids, more time and repetition is really what they need, but they need that from equipped educators who are trained in how to identify, how to plan instruction and intervention to fill those gaps,鈥� Taylor said. 鈥淲e need to carry some of those supports that are present in early literacy policy into secondary or into the middle grades.鈥�

It鈥檚 why states, including Indiana, are having teachers at all levels train in the science of reading. 

More support for middle school teachers might be needed, however, said Robert Behning, chairman of the Indiana House education committee. 

Behning, who also helps lead Marian University鈥檚 Center for Vibrant Schools, one of the two organizations helping to train and coach teachers as part of the Literacy Cadre, is working on a reduced version of the Cadre efforts 鈥� a 鈥淐adre light鈥� 鈥� aimed at middle schools, where students typically have different teachers for each subject, rather than a single teacher.听

He cautioned that the state may not have the money for a major effort for middle schoolers, on top of its early grades work. It already had to trim money for schools to buy science of reading materials from the last state budget.

Behning said there may be ways that money Lilly has already committed to literacy efforts, plus another $86 million Lilly is already offering in grants to schools in and around Indianapolis, that can include work with the middle grades.

Whether Lilly would pay for more middle school help is unclear. The organization’s officials say they are encouraged by progress in the younger grades so far, but would not commit to offering more money.

Jenner, however, told the state board last month that she is seeking money to help middle schoolers, as it has younger students.

鈥淲e believe wholeheartedly that we’ve solved multiple other challenges and that we are up for the challenge there,鈥� she said.

Correction: An earlier version of this story misspelled the Lilly Endowment’s name.

But when the manuscript for J.K. Rowling鈥檚 fourth book landed on his desk, Saylor sat up straight: It was huge. Bigger, more complex and narratively intricate than virtually any storybook ever aimed at children.

鈥淚 had to really think,鈥� he said in a recent interview. 鈥溾�楬ow are we going to typeset this book? How are we going to print a million copies? How are we going to get enough paper?鈥欌��

Bound and shipped, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire clocked in at a formidable 734 pages 鈥�  2.5 pounds. It was, of course, another in a series of massive hits that collectively spent atop The New York Times Bestseller List, ensnaring both children and adults, including most of Saylor鈥檚 friends.

He jokes that until the advent of Potter, 鈥渕ostly no one cared that I worked in children’s books.鈥� As excitement for the series grew, friends would ask him when the newest installment was due 鈥� and what happens next?

鈥淪uddenly my job became important,鈥� he said.

But the book and its six co-volumes now serve another purpose. They鈥檙e an eloquent proof point in an ongoing conversation in the publishing world: Are kids still reading books?

By the time Potter arrived, Saylor had lived through waves of predictions about the next extinction-level event to doom his industry. First it was TV, then video games. Before that it was radio and comic books, once derisively called 鈥�.鈥�

鈥淚’m only slightly jaded by these reports,鈥� said Saylor, 65, 鈥渙nly because people are always predicting that kids are going to stop reading, and that the end of publishing is near.鈥�

This time, it feels different.

Even as children鈥檚 publishing explodes with new talent and excitement from fans , new distractions and diversions are precipitously driving down the share of young people who read for fun. It鈥檚 a long-simmering problem that even the optimist Saylor acknowledges his industry must confront. 

鈥楾he reading class鈥�

Over the course of , from 1984 to 2023, the proportion of 13-year-olds who said they 鈥渘ever or hardly ever鈥� read for fun on their own time has nearly quadrupled, from just 8% to 31%.

During that time, the percentage of middle-schoolers who read for fun 鈥渁lmost every day鈥� has fallen by double digits, according to surveys conducted for the National Assessment of Educational Progress, the test widely known as 鈥渢he nation鈥檚 report card鈥�: In 1984, 35% of middle school kids read for fun almost every day. By 2023, it was just 14%.

The phenomenon is part of a larger shift away from reading, research suggests. from the University of Florida and University College London found that daily reading for pleasure has dropped more than 40% among all age groups over the last two decades, 鈥渁 sustained, steady decline鈥� of about 3% per year.

Findings like these have sparked fears that, after more than a century of steadily expanding literacy, reading is devolving into an act relegated to a small group of elites, a 鈥溾�� that enjoys books while the rest of us see them as, in the words of scholar Wendy Griswold, 鈥渁n increasingly arcane hobby.鈥�

It鈥檚 a strange and thorny problem that in some sense seems contradictory: If you followed around a young person for a day, you鈥檇 likely see that she is reading constantly, but often in tiny fragments. In addition to school assignments, she鈥檚 taking in a ton of atomized content: alerts, text messages, memes and social media posts. All those bits add up for sure 鈥� one that the typical American reads the equivalent of a slim novel every day 鈥� but it isn鈥檛 the same as sitting down to read a book.

For young people, that鈥檚 having downstream effects, with NAEP reading scores slumping even before the pandemic and college professors increasingly reporting that students are uncomfortable tackling long reading assignments, let alone . 

Adam Kotsko, an assistant professor who teaches in the , a discussion-based classics program at North Central College in Naperville, Ill., recently that his students are intimidated by any reading longer than 10 pages. They seemingly emerge from readings of as little as 20 pages, he said, with 鈥渘o real understanding.鈥�

That has put pressure on professors to design courses with fewer readings: 鈥淚 got to a point where I was cutting to the bone so much that there wasn’t even enough to discuss in some class sessions,鈥� he said in an interview. 鈥淚t seems like the habits of sustained reading are not being taught in the first place, in some cases, and they’re just being replaced with nothing.鈥�

While COVID lockdowns took a toll on reading, the problem predates the pandemic. Many observers point to several possible culprits, including schools鈥� fraught approaches to reading instruction and two decades of test-driven K-12 school pedagogies, which often de-emphasize fiction in favor of short non-fiction passages. 

This has all taken place amid the dawn of smartphones 鈥� the iPhone turned 18 in June 鈥� and the rapid, unregulated rise of social media. So Kotsko and his colleagues are careful not to place the blame on students鈥� shoulders, but on a schooling and media ecosystem they can鈥檛 control.

鈥淲e are not complaining about our students,鈥� he . 鈥淲e are complaining about what has been taken from them.鈥�

鈥楥ontinuous partial attention鈥� 

Gabriel Baez, 15, said phones are 鈥渁 big distraction鈥� at his South Florida charter school. As soon as teachers give students even a moment of downtime, the phones come out. Several teachers have begun requiring students to stash them in special pouches during class. 鈥淣o distractions 鈥� that’s the only thing that I think helped a lot of us.鈥�

A sophomore, Baez said he鈥檚 excited to read the science fiction thriller Ready Player One 鈥� a novel about, of all things, video games. He loved the 2018 Steven Spielberg movie, but said most days he鈥檚 overscheduled and barely able to find a minute to open a book. 

He鈥檚 in class from 7 a.m. to 2 p.m., then does homework until 5 p.m. Dinner is at 6 p.m., then he studies a bit more. From 7 to 8 p.m. it鈥檚 soccer training, then bed so he can wake up early and do it all again. 鈥淚 really don’t have time unless I decide to substitute something.鈥�

For many young people, school is what gets in the way of books. 

Julia Goggin, 15, grew up reading books and loving them. She consumed the first few Harry Potter books unassisted in second grade and finished the series by fourth grade. She read a lot in middle school. 

In high school? Not so much. 

Like Baez, she鈥檚 heavily scheduled, running cross country in the fall and track and field in the winter. She鈥檚 in her school鈥檚 theater group, which means after-school rehearsals. Then homework. All of it leaves little time for reading anything aside from school assignments.

鈥淚f a school is too overbearing about forcing kids to read a lot, it makes them not want to read for fun because it’s not fun anymore,鈥� she said. 鈥淏ecause school isn’t fun.鈥�

A junior at a private high school in Wilmington, N.C., Goggin enjoys reading, but said her two younger brothers, eighth- and ninth-graders, don鈥檛. 鈥淭hey never got into reading the same way I did when they were little. Since then, I guess, they’ve just played video games instead. That’s, like, all they do all day.鈥�

Over the years, she has noticed a change in herself: As a kid, she read for relaxation. 鈥淏ut now all I want to do is scroll on TikTok, which is really bad,鈥� she said with a laugh. 鈥淣ow I have to be more conscious: Instead of going on my phone, I have to make the decision to read, which is different than before. When I was younger, it was just a default.鈥�

To be sure, young people in the U.S. are reading words 鈥� lots of words. Perhaps more than ever.

In her most recent book, the literacy scholar noted that research from as far back as 2009 found that the average American reads what amounts to 34 gigabytes of information, or about 100,500 words, daily 鈥� from newspapers, magazines, books, games, messages and social media posts. For a bit of perspective, To Kill a Mockingbird, the Harper Lee classic, clocks in at about 100,000 words.  

While all that grazing certainly adds up, Wolf said, it鈥檚 鈥渞arely continuous, sustained, or concentrated.鈥� Rather, those 34 gigabytes represent 鈥渙ne spasmodic burst of activity after another.鈥�

She said the fact that young people are reading all those words should comfort no one. 鈥淚t means nothing.鈥� The inability 鈥� or the unwillingness 鈥� to go deeper is what鈥檚 more important. 鈥淚 think we have, really, a demise of deep reading, which for me is synonymous with critical thinking and empathy and the beauty of the reading act.鈥�

While the 20th century saw literacy rates in the U.S. , technological developments such as movies, radio, TV and the Internet shifted modern culture away from reading and writing and toward visual and oral communication. One unintended result: at least two generations of young people who see books and reading as optional.

In the meantime, 65% of 8-to-12-year-olds now have an iPhone or other smartphone, according to by the market research group YPulse 鈥� and 92% of 8-to-12-year-olds are on social media, where they鈥檙e inundated with memes and short-form videos. 

Carl Hendrick, a Dublin-born professor at in Amsterdam and co-author of the 2024 book , accuses this generation鈥檚 parents of all but abdicating their responsibilities. 

He likens smartphones鈥� cognitive disruptions to the health effects of cigarettes, recalling that he grew up in Ireland at a time when smoking was ubiquitous. 鈥淵ou could smoke on buses 鈥� you could smoke on airplanes. You could smoke anywhere. We look back on that now with horror. And I think the same thing will be true of phones. We鈥檒l go, 鈥楬ow did we allow 11-year-olds to go onto social media?鈥欌��

Hendrick, who has emerged internationally as a for improving classroom instruction via better understanding of learning science, said digital distractions are taking a toll, hijacking kids鈥� ability to engage their working memory on difficult texts and problems. That kind of laser-like focus, he said, is rapidly disappearing from our lives due to the 鈥渨eaponized distraction鈥� of social media. 鈥淚t’s at an extraordinary level of sophistication to try and ,鈥� he said.

In a recent newsletter, he laid down the gauntlet: 鈥淪olitude, slowness and sustained attention are no longer default states but acts of resistance. And as those conditions erode, so too does the possibility of the moral work that deep reading once quietly performed.鈥�

While social media sites are the latest offenders, the phenomenon is hardly new. In 1998, the sociologist and computer researcher Linda Stone coined the term 鈥溾�� to capture the ways in which the first digital television networks allowed users to 鈥渃onnect and be connected鈥� 24/7. She described a kind of early , or 鈥渇ear of missing out.鈥� But it also generated an artificial sense of 鈥渃onstant crisis,鈥� a dopamine-generated high alert that鈥檚 hard to extinguish.

By contrast, Hendrick said, giving oneself over to reading deeply, whether it鈥檚 literature, philosophy or any complex text, offers something more: a rehearsal for real life, and for the patience we need to deal with one another. 鈥淚t is a rehearsal in understanding before judging, listening before reacting,鈥� he wrote recently. 鈥淭his is not merely a virtue. It is a survival skill for a pluralistic, tolerant society.鈥�

Ironically, one of the big drivers of the 鈥渨hole language鈥� movement was to foster a love of books and reading. But what educators missed at the time was that not teaching all kids to read proficiently at a young age meant reading became 鈥渕ore and more laborious鈥� as they got older, since they couldn鈥檛 handle more complex texts, said Holly Lane, director of the .

鈥淣obody likes doing something that they’re not good at,鈥� she said. 鈥淭hey may love the idea of reading, but they don’t like the act of reading.鈥�

That, to many observers, is the original sin of the reading problem: the nation鈥檚 uneven commitment to teaching reading in ways we now know are more effective, such as explicit phonics instruction, which systematically teaches students the relationships between letters and sounds. Other, less effective methods, such as 鈥渨hole language鈥� instruction, emphasize immersion in texts rather than attention to isolated skills.

Like many educators who are pushing schools to embrace scientific approaches to literacy, Lane is hopeful about improvements in states like Louisiana and Mississippi. But she worries that progress at the elementary school level will be wasted if educators can鈥檛 help students at the secondary level develop the stamina to read longer, more difficult texts. Without that, she said, they won鈥檛 develop into readers. 鈥淲hen they leave high school, even if they can read, they don’t.鈥�

Others worry that the rush to teach phonics without attention to solid background knowledge will continue to yield disappointing results. Phonics instruction is 鈥渢rendy to care about right now,鈥� said Boston University鈥檚 Elena Forzani, but it鈥檚 being enacted 鈥渋n pretty superficial ways鈥� that ignore student motivation. 鈥淲e’re teaching kids to read in a content and motivational vacuum,鈥� said Forzani, who directs the university鈥檚 programs.

In order to be able to read deeply, she said, students need many opportunities to enjoy, analyze, discuss and write about a text and the issues or problems it presents. But when she visits classrooms, she sees students reading short, disconnected 鈥減opcorn passages鈥� with new topics every day, sometimes multiple times a day. 

While more and more kids are getting the explicit phonics instruction they need at an early age, the vast majority are learning to read 鈥渋n a very isolated fashion 鈥� the focus is on the skills. And kids don’t care about that. They鈥檙e humans, like the rest of us. You only want to learn a new skill if it’s going to do something for you.鈥�

鈥榁ery good readers 鈥� and voracious readers鈥�

When he visits schools to sign books, the Japanese-American writer and illustrator Kazu Kibuishi sees this in action. His popular nine-volume series of graphic adventure novels, about siblings who must find their kidnapped mother, finds a rapt audience of dedicated fans.

鈥淚 don’t really buy that kids are not reading anymore, because I see the opposite of that all the time,鈥� he said in an interview. 鈥淚 find kids to be very good readers 鈥� and voracious readers.鈥�

But state-of-the-art digital entertainment has conditioned them to want more from their media. 鈥淭heir minds are encoded to get information as fast as possible,鈥� he said. 鈥淭hey have to turn that off when they go to school.鈥�

Kibuishi鈥檚 publisher, Scholastic, has gone all in on graphic novels 鈥� Saylor, the creative director, even established an imprint . Teachers and librarians regularly tell him that kids read them avidly and repeatedly, 鈥渦ntil they fall apart.鈥�

Kibuishi said he creates comics that provide 鈥渉igh-quality, dense information鈥� on every page, with fast-moving, high-stakes plotlines, rich illustrations and heightened emotions from his characters. His inspirations are the classic Marvel comics from the 1950s through the 1980s. 鈥淏ig ideas were baked into small spaces,鈥� he said.

Creators like Stan Lee and Jack Kirby 鈥減ut a tremendous amount of life experience鈥� into the slim stories, which he compares to little sponge dinosaurs that expand exponentially in water. 

A self-described average student, Kabuishi found his calling in storytelling after reading Ernest Hemingway鈥檚 The Old Man and the Sea in high school. 鈥淚 read it pretty much in one sitting,鈥� he said. 鈥淎nd when I was done with the book, I was transformed.鈥�

The words 鈥渇elt like pictures, and the book was so short,鈥� he said. It was the first time reading didn鈥檛 feel like homework. 鈥淚 felt like I was on a fishing boat. I felt like I had just experienced the rise and fall of this fisherman’s journey with this fish. And it was so poetic.鈥� The little book 鈥渇elt so much bigger than any other book than I’d been asked to read in class.鈥�

The struggle to find such magic books is real, said Kelsey Clodfelter, a veteran English teacher at a Chicago public high school. She teaches students whose skills are often years behind where they should be by 10th or 11th grade. 

鈥淲hen reading is hard for you, when it is literally difficult for you to decode words at the age of 16 or 17, reading is a very painful experience,鈥� she said. 鈥淚t’s also really embarrassing.鈥�

Clodfelter, 35, who has a large said Common Core reforms of the past decade essentially replaced book-length readings with short non-fiction texts designed to prepare students for the kind of reading they鈥檒l do 鈥渋n the real world.鈥� While it didn鈥檛 prohibit longer reading assignments, it may have made it harder for many teachers to assign appropriate books. 

And COVID, she said, 鈥渞eally did a number on us in terms of the transactional nature of school,鈥� sending students the clear message that grades mattered more than learning, that standards in general were lower 鈥� and that nearly any effort was satisfactory.

The upshot, she said, is that she鈥檚 working harder all the time to get kids through reading assignments: She often swaps classic texts for contemporary memoirs, such as by actress Jeanette McCurdy. She invites students to read silently in class for 20-minute stretches. She creates book groups, and even sits with them and reads passages aloud.

鈥淪tudents still won’t read the book,鈥� she said.

鈥楴obody can learn this much鈥�

These days, even the most elite students are rebelling against reading.

, a longtime University of Virginia professor, said he has noticed lately that his students 鈥� 鈥渟ome of the most successful that the system produces鈥� 鈥� not only complain about long readings but about 鈥渂eing asked to learn as much as I ask them to learn.鈥�

Like Clodfelter, Willingham believes the pandemic scaled back expectations that have yet to be restored.

Each year since 1985, he has taught an introduction to cognitive psychology course that has changed little in 40 years. Students read about a chapter a week, averaging 30 pages or so. A careful reading, he said, would require about four hours of work.

鈥淭his is the first year since the pandemic [that] I’ve been hearing from students, 鈥楾his is an unreasonable expectation. Nobody can learn this much.鈥欌��

A leading authority on cognitive science in the classroom, Willingham suggests to his students that they consider different study strategies. Long an advocate for the importance of broad background knowledge in reading instruction, Willingham said he鈥檚 鈥渁ctually cheered and optimistic鈥� that more educators are realizing the importance of a rich curriculum. 

But he worries about the time young people spend online 鈥� recent research suggests that they now spend most of their waking hours , he said.  

That may be the biggest irony embedded in this dilemma: The Internet has seemingly decimated young people鈥檚 desire to read books, offering them endless distractions and opportunities to do something 鈥� anything 鈥� else.

But dig a little deeper and you鈥檒l find it is also doing a lot of heavy lifting, making it easier than ever for young people to find great books and connect to likeminded people who desperately want to talk about them.

Daphne LaPlante, 25, a video editor in Austin, Texas, posts videos to , and elsewhere proclaiming her love of books. She got her start on the app in 2021, in her final year of college.

Scrolling on the popular video app, she realized that other young people were also hungry for conversations about books. One of her favorites, the fantasy novel Six of Crows, was being made into a TV show, she recalled, 鈥渁nd I had nobody to talk to about it.鈥� So she turned on her phone鈥檚 camera and hit record. Soon her videos began detailing what she鈥檇 read each month, and before long she was recommending books. After a while, publishers took note and started sending her advance copies of new titles.

LaPlante now has more than 40,000 followers on TikTok and over 30,000 on Instagram, and jokes that she has become a 鈥渕icro-influencer鈥� in the corner of the social media site known as . Born during the pandemic, it has become so influential that it has both crowned new hits and turned a few backlist books into . One industry analysis suggests that BookTok has changed behaviors: In 2021, the year it started gaining momentum, in the U.S. by 9%, to 825.7 million copies, the most since the research company NPD BookScan began tracking sales data in 2004.

鈥淚 think a big part of getting people into reading is community,鈥� she said.

For the past year-and-a-half, LaPlante and a friend have also recorded a podcast called , about their love for 2010s-era young-adult dystopian fiction, epitomized by The Hunger Games and similar titles. 鈥淭here are a lot of people, like me, who read those and were obsessed with them as a kid,鈥� she said.

鈥業 don’t want to eat the f***ing salad鈥�

If he鈥檇 had a mobile phone 25 years ago, Hendrick, the Irish educator, might well have been on BookTok, forcefully recommending his favorite literature, history and philosophy books. He recalled getting lost as a young man in The Great Gatsby, reading it cover-to-cover in two days. He has since read and taught it many times, but wonders: If he was 16 now, what incentive would he have to read such a book, given all the social forces in teens鈥� lives? With so much 鈥渆asily attained dopamine鈥� via social media, video games, movies and elsewhere, why would anyone go through the effort?

He thinks about what books must look like to his six-year-old daughter. 鈥淪he can read,鈥� he volunteered. 鈥淪he’s really clever, but she just doesn’t want to because everything else is so 鈥�.鈥� After considering it for a second, he finally said, 鈥淪he’s in McDonald’s and I’m telling her to eat the salad, and she’s going, 鈥業 don’t want to eat the f***ing salad. There’s all these chicken nuggets. Why would I do that?鈥欌��

To bring back reading, he said, schools may very well have to do more than just improve instruction and reading stamina and find a few tasty books. They鈥檒l have to get mobile phones out of classrooms, he said 鈥� actually, he thinks buying a phone for a 10-year-old 鈥渟hould be outlawed.” Many states and schools, to their credit, are getting the message and for much of the school day. But they may also have to consider a back-to-basics approach that treats reading as an indicator of public health.

鈥淲ith cars, we mandated seat belts,鈥� he said. 鈥淲e mandated speed limits. It may be the case that we need to say, ‘Kids have just got to read for an hour in silence on their own. That’s just it 鈥� in the same way you’ve got to eat certain vegetables.鈥欌��

In 20 years, Hendrick predicted, we鈥檒l likely discover that reading and, more broadly, deep cognitive focus, offer the same kinds of benefits as exercising or a balanced diet. We’ll look back on this decade, he said, with its easily attained dopamine, its endless mental chicken nuggets and distractions, and realize, 鈥淲e were weaponizing mental health problems.鈥�

A quarter-century ago, Hendrick recalled, after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the novelist Norman Mailer was unequivocal when asked about their significance. 鈥淗e said, 鈥業t’s going to take us 10 years to figure this out. Call in the novelists.鈥� His thing was, we need to get the writers in to make sense of this.鈥�

People, in other words, need books. No matter how advanced our digital media have become, nothing can replace the depth of understanding they afford. 鈥淔or me, when I read Shakespeare or The Sound and the Fury or [James] Joyce, I was finding out what it meant to be alive,鈥� said Hendrick. 鈥淢y struggles were the struggles of other people. And I was learning about ethics and morality. Where are we going to end up without that?鈥�

We鈥檙e often left out of schoolwide instructional conversations. We don鈥檛 always have mentors who understand our setting. And there鈥檚 still resistance in some buildings to true inclusion and co-teaching. 

But when it comes to reading, especially in special education, we celebrate small victories. A student decoding her first word. Another raising his hand to read aloud. A reluctant reader smiling as she opens a book. But those moments 鈥� joyful as they are 鈥� shouldn鈥檛 be rare. And they shouldn鈥檛 feel miraculous. They should be common. 

I鈥檝e been a special education teacher for seven years. And I鈥檝e seen firsthand what happens when we as teachers believe in students with disabilities 鈥� and give them structured, high-quality reading instruction. I鈥檝e also seen what happens when we don鈥檛. 

Far too often, we quietly accept that some kids, especially those with individualized education programs, just won鈥檛 learn to read. That they鈥檒l always struggle. That their reading growth will be slow, if it comes at all. We build systems that manage that failure. We adjust our expectations. And we wait. 

This year, I stopped waiting.  

For years, I cobbled together lessons from online worksheets and Pinterest printables, trying to meet each student鈥檚 reading needs during 30-minute blocks that felt shorter every day. I鈥檓 often responsible for more than 40 students across kindergarten through fifth grade, with service times ranging from 30 to 300 minutes per week. 

I had no curriculum, no sequence, no scaffolding 鈥� and worse, no results. 

That changed this past year when, for the first time, I began using an evidence-based, structured, supplemental foundational curriculum. I鈥檓 not in the business of promoting one curriculum over another, but you can find programs like this from , , , and others. Whatever you choose, ensure it’s research-based, structured, focused on foundational reading skills, and proven-effective for the resource room population.

 My program followed a consistent daily routine, built-in review, and offered skill checks that I could actually use to inform my IEP goals. Once my students understood the structure, they knew what to expect. They knew where we were going. And they started to believe that they could get there. 

Many of my students went from dreading reading instruction to asking to come early. They saw their own progress and became more motivated by it.  

This was the year I saw the most academic growth of my career. 

Students with disabilities face daily uncertainty in school: instructions they don鈥檛 understand, tasks they鈥檙e not ready for, expectations that shift depending on the classroom. This is why routines and procedures matter so much. 

From the first week of school, I taught every group the expectations of our classroom. Together, we created a classroom contract around three core values: Be kind. Work hard. Respect our learning environment. We didn鈥檛 just sign it 鈥� we lived it. Eventually, students began referring one another back to it. It gave them ownership. It gave them structure. 

That consistency made my room feel safer. And when students feel safe, they can take academic risks. They can read aloud. Ask questions. Try again. 

Even for students I saw just once a week, the structure stuck. That鈥檚 the power of routine. It doesn鈥檛 just save time 鈥� it builds trust. 

One of the most important lessons I鈥檝e learned is about language 鈥� and how much of it our students are expected to process at all times. For students with disabilities, especially those with ADHD or slow processing speed, every word we say adds to their cognitive load. That鈥檚 why I鈥檝e learned to cut 鈥渓anguage clutter鈥� wherever possible. 

Instead of giving constant verbal feedback, I use gestures or visual cues. I simplify my instructions. I give students room to think. This shift has made a remarkable difference 鈥� not just in student focus, but in confidence. 

Teaching isn鈥檛 about how much we say. It鈥檚 about how much our students can absorb, make sense of, and apply. 

This past year affirmed what I鈥檝e always believed but hadn鈥檛 always seen: students with disabilities can make significant reading growth 鈥� when we give them the proper support. 

That starts with structured instruction that鈥檚 actually usable in a resource setting. It means giving special education teachers access to curricula that are efficient, repeatable, and grounded in research 鈥� not just programs that check a box. 

It also means investing in mentorship and training tailored to the realities of resource classrooms. New teachers need more than general guidance 鈥� they need support from people who understand their schedules, caseloads, and instructional demands. Educators need to understand the reading brain, the science behind structured instruction, and what real IEP implementation entails. 

Finally, we need to create school cultures where general and special educators collaborate, rather than compete 鈥� where co-teaching is supported from the top down, and students benefit from a unified team. 

As I move into a new role as a reading specialist this coming school year, that鈥檚 where I鈥檓 putting my energy. I want to help other teachers implement IEPs with fidelity, understand the reading brain, and make structured literacy work in real classrooms. 

We don鈥檛 need to wait for perfect conditions. We just need to start with what works, stay consistent, and hold onto the belief that every student 鈥� especially those with IEPs 鈥� deserves the chance to become a reader. 

At first, the visit was heartening. Students diligently worked on mastering letter sounds, blending them and identifying spelling patterns to form words. But as we moved from classroom to classroom, my smile began to fade. By the end of the walk, I was taking deep breaths. The principal asked what was wrong. The diagnosis was hard to hear for the principal to hear, but necessary to deliver: The school needed to check into Balanced Literacy Rehab.

For more than a decade, I鈥檝e helped educators shift away from Balanced Literacy, a common but increasingly discredited approach, toward research-aligned practices. The transition is harder than it sounds, because even when schools obtain new materials and commit to better methods, ingrained habits can sabotage change.

Adopting a new curriculum is only a first step. Real change is like training for a marathon: buying the right gear doesn鈥檛 build endurance. Success comes from commitment, coaching, time and deliberate practice. Over time, I鈥檝e come to recognize several warning signs that indicate a school needs Balanced Literacy Rehab.

The first is that principals think the new program is being implemented but they don鈥檛 really know, because they often lack tools to verify what鈥檚 happening in classrooms. That鈥檚 not because they don鈥檛 care; rather, many don鈥檛 come from early literacy backgrounds, so concepts like or may be entirely new. Managing buses, cafeterias and playgrounds leaves little time for poring over curriculum guides.

Practical tools can help, whether they be that outline what to look for in a third-grade literacy classroom during the second quarter, or shared Google Forms that tag lessons as strong, developing or off-track, giving principals visibility. Literacy coaches can help get these systems running and build leaders鈥� own instructional knowledge. Data collected in this way allows them to identify trends by grade level or across a district and provide teachers with feedback on how to improve their instructional practices. If it鈥檚 unclear whether educators are using the new curriculum 鈥� or how well 鈥� they might as well be teaching behind a curtain.

The second warning sign is that teachers are using both the new and the old programs. Schools adopt a new curriculum, but teachers cling to favored materials from the past. It鈥檚 like buying new furniture but never clearing out the old couches. This instructional clutter leads to confusion, especially for students.

This isn鈥檛 about laziness; the guided reading groups, leveled-book bins and strategy charts that are central to Balanced Literacy represent years of effort and identity for many teachers. Letting them go can feel like a loss, so the teachers bargain: 鈥淚鈥檒l do the phonics lesson, but I鈥檓 keeping my leveled library.鈥� Unfortunately, mixed instructional models send mixed messages. Students may engage in explicit phonics lessons in the morning, only to be told later to guess the word using the picture. For children with learning differences, that inconsistency can be especially damaging. About 1 in 5 students in the U.S. struggle with dyslexia, which makes decoding even . Confusing mixed signals can undermine their confidence and progress as readers. Instructional coherence 鈥� fully embracing new methods and letting go of ineffective ones 鈥� is essential.

The third sign is that the science of reading is implemented in kindergarten through second grade, but that’s where the shift stops. In third grade and up, teachers continue to rely on outdated comprehension practices focused on 鈥渟kills and strategies鈥� rather than building the background knowledge that fuels true understanding. Foundational skills like phonemic awareness, phonics and decoding are necessary, but they’re not sufficient; reading comprehension relies heavily on background knowledge and vocabulary. This becomes increasingly important in the upper elementary grades, when students encounter more challenging vocabulary, including critical words and phrases that are used across subjects but often mean different things depending on the context.

To help students understand complex texts, schools must provide rich, knowledge-building content 鈥� not just lessons on, say, how to 鈥渋dentify the author鈥檚 purpose.鈥� That means reading and discussing meaty texts, writing thoughtfully about them and exploring important ideas in depth. Content matters at least as much as comprehension strategies.

Changing instruction is hard. It takes time, tools and support. Teachers can feel overwhelmed by competing messages, and principals often struggle to steer change while managing countless other demands. But the effort is worth it. When schools move beyond surface-level change 鈥� when they truly adopt coherent, research-backed practices 鈥� reading instruction becomes more effective and more joyful. Students thrive. Teachers regain a sense of purpose. And the work becomes deeply fulfilling.

The path to better reading instruction is real. It just takes a clear diagnosis, a good treatment plan and the willingness to see it through.