In a survey of more than 1,200 K-3 educators in the fall of 2025, researchers at the Fordham Institute, an education reform nonprofit, found 30% of teachers don鈥檛 鈥渇avor phonics,鈥� a major pillar in the science of reading that teaches students how letters represent sounds and how to blend those sounds together.

The number of teachers 鈥渓ess informed and committed鈥� to the science of reading is even greater in high poverty schools, according to the .

鈥淒espite everything that has been said and written in the past few years, nearly a third of teachers still put phonics and cueing on equal footing,鈥� the report said, also finding 鈥減rogress that has been made in some teachers in high-poverty, majority-nonwhite schools are still, on average, less informed about and committed to basic principles of the [science of reading] than teachers in whiter and/or more affluent settings.鈥�

About half of all surveyed K-3 teachers said they teach with a 鈥渟tructured approach鈥� which includes a mix of  鈥渋nstruction in phonics, decoding, and related skills,鈥� the report said, adding nearly one in three teachers use a 鈥渂alanced approach,鈥� where students are asked to figure out unfamiliar words through context clues or pictures 鈥� a practice known as cueing, which has been banned in some states. 

Thirty percent of teachers reported favoring both phonics and cueing for reading instruction and 2% said they preferred cueing over phonics, according to the report.

The report also found teacher belief and use of the science of reading is between nine to 15 percentage points lower in low-income schools compared to those in higher-resourced schools.

Researchers recognized schools have experienced 鈥渟ignificant , , and even 鈥�,鈥欌�� around the best way to teach kids to read for decades, which in part accounts for teacher hesitancy and/or inexperience with parts of the science of reading. 

As of late March, 42 states, and Washington D.C. have implemented laws around the science of reading, according to . But even with these initiatives, some teachers expressed concerns that the 鈥減endulum swings too far to one side and we need balance.鈥�

鈥淲hile I support our current emphasis on phonics, I worry that kids are going to lose out with less comprehension and vocabulary instruction,鈥� one teacher said in the report, with another adding 鈥渢he pendulum swings like political winds. Let us teach. Please!鈥� 

Others felt the shift toward the science of reading has led to 鈥渇ar more non-fiction texts鈥� at the 鈥渆xpense of rich literature鈥� and that 鈥済uided reading 鈥� is out, phonics-based small groups are in.鈥�

For educators more positive about the science of reading, said the growing emphasis around phonics has 鈥渄rastically changed how quickly students are able to learn to read,鈥� according to the report. 

鈥淭hey are happier learners because they aren鈥檛 as frustrated with reading,鈥� one teacher said. Another added: 鈥渢he shift to the science of reading has been huge 鈥� and has profound effects on teaching kids to read.鈥�

The science of reading is rooted in : phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary and comprehension, but most of the conversation around the evidence-based approach has centered on phonics.

Hesitancy around the science of reading is concerning to researchers, said David Griffith, one of the report鈥檚 co-authors.

鈥淎lmost every literate person I’ve ever met remembers getting phonics,鈥� Griffith said. 鈥淭here is abundant evidence that phonics is successful, and what the research shows is that you need to know how to decode words in order to learn how to read. 鈥� If kids don’t learn to do this, then they won’t learn to read, and if they don’t learn to read, they won’t learn much else.鈥� 

Griffith acknowledged teacher concerns about the trade-off of incorporating more phonics-based instruction and feeling students would miss out on comprehension, 鈥渂ut I would push back鈥�  that there is some sort of balance that we need to strike in terms of helping kids learn to decode,鈥� he said. 鈥淜ids need to learn to decode, and then once they’ve done that, there are many other things that we can start doing.鈥�

Griffith also argued having more non-fiction texts in K-3 could level the playing field for students who may not have exposure to certain background knowledge or vocabulary that would make them successful early readers. Lacking this kind of curriculum and instruction has created disparities and affected skills like finding the main idea or inferring for many children, he said.

鈥淎 weak reader who knows about baseball will outperform a strong reader who doesn’t know anything about baseball,鈥� Griffith said. 鈥淵our ability to draw inferences is entirely dependent on whether you understand what the passage is talking about and whether you have the right vocabulary.鈥�

The report found more than 40% of teachers hadn鈥檛 鈥渇ully internalized the importance of knowledge and vocabulary to reading 肠辞尘辫谤别丑别苍蝉颈辞苍.鈥�

The report found teacher knowledge around the science of reading is inconsistent.

Griffith said 鈥渢he chaotic information environment that the typical teacher is subject to,鈥� has been the biggest thing hindering implementation now.

鈥淎n older teacher tells you one thing. Your curriculum tells you something else,鈥� he said. 鈥淵ou read an article online written by some think tank and it tells you a third thing. Teachers want to do the right thing, 鈥� [but there鈥檚 a] lack of clarity 鈥� about points that really should be clear.鈥�

Teachers in higher-resourced schools scored slightly higher than average in their science of reading knowledge and commitment (in the 54th percentile), while those in low-resourced schools scored below average in the 44th percentile.

The report called it a 鈥渟ubstantial difference that will have dire consequences for poor students should it persist,鈥� that shows 鈥渢he fragmented nature of curriculum adoption and the complexity of translating exposure to science of reading鈥揳ligned training into better practice.鈥�

Griffith added that teacher turnover in those environments likely play a role.

鈥淭eaching is just harder in high-poverty schools. There is less time to think, there’s less time to do research on the science of reading or anything else. There is probably not a long tradition of veteran teachers building strong curricula over multiple years,鈥� he said.

Across the country, most K-3 teachers have received some type of professional development in the science of reading, the report also found. Those who have completed those courses have a better understanding of the evidence-based approach than those who rely on what they were taught in higher education and teacher preparation programs. 

Even though most educators receive professional development, researchers said teachers鈥� knowledge of the science of reading declined as the grade level increased, with kindergarten teachers 鈥渆xhibiting the deepest knowledge and third-grade teachers exhibiting the least understanding.鈥�

鈥淭hese differences may reflect the fact that science of reading鈥揳ligned trainings and curricula often disproportionately target kindergarten, where a focus on decoding is particularly crucial. Still, given the number of third graders who are still struggling with decoding 鈥� and the continuing need to build knowledge and vocabulary in higher grades 鈥� the mediocre performance of teachers in higher grade levels is grounds for concern,鈥� the report said.

Other findings from the report included how 93% of teachers use multiple reading curricula, some which still use practices like cueing. And that many teachers reported 鈥渓imited insight into the needs of English learners and students with dyslexia.鈥�

鈥淚f we could somehow improve the quality of pre-service preparation, we would really be making progress, because it is hard to change the practices of teachers who have been teaching for 15 to 20 years,鈥� Griffith said. 鈥淚t would be enormously helpful if teachers got the right message at the start of their careers.鈥�

Fordham researchers called for colleges of education to require instruction aligned to the science of reading.

The report also found teachers in states with reading-aligned licensure tests had a deeper understanding of the evidence-based reading model, which became another recommendation for better implementation. Other suggestions included mandates around K-3 teacher training to be completed within their first three years in the classroom and a push for states to establish approved curriculum lists.

This story was originally published by . Sign up for their .

Students attending Compton Unified School District and Modesto City Schools are improving in reading faster than students in demographically similar districts amid what a team of researchers has identified as a national 鈥渞eading recession.鈥� District leaders and researchers credit years of sustained academic reforms and data-driven intervention systems.

鈥淲e鈥檙e feeling really comfortable with what we鈥檝e built for literacy development. Now we鈥檙e like, 鈥極kay, now what can we learn from that experience to make gains in mathematics as well?鈥� 鈥� said Vanessa Buitrago, Modesto City superintendent.

The findings come from the , a database released Wednesday by researchers at Harvard, Stanford and Dartmouth that compares reading and math test scores across more than 5,000 school districts in 38 states, including more than 500 districts in California.

Researchers said the project is intended to make 鈥渓ocal recovery efforts 鈥� both successful and unsuccessful 鈥� more visible,鈥� highlighting both successful and struggling districts. To allow comparisons across states, the team aligned state test scores with results from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), a nationwide exam given every two years.

The nationwide reading recession began around 2013, according to researchers, and worsened in many school districts following the pandemic. But some districts, including Modesto City Schools and Compton Unified School District in California, have bucked the trend and were among the 鈥渄istricts on the rise鈥� identified by the Education Scorecard team.

Both districts implemented reforms before the pandemic and, importantly, maintained them through the uncertainty of school closures in the peak pandemic years. They also both rely on data from internal assessments to identify struggling students and provide targeted support quickly.

鈥淚 don鈥檛 see us as a district, so to speak, recovering from the pandemic,鈥� said Darin Brawley, 13-year superintendent of Compton Unified. 鈥淚 see us as a district that really used that moment to strengthen and build stronger systems to create stronger instruction, to create stronger accountability, and ultimately, to produce better outcomes for the students that we serve.鈥�

The Education Scorecard team found that 33% of California students attended districts where math scores exceeded 2019 levels 鈥� up two percentage points from . The share of students in districts surpassing pre-pandemic reading levels also rose, from about 18% to 22%.

鈥淚 think you鈥檒l see in that list of districts on the rise, a lot of districts that don鈥檛 normally get mentioned in this national discussion of who鈥檚 making a difference, but we鈥檙e trying to put a spotlight on local leaders that are making a difference,鈥� said Stanford professor Sean Reardon, who helped create the Education Scorecard.

Data-driven collaboration

Modesto City did not have a professional development department until Sara Noguchi, superintendent from 2018 to 2025, joined the district.

Today, principals, assistant principals and intervention specialists from every Modesto City elementary school meet quarterly for 90 minutes to two hours to review and evaluate student performance data, said Vanessa Buitrago, current superintendent.

Schools facing similar challenges 鈥� such as chronic absences or high rates of special education assessments 鈥� are paired together to share strategies for improvement. During Graduation Rate Intervention Team meetings, school teams develop specific action steps that they revisit at the next quarterly check-in.

鈥淲e need to create those strategic pairings so that they can learn from each other,鈥� said Buitrago.

The GRIT meetings also include discussions about classroom walk-throughs and what professional development teachers may need based on what school leaders observe in the classroom.

Teachers also meet weekly in their Professional Learning Communities to identify students who need additional support and collaborate on intervention strategies.

鈥淚n my experience, there are two things that are really sacred to teachers: the classroom space, in other words what they teach and how they teach, and grading,鈥� Buitrago said. 鈥淚 would say that this is probably the most challenging part of our work, 鈥� finding that balance between culture and all this other technical work that is very data driven.鈥�

Some of that work has included a revamp of reading instruction during the pandemic, and of math a couple of years earlier. The district created a new department to help students who are still learning English. Schools also ramped up teacher training, paying educators $5,000 to complete an extensive 鈥渟cience of reading鈥� program called LETRS, or Language Essentials for Teachers of Reading and Spelling. Teachers can opt in to meeting with math coaches who can provide feedback on their teaching, or they can request a substitute so they can observe other math teachers鈥� classrooms.

鈥淚 really think it comes down to creating the conditions for the teacher to be successful,鈥� said Noguchi, the former Modesto City superintendent. 鈥淚t鈥檚 really about building a relationship with that third grade teacher, fifth grade teacher, what have you, because everyone has different needs.鈥�

While initially establishing the systems now in place, Noguchi said districtwide buy-in was critical. This meant consulting with leaders across the district, including those reluctant to change.

鈥淚f you bring them in on the forefront and really listen to their issues and those concerns, that will help counterbalance others within the system,鈥� said Noguchi. 鈥淚t worked and we got complete buy-in.鈥�

The latest Education Scorecard data shows that Modesto鈥檚 test scores grew enough to represent an extra 18 weeks of learning in math and 13 weeks in reading. Nevertheless, the district still has a way to go: Overall scores remain far below grade level.

鈥楽ustained focus and aligned instruction鈥� are critical

According to the Education Scorecard, reading and math scores in Compton Unified District have increased since before the Covid-19 pandemic 鈥� with the only setback being a slight decline in math scores between 2019 and 2022.

Compton Unified is one of 108 districts identified by researchers as improving faster in both reading and math than demographically similar districts.

The district鈥檚 strategies for improvement include data meetings every four to six weeks, where groups of principals review student performance and discuss interventions. Like Modesto City Schools, Compton Unified expects principals to closely track which students are receiving additional instructional support and whether that intervention is effective.

鈥淥ur belief is pretty simple: the earlier you identify learning gaps, the faster you can intervene,鈥� said Brawley, district superintendent.

Other ways Compton Unified seeks to identify and intervene on academic gaps, he said, include:

• Weekly quizzes where students answer seven questions each in English language arts and math.
• In-class, small group tutoring for students who are not reaching the district鈥檚 threshold of 71% or above on internal assessments.
• A 鈥渉eavy, districtwide focus鈥� on the standards and vocabulary students are likely to encounter in the CAASPP (California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress), the state鈥檚 annual assessment.
• Teams consisting of Brawley, directors and principals who do walkthroughs of school sites throughout the year

鈥淲e believe that students must be able to explain their thinking, justify their responses, communicate their reasoning and engage in analytical discourse, and if they don鈥檛 have the academic language that is necessary for that, then that creates a bigger problem,鈥� said Brawley.

Some district teachers have raised over whether the district might be emphasizing too much test prep with the internal assessment calendar teachers are expected to follow.

鈥淲e basically believe that assessment should not be viewed as an event,鈥� Brawley said. 鈥淚t should be embedded within the instructional cycle.鈥�

EdSource鈥檚 data visualization specialist, Yuxuan Xie, contributed to this report. Sharon Lurye and Jocelyn Gecker of The Associated Press, Lily Altavena of Chalkbeat and Ruth Serven Smith of AL.com also contributed to this report.

A new report on whole-book reading in secondary English classrooms arrives at a useful moment. The debate over whether students in school has become increasingly , and at times nearly . A growing chorus insists that American schools have abandoned literature and are trapped in a joyless regime of excerpt-driven 鈥渟kills instruction鈥� imposed by standards-aligned curriculum and testing. Rand brings something refreshing to the conversation: evidence. And, as it tends to do, the evidence complicates nearly everyone鈥檚 preferred narrative.

The report鈥檚 headline finding is less alarming than much of the recent rhetoric would suggest: Nearly 90% of secondary English Language Arts teachers report assigning at least one full fiction or nonfiction book during the school year. About two-thirds assign between one and four books annually, while roughly one-quarter assign five or more. Clearly, that鈥檚 not a picture of novels disappearing entirely from classrooms. But neither is it particularly reassuring. For one thing, the report doesn’t tell if the average number of books assigned has declined, or which books students are reading: graphic novels or classic literature? The authors also acknowledged, 鈥淲e do not know the form their assignment took; teachers could have used the book for whole-class instruction or as a choice for independent reading.鈥�

The researchers鈥� most troubling finding is that teachers serving disadvantaged students consistently assign fewer books. Students in high-poverty schools or majority nonwhite schools, multilingual learners and students with disabilities all appear less likely to experience sustained encounters with complete works of literature. 

That matters, because reading a book is not just an extended version of reading a passage. It requires different cognitive habits: sustained attention, memory, fluency and the ability to remain immersed in language and ideas over long stretches of time. As Doug Lemov noted in a I hosted recently, teaching whole books effectively means cultivating 鈥渃ognitive persistence鈥� in ways that are becoming increasingly rare in our fragmented digital culture. 

So, if there is a singularly troubling implication in the Rand report, it is not that books have vanished. It鈥檚 that the students most in need of the benefits that whole books provide appear least likely to receive them.

The report also contains a finding that will delight critics of standards-aligned curriculum: Teachers using publisher-developed instructional materials assigned fewer books on average than educators using self- or district-created materials. Rand cautiously suggests that excerpt-heavy curriculum design may partly explain the trend. That said, I suspect the authors of the report may be assigning too much causal weight to curriculum publishers and not enough to the accountability systems that have shaped their products. For at least a quarter-century, high-stakes reading tests have functionally imposed a theory of literacy upon American educators that views reading comprehension primarily a suite of transferable skills that can be amply demonstrated on short, decontextualized passages: finding the main idea, making inferences, citing evidence, identifying author鈥檚 purpose and so on.

If that is what policymakers demand and tests reward, curriculum publishers would be irrational not to align their products to it. Said differently, the tests drive practice. Curricula are adapted to the tests. This is one reason I have that reading exams damage literacy instruction: they subtly teach educators to think about reading in ways that are at odds with cognitive science, leading schools to de-emphasize the importance of background knowledge, vocabulary and fluency in favor of a skills-and-strategies approach that assumes reading comprehension can be taught, practiced and mastered via repeated practice on brief passages. This approach largely conflicts with the science of reading that policymakers, literacy advocates and curriculum reformers are to persuade states, districts and schools to embrace.

To be sure, testing mandates in grades 3 to 8 cannot fully explain the decline of whole-book instruction in high school. But accountability systems helped shape the field鈥檚 broader conception of reading itself 鈥� not merely elementary and middle school test prep. High school assessments like the SAT largely reinforce these signals, emphasizing analytical skills applied to . The point is not that standardized tests directly cause teachers to assign fewer novels in high school. It鈥檚 that the accountability era has normalized a fragmented theory of reading across the entire K-12 system. 

It would be a mistake to respond to the Rand report with a simplistic demand to raise the novel count. Assigning lots of books is not automatically good instruction. A poorly taught novel can easily become an exercise in disengagement or superficial discussion. What matters is whether schools and teachers understand why whole books matter in the first place and can confidently guide their students through literary analysis and conversation.

The AEI webinar I hosted last month touched on both of these crucial topics. During the event, Lemov argued that whole books are cognitively powerful precisely because they demand sustained thought. They immerse students in language rich enough to shape how they themselves think and speak. Reading a book requires students to hold ideas in memory over time, revise their understanding as characters evolve and tolerate ambiguity long enough for meaning to emerge.

Mike Austin of Great Hearts Academies made a related and more humanistic point: Books welcome students into an ongoing cultural and moral conversation larger than themselves. Whole books matter not merely because they are long, but because they allow students to inhabit another consciousness deeply enough to encounter enduring questions about human life and moral values. 

On the question of how to teach books effectively, Kyair Butts, a Baltimore middle school teacher, emphasized the importance of building classrooms where students feel safe taking academic risks, reading aloud, building fluency and participating in shared intellectual work.  Lemov reinforced this point by sharing a video of eighth graders reading To Kill a Mockingbird together in class. Their teacher walked around the room, paper book in hand, as she modeled expressive reading, cold-called on students to read and encouraged self-correction. All these practices help students develop their reading fluency, a key aspect of upper-grade literacy.

In sum, good ELA instruction doesn鈥檛 happen simply because a publisher inserts a novel into a curriculum map. Nor will schools fully recover sustained literary reading until or unless policymakers and administrators create structures that signal its value and reward it. For years, schools received the opposite signal. 

The question now is whether schools are prepared to reclaim a richer understanding of reading itself 鈥� not as a toolbox of comprehension 鈥渟kills鈥� or test prep, but as immersion in language, knowledge, memory, narrative and thought.

Annika Hernandez, a research associate in education policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute and a former middle and high school English teacher, contributed to this essay.

Anna Gawf scans her third graders, sitting cross legged on purple carpet at in Springdale, Arkansas, to see if the concept sinks in. It鈥檚 a Tuesday in early April, and Gawf is prepping the class in reading comprehension for a state exam just a few weeks away.

While it鈥檚 a motto all four Hunt Elementary third grade teachers follow, they have achieved some high scores themselves. Hunt鈥檚 has some of the highest in the state, a measure of how well their students meet or exceed academic growth benchmarks in all subjects. 

Principal Michelle Doshier credits that success to the strategies the team created together. Three of the team members 鈥� Gawf, Jami Cheshier and Robyn Hubbard 鈥� have been with the school since Doshier helped open it 21 years ago. They came together as a third grade team five years ago, after teaching other grades. Teacher Lindsay Dees joined the team two years ago after working with adults in the district鈥檚 family literacy program.

鈥淥ne of the things that is so great about them is [the fact that] Anna’s taught second grade and third grade, so she knows those grades really, really well. Robyn Hubbard has taught fifth, fourth, third and second, so [she] knows where they are and where they need to go,鈥� Doshier said. 鈥淛amie has taught kindergarten, first, second and now third 鈥� she takes a lot of the low-performing kids because she knows that foundation. And Lindsay brings lots of new, fresh ideas.鈥�

The four teachers鈥� classrooms are located in a circle in a third-grade wing of Hunt Elementary. Students don鈥檛 stay in one classroom for the entire year, or even for the entire day. Instead, the four educators share students depending on their skill level. Children in Cheshier鈥檚 classroom might move to Gawf鈥檚 for reading instruction because they are more proficient than their classmates. 

Doshier said this practice is used in all grade levels. Some students will spend a part of their day in a lower or higher grade if that鈥檚 where they鈥檙e at in a certain subject. 

鈥淲e used to, I think, have the mindset of, 鈥楾hese are my little kiddos, or my 25 kids,鈥� and now it’s, 鈥楾hey’re all ours,鈥� 鈥� Gawf said. 鈥淲e want to see them all grow. For the bulk of the time, we do have our kids in our own classroom, but we do rotate so much. It’s nice to see other kids from other rooms and just know that you’re supporting your partner teacher.鈥�

The third grade team meets regularly to review academic data and discuss which reading skills students need improvement on, such as understanding the main idea or articulating certain word sounds. Then, they decide which classroom the students belong in and whether they need higher-level reading instruction or interventions.

鈥淚 think we’ve done the best job ever this year of them really being all of our [students],鈥� Hubbard said. 鈥淚’m noticing things like kids in my room have real relationships with [the other teachers]. They will say, 鈥楬ey, I drew this for Miss Gawf, can I go take it to her?鈥� Or they are making sure they say hi to Miss Dee every morning or telling me something Miss Cheshier said to them 鈥� they don’t just go to their classes. They really have relationships with all three of them.鈥�

Administrators from other schools in the Springdale district, which serves nearly 22,000 students in northwest Arkansas, visit Hunt Elementary to observe strategies like those used in third grade. 

鈥淚t鈥檚 been a journey to get to this point,鈥� Cheshier said. 鈥淒on鈥檛 think we don鈥檛 have really hard days.鈥�

Teaching looks a lot different at Hunt Elementary now than it did when the school first opened, they said. Over the years, the percentage of English learners increased from roughly 5% to 35%, and more immigrant students are enrolling in third, fourth or fifth grade without many reading skills. In the last decade, the school鈥檚 poverty level from 39% in 2015 to 60% in 2025.

鈥淢y first year that Hunt was open, I taught third grade,鈥� Hubbard said. 鈥淏ack in those days, it was all about comprehension. And I never had taught a child how to read from the beginning until our population changed as drastically as it did. When I came back to third grade, I was now having to teach third graders how to read.鈥�

Like teachers across the country, the third grade team has also dealt with a rise in student needs and behaviors since the pandemic. All four teachers recounted how last year鈥檚 class 鈥� which entered kindergarten during COVID 鈥� needed more support than any other group of students they鈥檝e had in recent years. The children lacked social skills and required more discipline. 

鈥淚n families, everyone was stressed out about their own jobs, and the students missed out on a chunk of learning during COVID,鈥� Dees said. 鈥淭hey didn鈥檛 learn the right skills.鈥�

Doshier said children who were in third grade in 2024-25 also needed more academic support than normal, and they had the lowest reading proficiency rates in Hunt Elementary鈥檚 history, at 37%. Third grade reading proficiency was at 57% the year before.

Doshier said the team is working hard to build the current class鈥� reading proficiency so the rate can go back up.

The teachers’ work can also be seen through their average growth score that鈥檚 measured by the state. A score higher than 80 means that teacher鈥檚 students are growing academically, on average, more than expected. Anything below 80 means the kids are progressing more slowly than they should. 

Gawf, Hubbard and Cheshier have a three-year growth score average of 90 points or higher, according to school data. A have a three-year average greater than 82 points. Dees doesn鈥檛 have a three-year average score because she鈥檚 been at Hunt Elementary for only two years.

Arkansas lawmakers approved the in 2023 to reward high-performing educators. Teachers who have a three-year growth score average above 80 can earn up to $10,000 in annual bonuses.

鈥淚 was recently talking to a friend who’s from another school in Springdale, and she said, 鈥楢re you still at Hunt? Do you still love it?鈥� Yes and yes,鈥� Hubbard said. 鈥淪he said that Hunt is known around the district as being a well-oiled machine. That comes from the top. Our administrators are amazing, and all the teachers want to work for them, and we want to do our best for them, because they give us so much grace and so much freedom. It creates a really awesome culture.鈥�

As of this year, say yes and impose some form of retention policy linked to a child鈥檚 reading scores, according to the advocacy group ExcelInEd. But the question of retention has been hotly debated as a tool to drive reading scores, with Ohio its version in 2023 and dropping its requirement in 2024.

On one side, research suggests that third grade reading scores are of a student鈥檚 likelihood of academic success through middle school and into high school. Children who behind in the early years to ever get back on track.

On the other hand, it feels harsh to hold students back and separate them from their peers based on the results of a test. Plus, there is good reason to suspect that the children who will actually be affected by such a policy will be Black and low-income.

But there鈥檚 one more argument that, in my opinion, tips the scales in favor of third grade reading laws. In threatening to hold students back if they haven鈥檛 been taught to read properly, states are warning the adults to make sure each child is on track in literacy.

When you start to see third grade retention policies as less of an intervention and more about how they change adult behavior, you can see it show up in the research literature. For example, from Michigan 鈥� a state where, thanks to various exemptions and remediation efforts, the number of kids who are actually retained is just 鈥� found positive effects of its third grade reading law even in districts that did not hold any students back. A Florida found that flagging a child for retention improved the academic outcomes of their younger siblings. One of the study’s authors that, 鈥渢he high-stakes retention signal for the older siblings might inform parents and educators about the educational needs of the younger sibling and induce them to act.鈥�

If the actual act of retention were the trick, these results should be impossible. As is, they imply that the laws are forcing adults to change their behaviors in ways that boost reading outcomes even for kids who were not retained. 

One of the most active champions of third grade reading laws is ExcelinEd鈥檚 Kymyona Burk, who implemented Mississippi鈥檚 third grade reading bill while serving as the state鈥檚 literacy director. Last year, she told , 鈥淩etention is not the goal of the retention policy. 鈥he goal is for students to be identified early and receive the tutoring, the attention, the individualized reading plan to prevent a student from being retained.鈥�

Notably, did not just threaten to hold kids back. It also required districts to administer a state-approved literacy exam to identify any children in grades K-3 who might have a reading deficiency. If a student is identified as being at risk, districts have to draft an individual reading plan outlining the child鈥檚 specific deficiencies and a plan to address them. Schools also have to notify parents if their son or daughter has a reading challenge and provide parents with 鈥淩ead at Home鈥� lessons including guided reading assignments.

Like other states, 惭颈蝉蝉颈蝉蝉颈辫辫颈鈥檚 law includes 鈥済ood cause鈥� exemptions, for students who are non-native English speakers who have been in the country for less than two years of instruction or who suffer from severe disabilities that prevent them from learning to read successfully.

For children who are held back, the requirements get even tighter. Schools are required to provide them with at least 90 minutes of research-based reading instruction per day, delivered through small-group lessons, tutors or summer or afterschool programs.

Some skeptics argue that 惭颈蝉蝉颈蝉蝉颈辫辫颈鈥檚 up the national fourth grade reading rankings was dubious, as some of the tested students were older because they had been held back in third grade (and thus given more instruction and time to mature). For example, three professional statisticians published in January noting that, 鈥淚t is a fact of arithmetic that the mean score of any data set always increases if you delete some of the lowest scores.鈥� It is true that Mississippi has more students than average who are for their grade (54% versus 39%). But 惭颈蝉蝉颈蝉蝉颈辫辫颈鈥檚 rate is the same as Oklahoma’s and South Dakota’s, and Mississippi has much better reading than those two states. Besides, Mississippi has held back more kids than other states 鈥� what changed was the formal tie to a child鈥檚 reading performance.

If anything, states with third grade reading retention policies like Mississippi’s are taking early reading challenges more seriously than states without one. After all, student literacy is not likely to magically improve without some rigorous intervention. What鈥檚 more likely is that doors of opportunity will slowly close to them over time as schools pass them along from grade to grade.

Third grade reading policies can certainly be harsh for the students who are subject to them. But they force schools to address each child鈥檚 reading problems before they have a chance to fester.

Disclosure: Chad Aldeman is a consultant with ExcelinEd on an unrelated project. 

This story originally appeared in , a nonprofit news publication investigating power in New York. .

When Governor Kathy Hochul unveiled her signature literacy legislation in听2024, she stressed that New York was late to the game 鈥� calling it 鈥渆mbarrassing鈥澨齮hat Connecticut, New Jersey, and other states had already embraced phonics-based instruction. New York schools had fallen behind the national curve, she said, and had been teaching students how to read the wrong way.

A large reason for that, she emphasized, is that under state law, districts choose their own curricula. The Back to Basics law was supposed to fix that problem, by requiring school districts to align instruction with research on how children best learn to read by September 2025.

Specifically, districts had to start teaching using the 鈥渟cience of reading,鈥� a phonics-based approach grounded in the idea that reading isn鈥檛 innate and must be explicitly taught through skills like sounding out words. At the time, it was gaining traction as the policy du jour in literacy instruction as an alternative to 鈥渂alanced literacy,鈥� an approach long embraced by New York districts that teaches children to instead rely on context clues for reading comprehension.

By passing the Back to Basics plan, New York joined听 and the District of Columbia in a nationwide movement fueled in part by results in Mississippi, where rigorous literacy laws听 in academic performance over the past 13 years.

But a New York Focus analysis of mandatory school surveys submitted to the state has found that more than 130 school districts are still using 鈥渂alanced literacy鈥� curricula.

Teachers in those districts, primarily in rural and suburban areas, are often required to use reading programs that advocates say contradict the settled body of research around teaching reading. The misaligned curricula could have an especially profound impact on students of color and those from low-income families, who are already more likely to experience reading difficulties, these advocates say.

New York鈥檚 law differs from those of some other states, which require districts to pick from a list of state-approved reading curricula and offer extra funding for districts to purchase them. Others have allocated hundreds of millions of dollars to advance multiyear literacy plans with clear benchmarks.

While New York鈥檚 Back to Basics law required the State Education Department to provide best practices to districts, it entrusts school districts with making the switch and measuring their own compliance 鈥� leaving in place a discretionary system that advocates argue contributed to New York鈥檚 low literacy rates to begin with.

So far, that piecemeal approach has left hundreds of thousands of students learning how to read with widely discredited curricula and instructional materials.

鈥淥ur concern is a lack of urgency,鈥� said听Jeff Smink, deputy director at the advocacy group EdTrust-New York, which recently published听 of the survey data submitted to the state in September. 鈥淚f 400,000 kids aren鈥檛 getting evidence-based instruction, that, to us, is a crisis.鈥�

Smink said the law lacks enforcement mechanisms in part because of New York鈥檚 deeply embedded culture as a strong local-control state, where most decisions about public schools are determined by districts, school boards, and even individual campuses. He also said the state teachers union wields significant influence and 鈥渙pposes anything they think threatens teacher autonomy.

The literacy law, which invested $10 million in teacher training and tasked the union with training 20,000 teachers, came under fire after a March听 revealed that the training program heavily featured the instructional methods that Hochul set out to replace.

The survey data offers an unprecedented statewide look at how schools are teaching elementary school students how to read and write 鈥� and insight into the state鈥檚 progress as it gears up to replicate the same approach with听.

New York鈥檚 reading scores are average at best.听Thirty-one percent of New York fourth graders were proficient in reading last year,听according to the National Assessment of Education Progress 鈥� just slightly above the US average and much lower than similar states like Massachusetts and New Jersey. Mississippi, the nation鈥檚 poorest state, also outperformed New York, which spends more money per pupil than any other state.

According to education advocates, the Back to Basics is doing little to make up for lost ground. 鈥淲e are shockingly behind,鈥� said听Assemblymember Robert Carroll, a leading literacy advocate. 鈥淚f we don鈥檛 do something, we are on the path to be the last in the nation on this.鈥�

In response to a request for comment, a Hochul spokesperson wrote, 鈥淲e anticipate continued progress and are working with SED to ensure that all schools are implementing evidence-based literacy instruction.鈥�

The structure of New York鈥檚 education system means that students in neighboring districts may be learning with vastly different curricula. Until recently,听Celine Schneider鈥檚 children attended school in Riverhead Central School District, where last year less than a third of third graders were proficient in reading.

On the literacy curricula survey, Riverhead was听one of 16 districts that reported not aligning with the state鈥檚 best practices in every category of reading instruction, as well as in writing. The district said it uses a mix of curricula, including some aligned with the science of reading alongside balanced literacy programs critics say fail to teach children how to decode words properly.

Riverhead declined an interview request, but provided a statement through a communications firm verifying that its reading curriculum and instruction 鈥渁re aligned with the state鈥檚 core curriculum standards and teaching practices.鈥�

Schneider said that in Riverhead, students were promoted from one grade to another without gaining basic literacy skills. After watching her daughter fall behind, lose confidence, and endure bullying for not knowing how to read, Schneider said she decided to transfer her children to a nearby district with stronger reading intervention, despite the hefty tuitions required to switch districts. (The district, Quogue Union Free School District, said in its survey response that it uses science of reading curricula and aligns with the state鈥檚 best practices, though it did also report using a popular balanced literacy program.)

鈥淚t was either let them continue to fail, or struggle financially to make sure my kids are okay in the long run,鈥� she said.听

Schneider asked Quogue to assess her children鈥檚 reading abilities, and expected mixed results: Her oldest struggled with dyslexia, and she had just learned her other daughter was going to enter second grade as a nonreader. But the other three seemed to be succeeding in school.

Instead, the results were shockingly similar 鈥� all five were at least a grade level behind.

鈥淣ot being able to read destroys a child鈥檚 future,鈥� she said. 鈥淲e are setting our kids up to fail.鈥�

Educators and policymakers have long debated how to best teach students how to read. 鈥淏alanced literacy鈥� dominated US classrooms for much of the past 20 years, but many schools have moved away from it due to mounting evidence that can lead to poor reading outcomes.

The science of reading, on the other hand, represents a vast body of research emphasizing the importance of phonics 鈥� the relationship between letters and sounds 鈥� in teaching children how to read. While the approach has some detractors who say it pushes a 鈥渙ne-size-fits-all鈥� approach that may not work for every child, studies show that instruction based on the science of reading improves reading proficiency, especially for children with dyslexia.

But whether it can underpin an effective education policy depends on how it is implemented, and some worry New York鈥檚 patchwork approach could limit its potential benefits.

In 2024, 46 percent of New York third graders were below basic proficiency in reading.听Those outcomes could have profound implications: Research shows听children who fail to read proficiently by third grade are four times more likely to drop out of high school.

惭颈蝉蝉颈蝉蝉颈辫辫颈鈥檚 success with the science of reading is hard to ignore. The state was ranked second worst nationwide for fourth-grade reading in 2013 and rose to the top 10 within a decade. Nearby states that followed suit, including Alabama and Louisiana, saw similar gains, a trend referred to as the 鈥淪outhern surge.鈥� Outcomes in other states have been more mixed, fueling debate between critics who see stalled scores as a cause for concern and proponents who argue the reforms need time to take hold.

Under New York鈥檚 Back to Basics plan, all school districts were supposed to confirm in the September survey that they transitioned to the science of reading in their curricula, instruction, and teacher training, and that they鈥檙e following best practices in seven literacy and writing categories. As part of the survey, districts submitted the curricula they use.

Most school districts reported meeting best practices, but the results still show areas of concern, especially in writing, fluency, and vocabulary practices; in each of those areas, over 100 school districts and BOCES 鈥� regional organizations that provide educational resources to districts 鈥� said they were out of alignment. Many also shared plans to improve instruction, including by reviewing curricula, revamping teacher training, and establishing literacy committees to inform programming.

Plattsburgh, Friendship, and Watkins Glen school districts all reported misalignment even though they submitted curricula that align with the science of reading. Superintendents at those school districts said they opted for candor, and that the survey revealed where instruction still needs improvement.

鈥淭here was a relatively large learning curve to get a full staff of teachers up to the expectation of Back to Basics,鈥� said听Watkins Glen Superintendent Kai D鈥橝lleva.听鈥淏ut there has been tremendous buy-in, and we鈥檙e excited to see the fruits of this labor develop over the next few years.鈥�

Overall, more than 130 of the state鈥檚 713 school districts submitted balanced literacy curricula, with the most popular being Fountas and Pinnell and Lucy Calkins鈥� Units of Study, two of the most controversial programs. Scores of districts also created their own curriculum or reported using other programs that have not been reviewed by EdReports, a nonprofit that states and districts use to review the quality of K-12 instructional materials.

Kat Fratticci, co-founder of the Long Island Literacy Coalition, a community-based advocacy group founded in 2024 to promote the science of reading, said some districts are hesitant to revamp reading instruction because they鈥檝e already invested heavily in their current curriculum, instructional materials, and teacher training.

At the same time, the state law does not have any clear enforcement mechanism built in to account for these variations. And the survey results don鈥檛 capture the full picture. Districts have to fill out the attestation survey annually, but they鈥檙e not required to submit proof that their curricula are aligned, and the state doesn鈥檛 provide guidance on what programs districts should steer clear of. Dozens of districts reported using balanced literacy programs despite confirming their alignment with all best practices.

The state shouldn鈥檛 tell school districts exactly what to purchase and teach, said听Tarja Parssinen, founder of the Western NY Education Alliance,听but 鈥渢here has to be some guidance, some support, and some recommendations about what to stay away from.鈥�

Balanced literacy curricula can mask dyslexia and other learning delays, research shows, because they often encourage students to guess words based on pictures or context clues rather than decode letters and sounds. In Schneider鈥檚 case, she said she thought her children were reading at the appropriate level because they would read aloud at home 鈥� until she noticed they were just reciting passages they had memorized in class.

Other Riverhead parents told New York Focus how their children who struggled to read were pushed along without proper intervention. One mother, who asked to remain anonymous due to potential litigation, said her son was reading at a kindergarten level in fourth grade before he started receiving one-on-one reading intervention.

鈥淭here鈥檚 a mantra in New York state: Just wait and see, wait and see if they grow out of it,鈥� said听Yolanda Thompson, special education advocate and three-time Riverhead school board candidate. 鈥淭here needs to be a huge cultural mindset shift. We can鈥檛 fix something we don鈥檛 understand.鈥�

The students most harmed when districts don鈥檛 use best practices are often students of color, those from low-income families, and multilingual learners, said Fratticci. 鈥淭hey don鈥檛 necessarily have that safety net of private tutoring or reading specialists outside of school, so when the classroom fails them, there鈥檚 no backup.鈥�

That鈥檚 true in Riverhead, said Thompson. A majority of students there are from low-income families and around听40 percent are English language learners.

In the survey, Riverhead wrote that many of its teachers are new to the profession and work with high-needs students, and that financial constraints limit access to instructional resources. The district added that it hired three literacy coaches to lead professional development and support implementation of the science of reading, and is evaluating the need to purchase new instructional materials to teach phonics.

Education Department spokesperson Karen Male said in a statement that the agency plans to reach out to noncompliant districts to provide free instructional resources, explore professional development with colleges and universities, and work with districts to identify other needs. The agency did specify when districts must achieve full compliance.

Without holding districts accountable, Assemblymember Carroll said, New York will continue to lose the race to literacy.

In 2023, Carroll introduced a bill called the Right to Read Act, which would require all elementary school teachers to be trained in the science of reading, provide grants to districts to hire literacy coaches, and mandate school districts to choose from a list of approved, evidence-based curricula. The legislation is currently awaiting action in the education committee, but Carroll said he鈥檚 optimistic it will advance this year, citing recent conversations with colleagues and the governor about the need to improve New York schools to keep residents from leaving the state.

鈥淩ight now, in New York, you have to be lucky to learn how to read 鈥� and that is unjustified and unconscionable,鈥� Carroll said. 鈥淲e know how to fix this, and I know the governor wants to fix this. But we all need to work together because this is going to take the effort of the legislature and the governor working together to get this done.鈥�

Carroll鈥檚 bill has the support of EdTrust, which is also calling for school districts to submit literacy plans with evidence of implementation and notify parents if they are using non-evidence-based curricula. In addition, the organization wants to see the state invest听$15 million so that districts can purchase science of reading curricula, and mandatory universal screening in grades K-3.

鈥淲e have to catch up with the rest of the nation,鈥� Smink said. 鈥淔or the amount of money we spend and for how important learning to read is, we deserve policies like every other state.鈥�

Dacia Toll, co-CEO of and co-founder of , joins Michael Horn and Diane Tavenner to share how Coursemojo is using artificial intelligence to support students and teachers in English Language Arts. The conversation dives into how Coursemojo functions in real classrooms and the very human process it took to build the product itself.

Toll explains how she and her team started with the core curriculum 鈥� high quality instructional materials that build knowledge and vocabulary over time 鈥� in schools, then focused on how to ask students the right questions to gauge their understanding, give them the right feedback and then ask the right next question. They then figured out how to surface those insights for teachers in actionable ways. 

Listen below to hear about the professional development Coursemojo offers teachers and how AI makes it much easier to rapidly incorporate feedback and update the product, but, of course, with limitations.

Listen to the episode below. A full transcript follows.

Diane Tavenner: Hey, Michael.

Michael Horn: Hey, Diane. Good to see you and continue to crank on, uh, these, uh, AI tools that are starting to change what learning looks like in schools with you today.

Diane Tavenner: Today is gonna be a really fun one. I鈥檓 very excited to dive in with our guests today, but before we do that, this is our second time making this ask of our listeners, a second time in like seven seasons. And we never really thought this was important or quite frankly even thought about it, but it turns out it would be super helpful if you all could rate or review Class Disrupted wherever you鈥檙e listening to the podcast. And of course, please subscribe to it, and, and we鈥檝e never asked you to do this because this is very much like a labor of love for us, but, but it turns out it kind of matters.

A little bit.

Michael Horn: Yeah, it鈥檚 absolutely true, Diane. And so a good way for other listeners to find out about it. And we of course get tons of private feedback from listeners, so we know you鈥檙e all out there. But, you know, if you can rate it, review it, subscribe it, you鈥檒l help other people figure out as well what鈥檚 going on here. And while, as you said, this is a passion project for us, we do want it to matter and change the broader dialogue so people are having these conversations. And it turns out those, 5 stars, subscribe, beep, whatever it is. Those are a big deal, right, Diane?

Diane Tavenner: Yeah, they are. And then the last thing we鈥檒l say about this is please keep telling us privately the things that we鈥檙e asking you to now say publicly, which is like what you like, who we should talk to, what鈥檚 working. We really do love the feedback and try to incorporate it every chance we get. And so please keep that, keep that coming.

Michael Horn: Keep it coming indeed. This is going to be a fun episode today though. It鈥檚 a friend of both of ours who, deep admiration for Dacia Toll, is our guest today. She鈥檚 a lifelong educator, school builder. She鈥檚 known for her work, obviously in 1999, founding principal of Amistad Academy in New Haven, Connecticut, dedicated to closing that achievement gap and then went on to found, of course, Achievement First. A network of many, I think 40-plus charter schools in the country, recognized nationwide as one of the highest performing school systems and so forth. And then in 2021, Dacia left Achievement First and soon after launched this company called Coursemojo, which we鈥檙e gonna get to talk about today. We鈥檙e gonna break it down.

It鈥檚 an AI-powered teaching assistant, but we鈥檙e gonna actually say what that in fact means, 鈥榗ause it has very, very cool specific use cases that I think people are gonna enjoy learning about. And Dacia, thank you so much for being here. We鈥檙e thrilled to have you.

Dacia Toll: Very happy to be here with both of you guys.

Diane Tavenner: Yeah, super happy. I will say that over the years I have learned so much from Dacia on so many fronts. And so I鈥檓 really grateful to be here with you.

Dacia Toll: Right back at you, Diane.

Diane Tavenner: Yeah. Yeah.

Michael Horn: Well, I was gonna say, this is fun, right? We鈥檝e all known each other and Dacia, you and Diane, you have something in common, which is you founded a school, then a CMO, and left a few years back and now both of you running edtech companies. We may come back to that. I should say you both raised venture funding. Like, there鈥檚 a lot of interesting things here. Listeners, of course, have a sense for why Diane made her job move, in my parlance. But why, why did you make yours? Like, what鈥檚 the founding story behind Coursemojo and the problem you were trying to solve by founding it?

Teaching, Outcomes, and Challenges

Dacia Toll: Yeah, so as you pointed out, I鈥檝e been at this for a while now. I鈥檝e spent a lot of time in my happy place, which is classrooms. Trying to figure out how to create the student experiences and the student outcomes, short-term, long-term, that we all want. And I do think we had a fair amount of, our students had a lot of success by at least the traditional measures. And then importantly, we always anchored in college graduation and launched into a career as part of what we were very focused on. But, it was hard. Like everything, you know, to really get a great teacher in every classroom with high-quality instructional materials and a strong classroom culture and relationships amongst kids and teachers and family and community connections. And then, I got inspired by Diane and tried to pull off project-based learning and expeditions and personal goals.

And sort of double down on, I don鈥檛 know, I don鈥檛 like calling them soft skills, but like the whole package, both as a parent, I now have teenage boys and as an educator.

Michael Horn: I always remember seeing your kid in the school, whereas you were making that transformation. It was so much fun to watch.

Dacia Toll: Yeah. Yeah. So yes, my own kids went to Achievement First schools. And so it鈥檚 just, it鈥檚 all very personal and I, I both believe as much as I did in the, in the possibility of success, but if we鈥檙e honest about it, it took so many things to line up to be successful. And I just, especially when AI emerged on the scene, I thought, wow, this, I鈥檝e been frankly for most of that time an edtech skeptic. I think there have been lots of promises and it鈥檚 sort of overpromise, underdelivering is I think the pattern if you鈥檙e honest about most edtech. And AI felt different. Like we refer to it internally, I know others do as well as an electricity.

And you still have to build the light bulb or the power screwdriver or, you know, the tools that will leverage that electricity, but you are fundamentally working with something different now. And I found that inspiring. And so how, the problem we are focused on, it does feel like it鈥檚 been a lifelong effort, is, uh, reading achievement. Like, as you guys know, the NAEP scores in 8th grade are at the lowest level in 30 years. It does really feel like too many kids are falling off a cliff when it comes to basics of reading and writing. We could debate whether we think that鈥檚 still gonna matter in an AI-powered future. I do. And so it, and it feels really urgent.

And so we are, we have two big north star goals. We are trying to improve reading achievement. Specifically, we focus at the middle school level, although we鈥檙e now expanding to grades 3 through 10 next year. And then second, on teacher efficacy leading to teacher retention. Like we want more great people to stay in this profession. I think a lot of AI tools are trying to save teachers鈥� time. We certainly do that too, but we think we are in this profession because we wanna serve kids well, and that what will motivate you is if you feel like I鈥檓 doing a really good job at this thing that I care a lot about.

Michael Horn: So let鈥檚 dig in then, and just Coursemojo, obviously that tool, as you were saying, that you built using the electricity of AI to help solve that reading problem and boost teacher effectiveness. How do you describe what it does today in middle schools? What is Coursemojo?

Dacia Toll: So, there鈥檚 a student-facing side and a teacher-facing side. On the st鈥� well, let me just say, take one quick step back before I dive in. You guys have been having so many fascinating conversations. Thank you for that. and people should like and subscribe and rate.

Michael Horn: Thank you.

Dacia Toll: Favorably, but what I, you know, I think it鈥檚 Bob Hughes and others who鈥檝e talked about like multiple levels of AI in schools or models or paradigms. There, there is the one that I think is happening the most, which is finding efficiencies in small ways for teachers, whether that鈥檚 grading or on the operational side. And I鈥檓, again, that鈥檚 great, but it鈥檚 sort of at the margins. And supplemental or not actually touching students at all. Then there鈥檚 this second model, which is more transformational when it comes to the teaching and learning experience. I think that鈥檚 at the moment where Coursemojo sits. And then there鈥檚 the third model, which is the AI-native schools. And I did listen to your episode with John Danner, and that I think is so.

AI鈥檚 Impact on Future Schools

Dacia Toll: And my personal belief as somebody who spent a lot of time in schools is that some people will want to and be able to make a leap to an AI-native school that鈥檚 an entirely different design, including in the, the goals that it鈥檚 trying to achieve with young people. But I think a lot of folks are gonna, hopefully make this transition into the model 2, work where it is meaningfully, it鈥檚 transformative in terms of what the experience is like, but it鈥檚 not a different universe. It鈥檚 like you鈥檙e still in schools, you鈥檙e still trying to do the core jobs, many of which I think are still important, although we could have that conversation if you wanted. So we鈥檙e going into the ELA classroom as it current 鈥� mostly as it currently exists, where you, especially in middle school, generally have content expert teachers who are trying to help kids improve their critical thinking about text and their writing skills, discourse, collaboration among students. And we start with the high-quality instructional materials. As you all know, it鈥檚 been one of the, I think, most positive steps forward to really have a quality curriculum that鈥檚 anchored in building knowledge, vocabulary, and reading skill over time. But that鈥檚 another one of those things that we all believe in, but is hard to execute effectively. And as a result, we have not universally seen the gains that we all believe we could. So we start there.

The first thing our team does is identify the hardest thinking part of every lesson. Which we know from the national research on these core curricula is often the part that gets a little watered down or skipped. Teachers run out of time, or frankly, they鈥檙e worried about the diversity of learners that exist. I think there鈥檚 on average a 5-grade-level span in a typical middle school classroom right now, so you can understand why teachers are anxious about giving the rigor of the text and task. So we identify the hardest thinking part of the lesson. Then for that part, not the entire thing, but for that 25-minute chunk. That鈥檚 where, for the kids, as a student said to me, it鈥檚 like the handout is talking to me. So it鈥檚 the same rich, wonderful text we鈥檙e already trying to read.

Adaptive Learning for Collaboration

Dacia Toll: It鈥檚 the same analysis questions we鈥檙e already supposed to be grappling with, but now kids are in partners or small groups, and we can come back to why that鈥檚 important to us, but they鈥檙e talking and then typing, and Mojo is like a learning buddy in that context. And what happens is Mojo figures out what the kid knows or doesn鈥檛 know about in response to that question, and then affirms, gives a little moment of metacognition if they need it, if they鈥檙e, if they鈥檙e struggling at like an insight, and then gives them the next just right question. And we could get back to why all three of those steps I think are important, but that鈥檚 something we worked on over time to make sure, we鈥檙e not trying to replace the teacher, but we鈥檙e trying to, as our great teachers have said, I can鈥檛 be in 27 places at once. So how can we get as close as possible in what a good teacher would do when a kid鈥檚 struggling, with a rich, meaningful question. So the kids are working. Meanwhile, the teacher has a live dashboard that shows every student鈥檚 level of understanding for every question. And so every class is wonderfully different, but In general, 85% of kids are humming with their partner and with Mojo, but the teacher knows right away the 15% of kids who are struggling for whatever reason, could be motivational, could be comprehension, and directs their effort and then sort of tees up for them what鈥檚 the gap between what the student鈥檚 current response and the criteria for success for that question. And so the teacher can, does, go around the room, conference one-on-one or with the entire small group, and push them forward as well. So we don鈥檛 think the AI鈥檚 gonna get every kid exactly where they need to be for deep understanding.

And in fact, we very meaningfully want the teacher to be focused strategically on what they can uniquely do well. So that happens for about 12 to 15 minutes that the kids are working on these close, generally close read questions, could be writing, and then the teacher goes over to, pushes a button and Mojo tees up the two biggest misconceptions in the class right now, and a suggested discussion question. So the teacher reviews them. We always want the teacher to make the choice about what鈥檚 the best use of time. Then the teacher pauses the class and facilitates a class discussion, not about every single question, but about the thing that is most holding kids back, often cuts across questions. And what we found is, I think it鈥檚 85% of kids say they鈥檙e more likely to participate in class after having worked with Mojo. So on both the student side, they鈥檙e encouraged to participate. And then on the teacher鈥檚 side, they鈥檙e more confident because they kind of know what to go after.

And I think this just hits on another point. There are AI-powered learning experiences that are silent solo.

Diane Tavenner: Tons of them.

Dacia Toll: We, for a whole bunch of reasons, we鈥檙e talking about core Tier 1 instruction. We want it to be as beautiful as what these curriculum materials and teacher vision calls for, with more discourse, not less. And then again, there鈥檚 a lot we don鈥檛 know about the future for these young people, but we know we鈥檙e going to need our human skills more than ever. So that ability to work together, both in a full group setting and a partner setting, is really important. Anyway, and then finally it does end with an exit ticket, which is kids do independently, often writing. What鈥檚 different now is kids get, in every phase of this, kids get multiple rounds of feedback and then they revise their thinking and they revise their writing to make it better. And we know that also, like, if you don鈥檛, I think about all the grading I did over the years and like, you just grade and the kids don鈥檛.

You have to revise.

Diane Tavenner: Yeah.

Dacia Toll: So that鈥檚 inherent. And then there鈥檚 celebrations throughout. And Mojo also can make, it pulls exemplary student work, highlights kids who should be shouted out. So that鈥檚 the long whirlwind tour as to what it looks like.

Diane Tavenner: It鈥檚 awesome. Thank you for making it so concrete.

Michael Horn: Yes.

Reimagining Teaching with AI

Diane Tavenner: Literally taking us into a classroom about, and you know, anyone who鈥檚 been in a classroom, an English language arts classroom, what I taught certainly, like what you鈥檙e describing is what I aspired to do as a teacher, right? But I had to use my whiteboard or in the old days, my chalkboard. And I would, what I would call bumblebee around the classroom. Like you鈥檙e just trying to like bumblebee around so the kids are supposedly doing what they鈥檙e doing, but you鈥檙e not giving any feedback. You don鈥檛 actually know if they鈥檙e getting it or not, you know, like and so, it is making, well, in my words, it鈥檚 making the mere mortal be able to be the sort of superhuman teacher that we all want and imagine. And it鈥檚 just like my partner in doing that, right? I can be everywhere all at once and, and I, you know, have this brain working next to me and whatnot. What I know is that well, What I know from you in our previous conversations, and this is where I鈥檇 love to dig in and get a little bit nerdy right now, is I don鈥檛鈥� Michael and I keep pressing people to say like, what do you mean when you say by AI? You know, AI, because I think most people think that鈥檚 like, you know, logging into ChatGPT or Claude or Gemini and just asking a question. And you have gone through an extraordinary amount of work with AI to enable everything you just described. So will you take us sort of under the hood a little bit?

Talk about the type of work your team had to do to train the AI and get it to do the things you鈥檙e talking about and for you to feel good about it.

Dacia Toll: Yeah. This is something I both think AI is a game-changing electricity and I鈥檓 sort of frequently disappointed from a pedagogical perspective, even with the general large language models in terms of how well they evaluate student responses and how poorly generally they do at coming up with the next just right question. They鈥檙e so wired to give away the answer that it really is not the best pedagogical experience at this point. But what we do is, so first we start with the text and the questions, but then that鈥檚 nowhere near enough. It鈥檚 about how the AI, what the AI uses to evaluate the student response. And what they鈥檙e using is not just the knowledge of the unit and the unique text complexity and the lesson objectives for the day, but rather we have programmed in question-specific criteria. So they know if you鈥檙e analyzing this beautiful Langston Hughes poem and you鈥檙e answering this question that you need to鈥� it鈥檚 maybe a vocabulary and context question鈥� you need to know both what the word means and you need to know what it means in the context of this beautiful extended metaphor. and there鈥檚 not one right answer.

This is what鈥檚 complicated about the criteria of success, but there is a universe of good answers. There is a universe of typical kid confused answers, and that can be constantly refined. Like as kids teach us new insights into, you know, something like poetry, we can upgrade and do in real time. But so they鈥檙e criteria-specific questions, criteria, I鈥檓 sorry, question-specific criteria for success, which to my knowledge, I don鈥檛 know that anybody else is doing. Because it takes a lot of work on the front end.

Michael Horn: Now, I was gonna say, like, you have to go deep into these texts, right? I mean, just describe a little bit of that creation process also.

Dacia Toll: Yeah. And then there鈥檚 a whole other reading framework, but we can get to that. So yes, initially it required some of the best teachers we know on staff to do that kind of level of intellectual prep that you would do. Basically, what constitutes an exemplary answer? What are the transferable criteria of that great answer? So originally we human-powered it. Now we have so many examples of excellent human-powered criteria and have trained an AI authoring platform, which is internal-facing only, to give us a good rough draft. But we are still having humans do a gut check basically on, on鈥� we could talk about what that looks like, but there are multiple steps. It鈥檚 like dominoes that the AI agent will tee up different things, and we still want those excellent teachers to go through and check.

Complexity of Reading Challenges

Dacia Toll: But so that鈥檚 what鈥檚 happening on the question-specific criteria. The other thing that we found is essential, which is why I really do believe for at least a long time, the specialized products are gonna outperform the general, like thin-layer products. And so we are very clearly geeking out on reading. It鈥檚, as we know, reading is not math, and it鈥檚 not as simple. Like when a kid is struggling to understand a poem and to identify the central idea, it鈥檚 rarely that the problem is the skill of identifying the central idea. It鈥檚 almost always that there鈥檚 something else about the way that text complexity that is getting in the way, or it could be a fluency issue or background knowledge or a vocabulary issue, and we sometimes wanna say, oh, it鈥檚 a main idea problem, which then leads people to go outside the curriculum and do a bunch of main idea practice, which we know does not work. So like there are a set of ways in which we now have a whole reading framework that we鈥檝e developed with, the good folks from Anet, Whitney Weldon, a whole bunch of reading experts, and it sort of honors the complexity of reading.

So Mojo鈥檚 looking at the criteria-specific success, it鈥檚 looking at the reading framework, and it鈥檚 trying to figure out what does this kid likely not understand about this? And that鈥檚 where there鈥檚 now this light bulb step that gives them like a little hint, and then it asks them the next just right question. And that is actually pulled from a bank of suggestions that is also, was initially human-authored, is now AI-authored specific to that question. So that鈥檚 not even tuning or training. It鈥檚 that the AI in real time is consulting with a set of resources and trying to pull the exact right instructional move for that kid. Would it be helpful to give an example or

Diane Tavenner: Yeah, well, because these have been created by expert teachers, vetted by expert teachers.And so like, I think the thing I want to, and Michael helped me here with the language, but like, there鈥檚 a lot of people, I would say the majority of people who are doing AI products are literally just putting like a wrapper around the language model right.

Michael Horn: With a bunch of instructions of guardrails around the context window.

Dacia Toll: It鈥檚 like prompt engineering, maybe.

Michael Horn: Yeah, not the training you just described.

Diane Tavenner: No, they haven鈥檛 literally taken expert professionals to work hand in hand with the AI to then produce this new experience, if you will, that brings the best of both of those. And so please do give us an example. I think it鈥檚 super helpful.

Dacia Toll: Well, I was in a classroom last week in Colorado, and the kids were analyzing a poem, and the question from the curriculum was, what role do lines 6 and 7 play in this poem? And these 7th graders were like, I really have almost no idea. So to the best of their ability, They are, they sort of, most of them tried to say what was going on in lines 6 and 7. And so what Mojo does is like, OK, affirm, first of all, good job, you know, in your own words explaining what鈥檚 happening in lines 6 and 7. But then the light bulb step comes. This question is actually asking you about the author鈥檚 craft and an intentional choice the author made to include these lines. Follow-up question: how would this poem be different without lines 6 and 7? That is like a 鈥� both the kid is like, oh, I didn鈥檛 even understand that this was about a choice the author was making, like author鈥檚 craft, and then I did 鈥� now I鈥檓 like guided into a process of actually trying to figure this out. And then if they struggle with that, Moja will say, well, what happens before and what happens after, you know, there鈥檚 like a set of additional questions that come out that what new teachers have told us, it鈥檚 one of the greatest compliments, is they do the Mojo activity before the kids so that they understand how to ask a scaffolded question without totally draining the rigor out of the thinking work that鈥檚 required, or how to give bite-sized feedback.

So that鈥檚 what we鈥檙e trying to do.

Diane Tavenner: Dacia, let鈥檚 stay here for a minute, as like a lifelong English language arts teacher. I wonder if I know some people will hear this and be like, who the heck cares if that author, like what their purpose was in those two lines? Like why, why are kids even learning this? Can鈥檛 we just teach them to read? So let鈥檚 spend a minute on how that transfers into the world and why that is so important and how, yeah, let鈥檚 start there. And then yeah.

Dacia Toll: Well, there鈥檚 so many layers to your question. And I鈥檇 love for you as a lifelong ELA teacher to offer your own point of view as well. But I think first we have the question, do kids in this new future still need to learn to read and write? And my, my strong conviction is yes, they do. Like, we鈥檙e going to be processing lots of information, but as we all know, there鈥檚 no firm line between listening, reading, and writing. It鈥檚 all the same cognitive process with each of them reinforcing the other. So learning to read is also a way in which, even if we believe AI is going to talk to us in the future, I think there鈥檚 still like the vocabulary and the, and the sort of way sentences get put together to effectively or ineffectively convey meaning. So that鈥檚 one. It鈥檚 like we could talk more about that. But I also think, I actually do believe we should be letting kids write more advanced pieces using AI.

That鈥檚 a whole separate other question. But if they haven鈥檛 learned to write themselves, I think that is a very dangerous place to start.

Diane Tavenner: Yeah.

Dacia Tol: So, that鈥檚 one. Second, it鈥檚 really just critical thinking.

Diane Tavenner: Well, that鈥檚 where I鈥檓 going. Like everyone鈥檚 talking about cognitive offloading and the lack of critical thinking and what you just literally put your finger on that activity is, oh. I can question or get curious about what an author鈥檚 intention was and why they did something. And that applies to every article. It applies to the 鈥�

Michael Horn: Well, it applies to the AI reading output you鈥檙e getting, right?

Diane Tavenner: Literally. Like, that is 鈥�

Dacia Toll: It applies to art. I mean, it applies to human interactions. Like, why is this person doing or saying what they鈥檙e doing in the way they are doing or saying it? And what does that reveal about them, their purpose? The message they鈥檙e trying to convey. Yeah, I think, I mean, just to, in defense of productive struggle, the brain, that鈥檚 the way we learn. Like if we don鈥檛 attend and focus and think and productively struggle, now there鈥檚 a zone in which that鈥檚 productive versus unproductive. But, and that鈥檚 part of what I think AI can help us get more kids like in their zone. But you have to, you have to remember. And forget and recall.

And these are the ways that the neural pathways get formed in our brain.

Diane Tavenner: Yeah. And I think your ability to like bring this into the classroom every day where it鈥檚 like, let鈥檚 just imagine now these young people every day in their class, they鈥檙e just doing this type of work over and over and over and over again. It is a muscle. You have to work it out. You have to build it. You have to practice it. You know, it will go away if you don鈥檛 use it. And as much as we鈥檝e aspired for classrooms to look like this all day, every day, they, they for the most part don鈥檛 and haven鈥檛.

And I鈥檓 not putting blame on anyone because it鈥檚 just so hard to do. And I think that鈥檚 why you call AI electricity, because it actually enables that, right?

Balancing Curriculum and Students

Dacia Toll: Well, I think so. Again, part of what we鈥檙e doing is going into the. Part of what you asked again, what set me on the journey, one teacher said to me, she said, am I supposed to teach the rigor of the curriculum or the kids in front of me? And the answer is both, but back to the whole thing being a little hard. Yeah. Like, she鈥檚 not wrong that bridging that, much less bridging that for 26 wonderfully unique individuals is very hard. And I think what too often we see happening in classrooms is the teacher, one of two things happens. Either they are so worried about kids struggling, and they鈥檙e not wrong, left to their own devices with that question, I watched it. A lot of kids out of the gate didn鈥檛 know what to do with that question. And so, the teacher holds it for the whole class and they ask the question and maybe, maybe 3 kids answer and then they move on.

And then the next question, same thing. And frankly, intellectual engagement is optional. For the other 24 kids in the room. And some of them are probably paying attention. Some of them, this is middle school, may not be or they鈥檙e going in and out of attention. The other option is I give it to them on a handout and kids are set to struggle and they put down the best answer they can. They put down the literal comprehension of those lines of poetry and then they move on.

Diane Tavenner: Yep.

Dacia Toll: The difference now is every kid is answering every single question. And intellectually grappling with it, and they鈥檙e getting real-time feedback that allows them to revise their thinking and their writing, and they get closer to encoding success before they move on. Cognitively, that鈥檚 a very different experience. Yeah.

Michael Horn: Yeah. I was gonna say the headline I鈥檓 taking away from this, right, is everyone鈥檚 worried right now about AI and cognitive offloading. You actually have used it to do the exact opposite, which is to make sure no one escapes this cognitive work and struggle, which is a significantly different use of use case of AI, but it鈥檚 significantly different use case of the classroom in a lot of average schools across the country right now. It leads into the question I have, which I鈥檓 just curious, like, is it hard for schools to figure out how to use Coursemojo? What does that on-ramp look like? Do they think of it as AI? Do they think of it as like an engaging digital learning activity? Are you, are you getting caught up in the backlash against edtech and the overpromising and underdelivering? Like, how is that all playing out?

Dacia Toll: Yeah. I personally lead a lot of teacher PD. I just love doing it and I learn a lot from it and it鈥檚 kind of fun to show up and we have a phenomenal partnership with Jackson, Mississippi and I was their leading teacher PD and they鈥檙e so nice. Like teachers are so nice. They come in, they, but the truth is they鈥檙e looking at me like, who is this lady? And it didn鈥檛 help that all they were told is like, come and learn about a new AI tool aligned to the curriculum. Like, That does not inspire confidence in the vast majority of teachers. And one of the things that鈥檚 wonderful is they actually have a significant number of experienced teachers. So it was actually teachers who had been teaching for a while and they start out a little side-eyed, like they鈥檙e nice, but they鈥檙e like, eh, skeptical.

And the first thing we do, like within the first 15 minutes of the PD, is they become students in a Mojo-powered classroom. And it鈥檚 often a text because it鈥檚 a curriculum that they鈥檝e taught. And we start normally with, you know, we give, serve up a very challenging one. I remember in this case it was historical fiction about westward expansion, and they were like, 鈥淥oh, the kids really struggled with this one.鈥� And 5th grade. And then the teachers get into it and they realize how delightful it is. I mean, one thing I do really want to emphasize is we care a lot about joy and you should love reading. This should not be, yes, it鈥檚 cognitive and you have to productively struggle. But we are often like Mojo and the, and the way it鈥檚 organized, we鈥檙e taking delight in the text and the insights and the combination of affirmation.

And then when you get a partially correct or fully correct answer, Mojo has like just little emojis, like hundreds of them that sort of like your message the same way it would on social media or texting. And the kids love that. Like, oh, I got the little man on the surfboard or the muscle. And, and then if you get a 3 out of 3 on your writing after multiple rounds of revision, you get different gifts. And I saw a llama on a surfboard yesterday. And like, it鈥檚 the digital sticker. Like, we don鈥檛 overly gamify. They鈥檒l never be playing Asteroid Blasters or whatever in reading class, but We believe in recognizing quality thinking and quality work, you know, the same way a great teacher does that praise.

And we make it easy for teachers to celebrate kids too. That鈥檚 even more meaningful. But the point is the teachers start out in this skeptical place and then they experience it and they experience the delight of my ability to identify who needs help and make my way over to them or facilitate the class discussion. And the other thing I would say is because they have this live dashboard teachers have told us they鈥檙e more comfortable letting kids work together in partners in small groups. Which I also think is something that I鈥檓 anxious about is there鈥檚 not enough of in classes in this, especially in this AI future. And because now they have, as a teacher said to me, eyes everywhere. They know immediately if that group in the back that鈥檚 gotten good at looking like they鈥檙e working is not actually working. So that鈥檚 important.

Improving Instructional Effectiveness

Dacia Toll: I think in terms of what鈥檚 hard, we also have the pleasure of working in New York City, and I was walking classrooms there with some coaches, and we were identifying that some of the small group work could be more effective. They were just happy it was happening, but they want鈥� with it, it could be more effective, and that the full class discussion could also be more effective. Those are things they said their work鈥� I mean, New York City has seen great gains with New York City Reads. But that鈥檚 the thing, that鈥檚 what they鈥檙e working on already. Like that鈥檚 the same way we鈥檙e all trying to improve effective instruction. Yeah. And I think the feeling was in the moment Mojo is nudging those behaviors to be enabling and nudging, but that there still is a level of teacher training and expertise that has to run alongside. So we鈥檙e asking ourselves, how could we support that even more in the context of the product with suggestions and sort of additional insight in real time.

But that鈥檚 really the hard part. I would say logging in is smooth and easy because of all single sign-ins. The dashboard is clear and intuitive. It鈥檚 colors that direct you where you need to go. So that鈥檚 not the hard part. It鈥檚 teaching and helping. We鈥檙e giving an alley-oop, but the teacher still has to execute some of those, those effectiveness moves.

Diane Tavenner: Dacia, along those lines, I think about this often, and I don鈥檛 want to give you heart palpitations because it gives me heart palpitations, but if you were back leading a network of schools again, like we, we used to, and I know neither of us, that鈥檚 not our chapter of life right now, but if you were there at this moment, what other opportunities besides this one, because clearly this is a need and you鈥檙e passionate about, like what else are you seeing in the world that you would be hopping on and wanting to bring into your schools and your network? What鈥檚 the sort of low-hanging fruit that you鈥檇 be going after?

Dacia Toll: Yeah, well, I think those are two different questions. Low-hanging fruit versus, I mean, what you inspired me to do, Diane, oh my gosh, more than a decade ago, was to create a whole new school model. And I do think back to this model 1, model 2, model 3. I mean, we鈥檙e all finding incredible efficiencies just by using AI and finance, the operations that there鈥檚 so many ways in which we should be doing that. And I am for saving teachers鈥� time. I鈥檓 most interested in the space I鈥檓 in, which is like, how do we improve the core teaching and learning? And I think those have to be in some level student-facing because, yeah. And I know there鈥檚 been some resistance to that and it has to be safe and, and pedagogically strong, but I would be trying to create a new model as well.

AI-Powered Learning Transformation

Dacia Toll: And I think that I don鈥檛 think it, you take it, you know, what we did inspired by you was first one school and then three schools. But I have the pleasure of being a part of a CIPRI fellowship, and they asked us to redesign, you know, to design a school, if we could, or a school model based on what we know now. And I do think the emphasis鈥� I still believe knowledge matters. I still believe core skills matter. And the emphasis has shifted for me, like entrepreneurship, creativity, the human connection skills, leadership, judgment, ethics. And I think because we can potentially have the AI-powered learning experiences be so much more effective, I think that opens up more time for, I know a personal favorite of yours, project-based learning. I think there鈥檚 a way for AI to be embedded coaches in projects so that we, they were always so darn hard to pull off. But I think what鈥檚 exciting to me about this chapter, and the first thing we鈥檙e always talking to district leaders about and they鈥檙e talking to each other about is, Start with what鈥檚 your vision? What are your goals? What鈥檚 your vision? What are your values? And now increasingly AI can power a lot of that.

Now it takes this kind of specific design the way we鈥檝e done it. I don鈥檛 mean to imply like you can go to ChatGPT and it will run your school for you. Like that is not how it鈥檚 gonna work. But if you decide we鈥檙e committed to project-based learning based on a knowledge graph, that can be powered now. And I鈥檓 hopeful that there鈥檒l be more and more products that are trying to bring more and more of these experiences to life.

Michael Horn: Let me ask one last question. And Diane, I want you to answer this as well. So it鈥檚 a question for both of you. You didn鈥檛 wanna give yourself PTSD on running a network again. But, but, you know, we鈥檝e talked about it, like you both founded schools, you both founded charter networks, you both had distinctive philosophies, enjoyed success. You both left, founded edtech companies. I鈥檓 just, I鈥檇 love to hear one reflection that you both have from being on the other side, if you will, on the edtech company side, or a company that provides to schools. You can view it either way.

One reflection that your school network founder self would have been surprised by at the time. Both of you, I鈥檇 love to hear your reflections.

Dacia Toll: Do you want to go first, Diane?

Diane Tavenner: I鈥檓 thinking, I鈥檓 thinking.

Dacia Toll: I will just say. There鈥檚 so many things, but what I was, it took a while for me to build new muscles, frankly, because initially what, what, particularly when you were running a system that got into a certain size, like as you said, we were 41 schools when I left, you had to set these big multi-year priorities and goals and you had to go after them in a sustained focus kind of way. And it was a lot about. Keeping this large organization aligned around the pursuit of those goals and cascading communication and systems to support this. And this is fast and iterative and responsive. And if we had tried to write a 2-year product roadmap, it would鈥檝e been so painfully wrong. And so we start with vision and values. I鈥檓 not saying you don鈥檛 start with vision and values.

But then part of why I鈥檓 spending so much time in schools right now is watching and listening to kids and teachers and both what鈥檚 causing them friction in the moment and what their aspirations are. Like, what are they trying to get done they can鈥檛 get done? And then that literally dictates our product roadmap in the most wonderful way. And it鈥檚 really a code鈥� we consider our school partners co-designers with us. Like it is that we鈥檙e running design input sessions with them about next future-facing things. Like it is fun and then the tech is just moving so fast.

Diane Tavenner: Yeah.

Dacia Toll: So like our ability to now have an agent that takes the do, all the work from today and creates your do now for you the next day in all of these things, like this is now that鈥檚 so different than it was 4 months ago.

Michael Horn: Wow.

Diane Tavenner: Wow. Yeah. That, that totally resonates with me, sort of the misalignment between how quickly well-run schools and systems can run and how fast you know, actually I should say how slowly that moves, even though you think it鈥檚 moving so fast as a school or network leader. And then this outside world is just going at a different rate and pace. And the co-building obviously resonates. I think what I think we鈥檙e in this moment in time right now where it鈥檚 really, I appreciate school and network leaders who are trying to think about streamlining and focusing and only partnering with so many people and not having a million platforms and how does it all integrate and whatnot. And I think the truth is that鈥檚 just not the reality yet. I think we should be striving to get there, but if we don鈥檛 kind of open ourselves up to what Dacia鈥檚 doing in this one little space and what other people鈥� how do we actually ever pull together a model that has the best in class of everything versus just sort of this one generic, not good at anything approach? And so there鈥檚 a real tension there I鈥檓 feeling.

And on the tech founder side now, I鈥檓 like, how do I collaborate with, how do I build a community on our side that makes it more thoughtful and doable for the schools? And then on the school side, I would invite them to think about how do we, you know, sort of work more expansively right now while we collectively, you know, bring into the, our space all the possibility and then move to, I think, more coherent and elegant models over time. I鈥檓 not sure that was a-

Michael Horn: No it鈥檚 one of the hypotheses when we started Entangled Ventures back in 2015 or whatever it was, that and this was higher ed, but it was similar, which is like, you know, Arizona State University is getting pitches from like how many hundreds of companies every single day. They throw up their hands and they鈥檙e like, I won鈥檛 say the name of a textbook publisher, but we鈥檒l go with them. We know every product is sort of mediocre, but like they鈥檝e got everything. It鈥檚 just simpler. Right. And how do you bring forth a portfolio of, of best in class to an organization to simplify procurement and all that messiness?

Diane Tavenner: Yeah.

Michael Horn: But also give them confidence that they鈥檙e getting the best.

Dacia Toll: Well, I would say two things on that front. I don鈥檛 envy the tsunami of pitches that land in, I mean, I, it鈥檚 bad for me that the amount of AI-powered marketing now that lands in my inbox. And so this is, I think, a huge issue. And the more that others can step in and help school leaders make sense of all the different use cases, and again, what鈥檚 aligned to their vision and values. And then we haven鈥檛 talked yet about outcomes, but the North Star for us, as somebody who鈥檚 focused on ELA achievement, is, is ELA achievement improving? And we have actually a number of outcomes-based contracts aligned to that, which I know can be scary.

Michael Horn: So you鈥檝e put your money, but you鈥檝e put your money where your mouth is.

Dacia Toll: Yes.

Michael Horn: Yeah.

ELA Improvement with Mojo

Dacia Toll: And, and it鈥檚, and we have seen, thankfully, huge improvements. I mean, as somebody who spent my entire life trying to improve ELA achievement and, and actually somewhat and successfully improving, it was always like 3 percentage points a year as reflected on the imperfect but consequential state tests. And we鈥檝e seen across multiple partners, 6, 8, 10 percentage points on state tests in a single year. And, that鈥檚 not normal when it comes to鈥� and, I think on some level, maybe it鈥檚 not surprising because we鈥檙e getting every kid to do the cognitive thinking. Those results are based on using Mojo 2 to 3 times per week. And, in general, we have much higher uptake and usage because it鈥檚 a core tier 1 because it鈥檚 everything else. But, I think it鈥檚 only Amira and Coursemojo on the reading side that have multiple independent efficacy studies. So, that鈥檚 not even just us, that鈥檚 ESSA Tier 2 research studies now that show that.

And I think people say, maybe this is why Diane and I, coming from the seats we were in, they said sometimes ed tech folks like, it鈥檚 too soon to evaluate impact. And I鈥檓 like, I just鈥� kids are spending an entire year of their life in one of the most consequential classes of ELA, and we鈥檙e saying we can鈥檛 evaluate impact? Like, yes, the product is very different at the end of the year, thanks to all the feedback we鈥檝e gotten along the way, but we still had this precious time with kids. Did it or did it not improve the core thing we鈥檙e trying to go after together? So, yeah.

Michael Horn: No, I think that鈥檚 very well said. All right.

Diane Tavenner: Yeah.

Michael Horn: Let鈥檚 wrap the conversation. We could clearly talk to you for a long time, but we鈥檝e got one more segment before we do that.

Michael Horn: And before we let you go, Dacia, the fun segment we always have is something we鈥檝e been reading, watching, listening to.

We try to get outside of education, but as Diane and I often note, we fail probably about half the time. So we鈥檒l let you go wherever, wherever you go on this.

Dacia Toll: I am reading and thinking and listening to a lot of education-focused stuff. I would say one quick on the work thing, Lenny鈥檚 podcast has taught a tremendous amount about鈥� I, as somebody who was making a transition into product and tech, I feel like it鈥檚 my weekly tutorial. But I also, we mentioned my teenage boys, so I try to spend some of that time with them and they鈥檙e getting me into anime. And so I just finished Death Note.

Michael Horn: That I didn鈥檛 have that on my checklist for you. OK.

Dacia Toll: No. Well, I, I have never watched anime before, but if it鈥檚 an opportunity for me to hang out with teenagers and then and you know, they鈥檙e pretty great stories of like heroes and even more, they鈥檙e kind of into the anti-hero, which then leads to a whole bunch of good conversations.

Diane Tavenner: That鈥檚 awesome. I love that. Anything that I can connect with my kiddos on is definitely something I will do. In this particular case today, I鈥檓 going to recommend a documentary film which is nominated for an Oscar, and this was my husband鈥檚 pitch to me, which was, I will say, not very compelling, which is there鈥檚 this new film out and it鈥檚 about death, and I really want to watch it. And then I think you鈥檒l like it because apparently you also laugh at it. And I was like, wow, that鈥檚 not compelling at all. But it turns out that Come See Me in the Good Light is actually an extraordinary film.

Diane Tavenner: And it is the relationship of two poets who have these really interesting backstories and, and one of them is diagnosed with cancer. And I think he was wrong. I don鈥檛 think it鈥檚 about death. I think it鈥檚 about living and it鈥檚 a really beautiful film for this moment in time. So I recommend it.

Michael Horn: I was gonna say it sounded like a Shelly Kagan Yale, sort of course, the way you started to pitch it and then you changed that up on us. But I鈥檓 going to go a totally different direction because you鈥檙e outpacing me at the moment, Diane. But as I said in our last episode, it鈥檚 America鈥檚 250th. And I鈥檓 going to give my brother a shameless plug on this one. I know we both read a lot on, you know, outside of our day jobs, but this one鈥檚 a little bit more personal because it鈥檚 my brother, Jonathan Horn. He鈥檚 been writing This Week in American History for the Free Press. It鈥檚 a weekly column, comes out on Wednesdays. It鈥檚 a fresh look at history that 

I鈥檝e really enjoyed.

He names events happening around the country to commemorate, celebrate the 250th, including an event in Dorchester near me, which has helped us plan some outings with my kids, which has been super fun. But it was actually his piece on Thomas Jefferson a few weeks back that I highly recommend to all of our friends for its bigger messages and perspectives on the state of our union then, but also the state of our union now. And so highly recommend.

And I鈥檒l just say, Dacia, huge thank you again. This was a fantastic conversation. We鈥檙e lucky you鈥檙e working on this. And for all of you, our listeners, keep the feedback coming both publicly and privately, and we鈥檒l see you next time on Class Disrupted.

This episode is sponsored by LearnerStudio.

You cannot claim to support literacy while slashing the very programs that help children become readers, stay healthy and succeed in school.

For more than two decades, I have worked alongside families as a social worker, nonprofit leader and education advocate. Today, I lead Families In Schools, a nonprofit that equips parents with the tools, knowledge and confidence to support their children鈥檚 learning. I have seen firsthand what happens when families have the support they need 鈥� and what happens when they do not.

The parents we work with remind me of my own parents. My father came to this country through the Bracero program and, like so many parents, trusted public schools to create opportunities for his children. I was the first in my family to graduate from college. That should not be the exception for children in communities like mine.

I benefited from programs that helped me succeed. Today, too many families risk losing those same opportunities.

The president鈥檚 Fiscal Year 2027 budget proposal would take 17 education programs that families rely on and roll them into a single block grant, cutting their funding from $6.47 billion to just $2 billion.

This is not reform. It is a dismantling.

Under this proposal, funding would no longer be dedicated to specific programs. Instead, states would receive significantly reduced amounts of money, with broad discretion over how it is spent. There would be no requirement to maintain investments in afterschool activities that keep children safe while parents work, college access programs like TRIO and Gear UP, community schools, family engagement efforts, academic supports and services for homeless children.

Programs like these aid more than 26 million students from low-income families. With reduced funding and no dedicated protections, they would be pitted against one another, and many would be at risk of disappearing altogether. But these programs are not extras; they are lifelines.

Families and educators know exactly what these cuts could mean.

They could mean parents working a second job scrambling to find somewhere safe for their child to go after school. They could mean English learners losing critical assistance in the classroom, or community schools having to cut back on health care, counseling, food assistance and other basic services that enable children to learn.

And they could mean family engagement 鈥� one of the most powerful drivers of student success 鈥� being pushed even further to the margins.

Parents are children鈥檚 first teachers and their most fierce and stalwart advocates. Literacy development begins at birth, in play and conversation with caregivers. Kids learn to love reading when people they love read to them. If they are struggling or falling behind, it鈥檚 usually the parents or caregivers who fight to make sure they get the help they need, whether that means demanding testing, changing schools or finding tutoring and afterschool activities. Children do not learn in a vacuum. They learn best when their families have the tools, information and resources to be active partners in their education.

The programs on the chopping block have been in place for decades, and they define 鈥渆vidence-based.鈥� They have been evaluated, showing improvements in attendance, academic outcomes and the ability of families to better support their children鈥檚 success.

Walking away from them puts that progress at risk.

States and local districts cannot absorb cuts of this . Families cannot simply make up the difference with time they do not have, money they cannot spare or resources that may not exist.

Parents, educators and policymakers all want children to read, succeed in school and build better futures for themselves. But literacy cannot just be a slogan, and literacy skills cannot be learned if children鈥檚 overall developmental needs are not met.

If children are truly to succeed, Congress should reject the president’s proposed cuts and protect the programs students and families rely on every day.

OKLAHOMA CITY 鈥� Major changes to early childhood reading policies, including a return to strict third-grade retention, are now law in Oklahoma after .

Gov. Kevin Stitt signed while surrounded by state leaders and students at John W. Rex Charter Elementary on Tuesday morning. Multiple children at the downtown Oklahoma City school asked for the governor鈥檚 pens as a souvenir.

The legislation implements stricter requirements, starting in the 2026-27 academic year, for public schools to intervene when students fall behind grade-level expectations in reading. Third graders who score below a basic level on state reading tests and fail a second state-approved literacy assessment would be held back from advancing to fourth grade, unless they meet limited criteria for an exemption.

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

鈥淭his is about early support, strong instruction and giving parents the information that they need to stay involved in their child鈥檚 progress,鈥� Stitt said. 鈥淎nd it ensures that when a student is struggling, we act quickly before that gap becomes a lifelong challenge.鈥�

About 27% of Oklahoma students scored at or above their grade level in English language arts last school year while 36% scored below basic, . Below basic is the lowest category and indicates a student is not on track to be college or career ready by the end of high school.

Legislative leaders said they hope to , a former bottom-dweller in education rankings before it dramatically raised student reading scores after years of investment and stricter policies. Mississippi similarly requires low-scoring students to repeat third grade, has an expanded network of reading coaches and specialists, and spends $15 million a year on literacy initiatives.

鈥淲e can do better because Mississippi has done it, which shows that other states can as well,鈥� House Speaker Kyle Hilbert, R-Bristow, said during the ceremony while accompanied by two of his young daughters.

It could take five years for Oklahoma to rise in national rankings, Hilbert said, though he suggested the state could see 鈥渋mprovement pretty quickly.鈥�

SB 1778 passed with .

It establishes three tiers of reading instruction and support starting in kindergarten.

Tier 1 represents the core reading lessons all students receive. Children who score below their grade level qualify for Tier 2 and 3 interventions, such as small-group lessons, extra tutoring, summer programs and transitional classrooms, which would involve separate reading classes for students who have fallen behind.

Families also could choose to have their children repeat first or second grade.

Schools will be required to notify parents or guardians within 30 days of a student showing a reading deficiency and must give monthly updates on the child鈥檚 progress through an improvement plan.

鈥淭he idea here is that third-grade retention is not the actual tool for learning,鈥� Stitt鈥檚 education secretary, Dan Hamlin, said. 鈥淚t鈥檚 a last resort after many other efforts have unfolded.鈥�

The state, for the first time, will administer the annual third-grade reading exam to second graders to give students an early opportunity to pass and avoid retention the following year.

The new law lays out good-cause exemptions for students to continue to fourth grade despite poor reading results.

Students whose individualized education plan 鈥渋ndicates that participation in the statewide student assessment system is not appropriate鈥� would qualify. Exemptions also would apply to children who have spent fewer than two years learning English as their non-native language.

Children who have been retained twice between kindergarten and third grade would be eligible for a good-cause exemption, as would students with disabilities who have repeated a grade once.

The state budget, , adds more than $26 million to a fund that supports literacy instruction in public schools. The total $43.75 million Strong Readers Act Fund will dedicate 40% of its money to Tier 1 instruction across the state, 30% for students needing Tier 2 and 3 support, and 30% to reward districts that improve their reading scores.

The budget also adds $100 million to raise all teachers鈥� minimum salaries by $2,000.

Lawmakers dedicated $5 million to expand a team of literacy coaches at the Oklahoma State Department of Education. The team will grow from five to 20 literacy coaches, who assist educators in improving reading instruction and will prioritize low-performing schools.

State Superintendent Lindel Fields, who leads the Education Department, said the agency will begin hiring for the team immediately. His administration also will start preparing a new early literacy micro-credential program, called 鈥渢eacher academies,鈥� with Oklahoma colleges and universities.

SB 1778 requires all districts to employ a reading specialist, reading interventionist or staff member who has completed the micro-credential program, which will focus on the science of reading and best instructional practices. Any certified school employee who completes the micro-credential would receive a $3,000 stipend from the Education Department.

鈥淭he bill gets signed today, but the real work starts tomorrow morning,鈥� Fields said.

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Oklahoma Voice maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Janelle Stecklein for questions: info@oklahomavoice.com.

In response, the national conversation has kicked into high gear. More than a dozen states have rewritten literacy laws, banning discredited instructional methods and mandating phonics-based curricula. Districts are overhauling materials. Parents are being urged to act in a multitude of ways: reading more at home, hiring a tutor, trying multiple apps.

I’ve spent decades as a classroom teacher, literacy coach, researcher, and now training future educators. I’ve worked with children who thrive and children who need extra support with reading. And I’ve seen how often parents are sent searching for complicated solutions while underestimating the impact of what happens in ordinary moments at home. That鈥檚 overlooking something both simpler and more immediate: Families already have powerful, evidence-based tools at their fingertips, and they don’t cost anything.

This isn’t a critique of schools. The evidence of what’s possible when schools commit fully is compelling: Louisiana became the only state to fully rebound in reading post-pandemic. Mississippi climbed from near the bottom of national rankings to the top ten in fourth-grade reading. Systematic, structured literacy instruction works when it’s implemented well. 

However, the best outcomes happen when classrooms and homes work together. The current reading crisis has exposed how much everyday language, attention and early habits have been neglected in shaping literacy, long before a child is ever formally tested.

Start with something deceptively simple: conversation. Reading is not just about decoding words on a page; it’s built on language. When parents narrate what they’re doing, ask questions and engage children in back-and-forth talk, they are building vocabulary and comprehension in real time. This isn’t enrichment. It’s the foundation strong readers stand on, and it happens in the car, at the kitchen table and at the checkout line.

Then there’s the way reading itself gets treated. Too often, it becomes something children think only “counts” as reading if it鈥檚 from a book. But literacy lives in the real world. A grocery list. A recipe. Street signs. Instructions. When children see that print carries meaning in daily life, they begin to understand why reading matters at all. 

And yet, in a culture saturated with screens and subscriptions, one of the most effective tools is analog: the public library. It’s easy to overlook because it’s free. But access to physical books 鈥� and the sustained attention they encourage 鈥� offers something many digital experiences do not. At a time when families are told to download more, the better advice may be to step into a quieter space and let a child linger with a book.

Honesty about the basics matters too. Letters and sounds are not outdated or trivial; they are essential. Helping children learn the alphabet, recognize letters in the environment or spell their own name is not busywork. It is preparation for the moment formal instruction begins and a base for whether that instruction sticks.

Perhaps most urgently, parents should stop being told to “wait and see” or 鈥渢hey鈥檒l grow out of it.鈥� These may sound reassuring, but in reading, it can be costly. Unlike spoken language, reading does not develop naturally without direct teaching. When a child consistently avoids reading, guesses at words, or becomes visibly frustrated, those are not quirks to outgrow. They are early warning signs. 

The earlier parents and educators respond, the easier the path forward, and the window for intervention narrows quickly. What looks like a behavioral problem in fourth grade often traces back to a foundational gap that could have been caught in kindergarten.

None of this will single-handedly reverse national test scores. But that’s not the point. The point is that in a moment when the literacy conversation is dominated by policy, programs and products, the most immediate and equitable intervention available risks being overlooked entirely: what families do every day.

The NAEP data tells a story of stratification: scores rising for high-performing students while struggling students fall further behind. That divide is not about capacity. It is, in part, about access to the kinds of early language experiences that wire children for reading before they ever enter a classroom. Debates about curriculum mandates and state laws are worth having. But while those debates unfold, children are sitting at kitchen tables tonight.

Parents are not a backup plan for struggling schools. They are a child’s first and most consistent teachers. The reading crisis is real. But so is the quiet, largely untapped power sitting in ordinary moments.

If better outcomes are the goal, the question shouldn’t stop at what schools will do differently next year. It should also demand answers about what’s already possible today 鈥� and why anyone has been told it isn’t enough.

This story was originally published by . for their newsletters.

A nonprofit organization created by the California State Library to improve childhood literacy has spent more than $1 million in taxpayer money but has yet to put a single book in the hands of a child.

Lawmakers grilled State Librarian Greg Lucas and other officials about the organization鈥檚 spending in , with one lawmaker saying it raises 鈥渟erious questions.鈥�

Lucas, however, blamed the shortcomings on the fact that legislators themselves pulled the organization’s funding prematurely. After the hearing, he told CalMatters in a statement that 鈥渆very taxpayer dollar spent on this program is fully accounted for.鈥�

In total, lawmakers allocated $70 million in 2022 to improve children鈥檚 love of reading with the intent of giving some of the money to Dolly Parton鈥檚 Imagination Library and some of it to a local organization.

The California-based Strong Reader Partnership was formed by the state library as the local partner, and it was originally set to receive $19 million. But in 2024, with very little of the money spent, lawmakers redirected the money to the Dollywood Foundation, which oversees Parton鈥檚 Imagination Library. Ultimately, the project has been able to meet many of its goals, the Dollywood Foundation this year. In all, it has served more than听160,000 children in California and distributed听 nearly 3 million books. The foundation is administering the program but not donating any money toward the project.

Although the $1 million spent by the Strong Reader Partnership is small, relative to the total project budget, Sen. , a Pasadena Democrat, and Sen. , a Bakersfield Republican, said in the hearing that it鈥檚 their job to ensure it was still spent correctly, especially since the money was designated for children.

In the hearing, P茅rez and Grove questioned the Strong Reader Partnership鈥檚 finances, repeatedly stating that its accounting practices and business activities were ineffective, negligent or potentially in violation of its state contract. Grove pressed Lucas about why he created a separate nonprofit instead of giving the money directly to the Dollywood Foundation, even though she herself required the state library to do so.

In 2022 Grove authored that created the program. The bill required 鈥渢he State Librarian to coordinate with a nonprofit entity, as specified, that is organized solely to promote and encourage reading by the children of the state.鈥� The Dollywood Foundation, which is national and based in Tennessee, was not eligible to be that nonprofit entity.

When CalMatters asked Grove why she is criticizing the state library鈥檚 formation of a nonprofit when her bill required it, she responded by email but didn鈥檛 answer the question. Instead, she reiterated her criticisms of the Strong Reader Partnership, saying that its money was 鈥渟quandered away without putting books in kids鈥� hands.鈥�

Letters to lawmakers

State lawmakers first questioned the Imagination Library project in 2024, when budget officials, faced with closing a nearly $50 billion , told lawmakers that most of the money for the program remained unspent nearly two years after its launch. That year, the governor keeping the money intact but requiring 90% of it go directly to the Dollywood Foundation instead of the Strong Reader Partnership or any local nonprofit. The foundation did not respond to CalMatters鈥� questions about its relationship with the Strong Reader Partnership.

Sonya Harris, executive director of the Strong Reader Partnership at the time, that 2024 bill and said she sent letters to legislators opposing it.

Lawmakers said speaking about the bill was a violation of her contract. 鈥淵ou’re attempting to influence legislation when it’s explicitly stated that you are not supposed to use state taxpayer dollars to do so. Do you agree?鈥� asked P茅rez during the April 7 hearing. Harris didn鈥檛 answer the question.

Also during the hearing, P茅rez repeatedly questioned the organization鈥檚 financial management, referencing instances when checks bounced, reports were not completed or documents arrived months after lawmakers had requested them. 鈥淎s far as I can see here, there (were) no local partnerships that you all established in order to facilitate this program over a two-year period,鈥� she said. 鈥淲e are not able to understand what you did with these dollars and that鈥檚 the whole purpose of this hearing.鈥�

Contracting with nonprofits comes with risks

The roughly $1 million in state funds that went to the Strong Reader Partnership is听 less than a thousandth of 1% of the state鈥檚听 total spending, but that鈥檚 not the point, P茅rez said

鈥淐omments have been made about the amount of money that this is, and that it might be small relative to the budget,鈥� she said before closing out the hearing. 鈥淏ut for me, as a public servant, I take this very seriously. We need to ensure that when we’re making a commitment to provide something as simple as books to children, that we’re actually delivering on that commitment.鈥�

State and local lawmakers routinely sign contracts and grant money to businesses, including many nonprofit organizations, to enact public services or programs. In the process, taxpayers 鈥渓ose transparency,鈥� said Susan Shelley, vice president of communications for the Howard Jarvis Taxpayer Association, a group that opposes higher taxes. 鈥淲hy is the state government or the local government turning them over to nonprofits instead of having their massive bureaucracies handle these things where someone is accountable?鈥�

Shelley said the responsibility lies both with the nonprofits and the Legislature, especially in this instance, because Grove鈥檚 bill required the California State Library to work with a local nonprofit.

Normally, the Howard Jarvis Taxpayer Association is strongly aligned with Grove. Last year, the organization gave her based on her voting record on tax-related issues.

This article was and was republished under the license.

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�

Experts have raised a variety of factors contributing to this reality: learning loss due to the pandemic, increased screen time, the dissolution of long-form reading and teacher burnout. While each of these points are critical, there鈥檚 an even deeper, more fundamental issue facing students that a flurry of educational reforms haven鈥檛 fixed and may have worsened:

They are simply not spending enough time actually reading in school.

Practice makes perfect, but without the reps, there鈥檚 no room for growth. Research kids should have at least 15 to 30 minutes of uninterrupted reading time a day. The reality? Much worse. On average, middle school and high school kids are getting about, if that.

This poses an even greater challenge for students in poverty. Kids who have little to no reading opportunities at home depend on school to fill the gaps. When reading minutes are reduced, they’re hit the hardest.

So how do educators fix it?

It turns out, they already have the answers. Here鈥檚 what the research tells us.

First, schools must protect uninterrupted reading time 鈥� and make it non-negotiable.

Right now in school, kids are bombarded with interruptions: digital devices, announcements, visual distractions, visitors. In fact, a recent of the Providence Public School District revealed that classrooms are interrupted more than 2,000 times a year, resulting in the loss of between 10 and 20 days of instructional time. What鈥檚 more, administrators often underestimate or misperceive how these interruptions might be disrupting the learning process.

Students need to be given the space to focus. If educators want to make changes, they need to get intentional about providing stronger opportunities for kids to focus in school: rethink the physical environment to reduce visual noise, streamline communications for students and build in time for cognitive processing.

That means giving students the time and space to get their reading reps in.

Second, teachers must make the time kids are spending in school worthwhile.

Giving kids the time and space they need to read, requires that they know how to do it. And there needs to be accountability and checks that tell us the practice is worthwhile. That鈥檚 where a strong curriculum comes in.

Educators need to be asking ourselves whether the work we鈥檙e asking students to do is worthy of their time and intelligence. If our kids are spending 15,000 hours in school across K-12, it鈥檚 on us to ensure they鈥檙e getting out what they鈥檙e putting in. It starts with providing high-quality instructional materials that are comprehensive, coherent, evidence-based, knowledge-rich, and grade-appropriate.

shows students learning under a coherent curriculum gain an average of 1.3 months of additional learning 鈥� 1.8 months for struggling students. With the right instruction, kids who are hit the hardest finally have the opportunity to catch up.

Unfortunately, TNTP鈥檚 2018 multi-system study,, and its subsequent study revealed that students are rarely taught grade-level work, and they鈥檝e often seen the materials that are being covered in a previous class. As a result, while kids are getting As and Bs, they鈥檙e demonstrating mastery of grade-level standards just 17% of the time.

Bottom line? Kids are doing the work, but they aren鈥檛 being appropriately challenged. They鈥檙e caught in an incoherent moshpit of disconnected academic programming. Schools are underestimating students鈥� potential, and it鈥檚 backfiring on their ability to learn to read.

Schools need to prioritize a curriculum that is cohesive, knowledge-rich, and grade-appropriate to support true learning. If we鈥檙e going to ask kids for their time, let鈥檚 make it count.

Finally, schools need to be clear-eyed about how they are measuring success.

Today, the domain of English Language Arts is made up of three key areas that are interconnected: reading, writing and oral language. these areas work hand in hand to help students build their skills; writing improves reading comprehension, while oral language supports both reading and writing.

The problem? Most testing tools that are used for instructional decision-making focus on a small slice of what it means to be proficient in the higher order skills of ELA. They rely on limited data sets like from to draw conclusions around proficiency across the whole domain, sometimes with big consequences for kids and teachers and instructional programming. Often, these tests don鈥檛 measure grade-level proficiency, they measure recall. That鈥檚 why our children can get As and still not be proficient readers.

If schools want our kids to succeed in literacy 鈥� an imperative in the age of AI 鈥� there has to be a more advanced discussion about assessment. Schools need to adopt an assessment system that aligns with the domain of English Language Arts. That means moving away from single-point-in-time multiple choice testing strategies and adopting assessment practices that hold the bar for higher order reading, critical analysis, writing, speaking, communicating and collaborating.

Solving the literacy gap doesn鈥檛 require an overhaul of our education system or an innovation that is smarter than all humans combined. As educators, we can teach children to read who attend school for 15,000 hours. We need a collaborative, aligned effort to challenge the status quo. We need leaders who are willing to pull on the right levers for change: protect reading time, provide high-quality, grade-level materials and measure what actually matters

In early 2026, a small group of first-grade students at Lucy Wortham James Elementary School in St. James, Missouri, sat together sounding out words.

Kim Williams, the school鈥檚 principal, watched as they worked through the lesson. One young boy caught her attention.

鈥淭his student had struggled significantly the year before and often avoided reading tasks,鈥� she said. 鈥淭his time, I watched him carefully tap out each phoneme, blend the sounds and read a multi-syllable word independently.鈥�

What stood out wasn鈥檛 just that he read the word correctly 鈥� it was how he approached it.

鈥淗e didn鈥檛 guess. He didn鈥檛 look to the teacher for the answer. He applied a strategy he had been explicitly taught,鈥� Williams said.

She has observed several meaningful changes in students over the past year.

鈥淪tudents are approaching unfamiliar words with greater confidence,鈥� she said. 鈥淚nstead of guessing, they are using strategies and applying phonics patterns they鈥檝e been explicitly taught. You can hear the difference 鈥� they are sounding out words more accurately and blending more smoothly.鈥�

The breakthrough she observed is part of a broader effort across rural central Missouri. Through the Rural Schools Early Literacy Collaborative, literacy coaches from the national nonprofit TNTP work directly with teachers in Phelps County schools, helping them implement structured reading instruction grounded in the science of reading.

Coordinated locally through the Phelps County Community Foundation, coaches visit classrooms regularly throughout the school year. They observe instruction, model lessons and provide feedback, strengthening foundational reading instruction for kindergarten and early elementary students.

The effort is taking place at a time when reading proficiency remains a challenge across Missouri and the nation. According to the 2024 National Assessment of Educational Progress, often called the Nation鈥檚 Report Card, only 27 percent of Missouri fourth-grade students scored at or above the proficient reading level, while 42 percent scored below the basic level.

Education leaders say improving early literacy is critical because reading proficiency by the end of third grade is closely linked to long-term academic success.

Before the collaborative began, the biggest challenges for K鈥�1 teachers in St. James R-I centered on consistency, skill gaps and limited structured support.

鈥淭eachers were using a variety of reading strategies, programs and materials,鈥� Williams said. 鈥淲hile many approaches had strengths, there was not a cohesive, research-aligned framework guiding K鈥�1 reading instruction across classrooms. This sometimes led to uneven student outcomes and confusion when students moved between grades.鈥�

Some students entered kindergarten with limited literacy exposure, and teachers needed clearer tools to systematically build phonemic awareness, phonics and decoding skills. Identifying and addressing skill gaps early was challenging without a unified approach.

鈥淔rom my perspective as principal, the most significant change since TNTP coaches began working with our teachers has been the shift to consistently structured, research-based literacy instruction grounded in the science of reading,鈥� she said.

Instead of learning strategies in isolation, teachers now receive feedback tied directly to classroom instruction. Coaching conversations are specific, practical and immediately applicable, accelerating growth in instructional practice.

鈥淚 have seen a significant shift in teacher confidence, collaboration and mindset around early literacy instruction,鈥� Williams said. 鈥淭eachers understand how students learn to read, have a stronger grasp of foundational skills 鈥� especially phonemic awareness, phonics and decoding 鈥� and can clearly articulate the 鈥榳hy鈥� behind their decisions.鈥�

That clarity has reduced uncertainty and increased instructional precision.

鈥淓arly literacy is no longer just an initiative,鈥� she said. 鈥淚t鈥檚 a unified commitment supported by knowledge, collaboration and confidence.鈥�

A first-year teacher finds support

For Ashley Wood, a second-year kindergarten teacher in Newburg, the coaching model provided unexpected support.

鈥淵ou see so many posts online telling new teachers to run from the profession,鈥� she said. 鈥淏ut when you have a support system 鈥� coaching, small groups, someone to talk through what鈥檚 working and what鈥檚 not 鈥� it makes you want to stay. It takes away that feeling that if a student struggles, it鈥檚 all your fault.鈥�

Wood said the approach reduces 鈥渢eacher guilt鈥� 鈥� the feeling that struggling students are solely the teacher鈥檚 responsibility.

Her literacy coach, Kelly, follows a predictable rhythm each month: a Zoom planning meeting before a visit, in-person classroom observation, immediate feedback afterward and ongoing email check-ins.

鈥淚t definitely makes you feel like you are not alone,鈥� Wood said. 鈥淎s a new teacher, there are so many moments where you wonder if you鈥檙e doing it right. Having someone come in, observe and then talk it through with you 鈥� it changes everything.鈥�

At the beginning of the year, some students did not yet recognize their starter letters 鈥� A, M, S and T 鈥� or the sounds they make.

鈥淣ow almost every single one of them knows capital, lowercase and sound,鈥� she said. 鈥淭hat growth has been huge. Kindergarten is such a growth year. They come in barely recognizing letters, and by the end they鈥檙e reading.鈥�

Wood admitted feeling nervous before Christmas break, wondering whether students would retain their skills.

鈥淚 sent home decodable passages because I thought, 鈥楾hey鈥檙e going to forget everything.鈥� But they came back after break and every single one of them just took off. It was like something clicked,鈥� she said.

The improvements teachers are seeing in classrooms are reflected in early assessment data from participating districts.

In Rolla Public Schools, more than 94 percent of first-grade students demonstrated year-long growth in reading after coaching support began. In Dent-Phelps R-III School District, the share of first graders reading at grade level increased from 25.5 percent in the fall to 89.4 percent by the spring.

At Newburg Elementary School, 100 percent of kindergarten and first-grade students demonstrated growth in reading assessments, with gains that more than doubled typical annual progress.

From classroom change to district strategy

For April Williams, assistant superintendent in the St. James R-I School District, the impact is most visible during classroom visits.

鈥淎s an administrative team, we met every Wednesday morning and did literacy walks,鈥� she said. 鈥淲e wanted to be grounded in the work, too 鈥� not just supporting teachers but really understanding what effective literacy instruction should look like.鈥�

Those visits give district leaders a firsthand view of how instruction 鈥� and students 鈥� are changing.

鈥淛ust last week I was in a kindergarten classroom, and the words students were decoding and understanding 鈥� for February 鈥� I couldn鈥檛 believe it,鈥� she said. 鈥淪eeing that difference in students鈥� abilities has been incredible.鈥�

What began as a local effort in rural Phelps County is now expanding across Missouri.

Through the state鈥檚 Comprehensive Literacy State Development (CLSD) grant, the coaching model is being implemented in 60 schools statewide, including 40 K鈥�5 schools and 20 middle and high schools. Literacy coaches trained in the same model used in Phelps County now support teachers across multiple regions of the state.

Education leaders say the expansion reflects growing recognition that improving reading outcomes requires not only strong curriculum but also sustained coaching and support for teachers.

For Williams, the goal is simple: ensure the work continues long after the original grant funding ends.

鈥淧robably what changed the most is we renewed our commitment to literacy district-wide,鈥� she said. 鈥淚t wasn鈥檛 just something happening in elementary anymore 鈥� we started asking how the entire district supports literacy and keeps it at the forefront of everything we do.鈥�

She added: 鈥淭he goal is for this model to live beyond the grant 鈥� and beyond all of us. So that it simply becomes what we do.鈥�

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Missouri Independent maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jason Hancock for questions: info@missouriindependent.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.

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

OKLAHOMA CITY 鈥� Everywhere House Speaker Kyle Hilbert goes, the topic of childhood literacy follows.

Hilbert, R-Bristow, said improving Oklahoma鈥檚 elementary reading scores is 鈥渢op of the agenda for me,鈥� and he鈥檚 been telling everyone who will listen.

鈥淓very single event that I鈥檓 asked to go to or every single question that I鈥檓 asked where it鈥檚 economic development, tourist-related, you name it, I talk about reading because it applies to everything,鈥� he told news reporters last month.

Early literacy has risen to the top of state lawmakers鈥� priorities for their 2026 legislative session, generating discussions and disagreement across the state about what policy changes and resources are necessary to improve children鈥檚 reading levels.

Only 27% of Oklahoma public school students scored at their grade level or higher on state reading tests last school year. A ranking of drew widespread public attention to Oklahoma鈥檚 ongoing struggles.

Legislators have discussed in literacy programs, but the single most dramatic change 鈥� and the most concrete reading policy idea that has emerged at the state Capitol 鈥� would be retaining struggling readers in third grade.

Republican leaders have pointed to third-grade retention as a clear solution for Oklahoma鈥檚 , but educators and parents said they鈥檙e less convinced.

Hilbert鈥檚 legislation would require students who score below a basic level in reading to repeat third grade. It also would promote earlier interventions, like summer tutoring, small-group lessons and optional retention in younger grades.

鈥淲e know if we pass this bill we will have better education outcomes,鈥� Hilbert told a House education subcommittee in February. 鈥淭hat is a fact. It鈥檚 backed by science. It鈥檚 backed by data. It鈥檚 backed by research. It鈥檚 backed by evidence of what other states have done. We know what will happen if we pass this. We just have to have courage to do that.鈥�

Research indicates retaining a student in elementary school leads to a , but retained students face a and .

Parents voice concerns over retention policy

Republican lawmakers and have pointed to Mississippi, with its strict retention requirement and improved reading scores, as a success story to emulate.

Mississippi has surpassed the national average in fourth-grade reading proficiency after on literacy initiatives and reading coaches, along with retaining its lowest-performing third-grade readers.

Oklahoma implemented similar third-grade requirements in the 2013-14 school year and by 2015-16 among early elementary grades.

School districts at the time said the retentions were necessary to prepare students for the high-stakes third-grade reading test.

The policy became unpopular among parents and educators, who complained the state placed far too much consequence on the results of one annual reading test. Lawmakers progressively for children to avoid being held back. They altogether in 2024.

Parents don鈥檛 want to return to high-stakes testing, said Wendy Hardwick, president of the Oklahoma Parent Teacher Association.

Hardwick鈥檚 twin daughters were in third grade when Oklahoma last had strict retention laws. They had already repeated first grade, and two years later, their reading skills were strong, she said. That didn鈥檛 stop them from feeling 鈥渟cared to death鈥� that a poor testing performance would hold them back again in third grade, she said.

Hardwick, who worked in public schools as a long-term substitute and later in special education, recalled the school environment was 鈥渟tressful and palpable鈥� during state testing time.

鈥淲hat (students) understand is that they鈥檙e going to take this test, and if they don鈥檛 pass it, they鈥檙e going to have to take third grade again,鈥� she said. 鈥淚t鈥檚 hard to see kids of that age being put under that type of pressure.鈥�

Senate Minority Leader Julia Kirt, D-Oklahoma City, had similar worries for her son, who was in pre-K when the retention law first passed.

Like Hardwick鈥檚 children, Kirt鈥檚 son repeated first grade. It worked out well, she said, but she feared a poor standardized test result would hold him back a second, more damaging time.

鈥淚 was pretty nervous about it, and knowing my educators didn鈥檛 have much say in it concerned me,鈥� she said. 鈥淥ur classroom educator the year my son was in third grade said, 鈥業 know he can read. I鈥檝e talked to him about it. I watch him read. He tells me he knows. We have no idea if he will show that on a standardized test.鈥欌��

Broken Arrow parent Kristine Chambers said her daughter in second grade already reads above her grade level and tests well. An extra reading curriculum her daughter received in pre-K through Broken Arrow Public Schools set her up for success today, Chambers said.

Boosting early literacy instruction should be lawmakers鈥� focus, she said, rather than having students repeat a grade.

鈥淚 think that instead of focusing so hard on this retention, maybe put that focus into funding for new programs, new ideas for early childhood literacy, so that we have that good base,鈥� Chambers said. 鈥淥bviously, there鈥檚 going to be students that learn at different speeds, but I think that if we have a really good, strong reading support and intervention early, we can not have the retention possibility at third grade.鈥�

The state鈥檚 poor reading scores demonstrate not enough schools are intervening sufficiently when young readers are struggling, Hilbert said.

That鈥檚 why his would require schools to offer summer tutoring, small-group instruction and other services. Mandatory retention 鈥渇orces that accountability鈥� for schools to take action and communicate with parents earlier, he said.

Teaching quality comes to forefront

Public school teachers have voiced disagreements, not with the concept of retention, but with doing so in third grade.

Students learn the foundations of reading in earlier grades, so the sooner a student is retained, the better, if it鈥檚 absolutely necessary, said Cari Elledge, the president of the Oklahoma Education Association, the state鈥檚 largest teacher union.

鈥淚f you wait until third grade, it might be too late,鈥� said Elledge, a former elementary teacher. 鈥淭hat鈥檚 really what we鈥檙e hearing from our educators across the state, is we do support this, but if there was any way that we could shift it back a little bit to pre-K, kindergarten, first grade, that would be more beneficial.鈥�

Republican legislators and business leaders have framed backing off of tough retention laws as the start of Oklahoma鈥檚 downturn in education rankings. But, other key factors have impacted public schools since that time.

Oklahoma experienced some of the and an . Public schools in Oklahoma now employ and over 800 uncertified adjunct instructors, both of which used to be a rarity in the state.

鈥淲hen we talk about watering down things, we鈥檝e also watered down certification and licensure, and that has been a dramatic change to public education in the state of Oklahoma,鈥� Elledge said.

The state Legislature has steadily increased public school funding since then, though Oklahoma in per-pupil spending.

Sen. Adam Pugh, who leads the Senate Education Committee, said as lawmakers invest more dollars in public schools, they鈥檙e aware Oklahoma鈥檚 teacher workforce is now younger, less experienced and more reliant on emergency certified educators.

That鈥檚 why measures to recruit and retain more teachers, including raising teacher salaries by $2,500, doubling college scholarship funds for aspiring educators, growing a statewide team of reading coaches and adding millions of dollars to support literacy instruction in public schools.

鈥淚 also think when it comes down to it, it鈥檚 not about the curriculum,鈥� said Pugh, R-Edmond. 鈥淚t鈥檚 about the individual that鈥檚 in front of the classroom every day, and so preparing that individual to go teach kids to learn how to read, I think, is really important.鈥�

Oklahoma City schools show improvement in early readers

Test scores were already on the decline when disruptions from the COVID-19 pandemic . Scores then from 2022 to 2024.

As districts seek to claw their way back up, Oklahoma City Public Schools has found a reason for optimism this school year. Winter benchmark testing showed nearly a quarter of the district鈥檚 first graders had more than a full academic year of growth in a semester of learning.

If more first graders show accelerated growth now, more will be on track to read proficiently by fourth grade, Oklahoma City Superintendent Jamie Polk said.

A major factor in that growth has been the addition of an extra reading curriculum on top of the district鈥檚 core literacy instruction, district leaders said in a March school board meeting. The extra curriculum more explicitly covers phonics and phonemic awareness, two concepts that are essential to sounding out words.

Classrooms that showed the most growth had another key element, Polk told Oklahoma Voice. They had teachers who were trained through content-specific professional development.

鈥淲hat we have found that works more than anything is 鈥� teacher clarity 鈥� teachers understanding exactly this is what the students need to know and be able to do, but also when our students can articulate what they need to know and be able to do,鈥� Polk said.

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Oklahoma Voice maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Janelle Stecklein for questions: info@oklahomavoice.com.

鈥淚t’s something that the students are very, very proud of,鈥� said librarian Annelise Rodriguez, who created and manages the Millionaires Club. 鈥淲e’ve had kids come in when they take tours and say, 鈥業’m going to be up there some day.鈥� Some kids get it in 45 books, and for others, it鈥檚 taken 360 books.鈥�

The project was created three years ago to motivate and recognize young avid readers in the of roughly 600 students. Just a few weeks ago, a grandmother who didn鈥檛 speak English bowed her head to thank Rodriguez after her grandchild鈥檚 photo finally made the display. 

Last year, Windsor Park students read 400 million words as part of the Millionaires Club. They are on track to beat that record, with over 315 million words read by the end of February. It鈥檚 one of the ways the school has attained its high reading proficiency rates, an achievement that earned its ranking on 社区黑料鈥檚 Bright Spots list. The highlighted schools have third grade literacy scores that are much higher than might be expected, based on the schools鈥� poverty rates. 

With its 29% poverty level, nearly two-thirds of Windsor Park third graders were projected to be proficient in reading in 2024, but its actual score was 96%. That rate jumped to 99% last year. Nearly 50% of students are Hispanic, 29% are white and 15% are Asian. 

Windsor Park is a magnet school for gifted and talented children. Texas schools to screen their students, and all children in the Corpus Christi Independent School District who score in the top 3% receive an invitation to transfer to Windsor Park, said Principal Kimberly Bissell. Transportation is provided. 

The consists of multiple tests that grade students鈥� achievement in reading and math, as well as problem-solving and critical thinking abilities. Students can transfer in any grade to Corpus Christi鈥檚 gifted and talented schools.  

Windsor Park is also the district鈥檚 only elementary school. The worldwide educational program allows teachers to write their own curriculum and offer rigorous instruction along with inquiry-based learning.

鈥淲e have kids who are in first grade reading at a middle school or high school level,鈥� Bissell said. 鈥淭hose things have always been true, but the initiative behind their personal achievement has certainly ramped up in the last few years with our new approaches.鈥�

The Millionaires Club, which is expanding to other schools in the 33,000-student district, is one of them. The number of words children read are tracked through Accelerated Reader, an online program that records finished books and comprehension. 

Windsor Park also recently launched a called 鈥渢hinking classrooms.鈥� Originally created for math education, it students working in small groups, solving problems while standing up at whiteboards and building on pieces of knowledge as they go. But Bissell said Windsor Park implemented this approach across all its classes. 

It especially improved students鈥� writing skills because the children use the whiteboards to organize text and story structure, she said. 

In Hanna Patton-Elliott鈥檚 third grade classroom on a recent morning, students became “doctors,” pulling on blue medical gloves before separating into groups of two or three. Each group had to assess a passage of text on a whiteboard 鈥� the 鈥減atient鈥� 鈥� by finding the main idea. The children then diagnosed their 鈥減atients鈥� by writing a conclusion for what the passage was about.

Patton-Elliott said that at the end of the class, students rotate and evaluate one another鈥檚 work as “attending doctors” 鈥� the staff who oversee the work of a medical team. 

鈥淚’m going to give them an opportunity to write the conclusions for other people’s work, but then also go back and look at it as the first attending doctor,鈥� she said. 鈥淪o we’ve got lots of things going on. We’ve got some reading skills, we’ve got the main idea, we’ve got organization, but then also we’ve got some creative writing, too. The metaphor seems to be working for breaking this down and organizing it.鈥�

The activity is part of the curricular materials written by Windsor Park teachers under the International Baccalaureate program. Teachers create their grade-level curriculum together to ensure that the same lessons 鈥� such as finding the main idea of a story 鈥� are taught in each classroom, even if the activities may be different. Because Windsor Park classes are interdisciplinary, teachers try to connect the same ideas in all academic subjects, so what the children learn in reading, for example, is referenced in math class.

Much of Windsor Park鈥檚 instruction uses standards from the Texas Education Agency, but infuses it with student-led learning and group collaboration. The curriculum also allows children to make decisions and manage their own instruction, such as choosing the grading rubrics for an activity. 

鈥淲e find not just for gifted learners, but as a best practice, this idea of choice and student agency really builds writing, as well as reading and everything that English Language arts envelopes,鈥� Bissell said. 鈥淲hen you offer choice with expectations, they do a lot better.鈥�

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. 

Policymakers in Washington are starting to pay attention. Last year, Secretary of Education Linda McMahon named 鈥淓vidence-Based Literacy鈥� as her No. 1 academic priority. And this month, the House Appropriations Committee held a on the science of reading.

So what role should the federal government play in reading policy?

Unfortunately, it鈥檚 not as simple as stealing the playbook from the best-performing states. The so-called 鈥溾�� states of Mississippi, Tennessee, Alabama,and Louisiana have seen the biggest gains in recent years, and many states have tried to copy them with their own science of reading bills 鈥� to of success.

The federal government also has a record of big investments in reading not leading to improved outcomes. That鈥檚 at least partly because reading policy is tricky, given all the potential reasons a child may or may not understand the words on the page.

But that doesn鈥檛 mean federal leaders are helpless. They just need to find the right levers. Here are five potential ideas:

1. Create a new national reading panel

In 1997, Congress brought together a group of experts to 鈥渁ssess the status of research-based knowledge, including the effectiveness of various approaches to teaching children to read.鈥� After reviewing thousands of research articles, the group focused on five critical components of reading instruction 鈥� phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary and comprehension.

The document that came out of that work, the , became a foundational text for the field. But it鈥檚 now decades old, and researchers know a lot more today than they did back then. It would be useful to have an update and a new consensus document from an esteemed body of experts.

2. Expand the National Assessment of Educational Progress

The NAEP exams have been instrumental in documenting the extent of students’ challenges, but they don’t say much about the underlying reasons why kids are having such reading comprehension problems.

For example, on , 46% of fourth graders couldn鈥檛 accurately understand the meaning of the word 鈥渃onform鈥� in a passage from the book The Tale of Despereaux by Kate DiCamillo. Was it because they didn鈥檛 understand the question, didn鈥檛 know the meaning of the word 鈥渃onform鈥� or got misled in some other way?

Reading researchers like Hugh Catts have been raising the that most reading comprehension exams are not well equipped to pinpoint the reasons behind a student鈥檚 literacy mistakes. NAEP could take the lead here by introducing other types of assessments that seek to unpack the root causes of reading struggles, and how they might differ across age groups. 

For example, young students might get a phonics check like the one England administers to its 6-year-olds. Older students might benefit from an age-appropriate version of this, as researchers have found that even middle and high school students can struggle with complex words.

3. Give states flexibility on English Language Arts assessments

Building on the point above, the federal government currently requires states to administer their own reading or language arts assessments annually in grades 3 to 8 and once in high school. Right now, the states have all interpreted that requirement to mean that they must give generic reading comprehension tests.

But states could be given flexibility to interpret this differently. Educators might gain better insights into students’ reading challenges if they were tested on discrete skills like decoding, fluency and vocabulary, and comprehension questions were left to specific content areas like social studies and science. Louisiana attempted something like this a few years ago, but the feds could give states much more leniency to pursue this line of inquiry.

4. Nudge states on accountability

Congressional leaders probably don鈥檛 have much appetite to rewrite the Every Student Succeeds Act, which requires states to draft goals for student achievement and plans for holding schools accountable. But those original state plans were written nearly a decade ago, and conditions have changed (for the worse) since then. The Department of Education can鈥檛 force states to revisit their plans if they don鈥檛 want to, but it could signal that it would be open to letting states amend them in light of the declines of the last decade, especially among the lowest-performing students.

5. Empower parents with information

Despite their best intentions, schools are not good at helping students who fall behind in reading catch up. According to the from Amplify鈥檚 DIBELS early literacy screener, just 49% of students who start kindergarten well behind in reading get on track by the end of third grade. And the odds get worse every year that schools wait. Last year, among third graders who were far behind at the beginning of the term, just 5% caught up by the end of the year.

Thanks to , parents already have access to their child鈥檚 education records, but only if they request them. To bring greater urgency to this issue, Congress could require schools to inform parents when their child is behind in reading and to work with families to develop specific improvement plans.

If reading scores are a crisis, policymakers should treat it accordingly. But they also have to be realistic in accepting that there鈥檚 only so much they can do, and that part of the decline in performance can be traced back to the fact that kids aren鈥檛 reading for pleasure as often as they used to 鈥� and are adults.

So one way to improve literacy scores is for education leaders at all levels to talk about the importance of reading. People who read a lot tend to know more about the world, and people who know more about the world tend to succeed in many aspects of life. That鈥檚 not exactly a policy change, but leadership can shape behavior to make knowledge 鈥� and reading 鈥� cool again. 

Then, we did a similar project looking for positive outliers in middle school math. There was Worcester again, leading all of Maryland.

So it came as no surprise when we did a follow-up reading analysis last year, this time looking for exceptional individual schools, that three of Worcester鈥檚 five elementary schools made our Bright Spots list. In fact, Worcester鈥檚 high-poverty Pocomoke Elementary made our Top 5 list, beating the odds for its kids 鈥� posting proficiency rates far higher than its average poverty level would suggest 鈥� by the biggest margins in Maryland. It wasn鈥檛 even particularly close.

In fact, when Thomas Hamill, Worcester鈥檚 coordinator of research, presented to the school board, even he was at a loss for words, saying, 鈥淭o have the quantity of scores that we have, at the level that we have, with the poverty that we have, there is no [statistical] reason for us to be performing as high as we are. 鈥� We are doing the improbable in Worcester County.鈥�

So what is Worcester doing differently?

It starts at the top. The district is led by hard-charging superintendent . Back in 2016, she was as the state鈥檚 high school principal of the year for leading a turnaround at Pocomoke High School. When we talked, she repeatedly brought the conversation back to building a culture of connection and belonging. While many school and district administrators might espouse similar ambitions, Wallace makes it concrete by expecting all principals to be able to walk into any classroom and know every student by name, as well as each one’s individual strengths and needs. That鈥檚 a high bar.

More unusually for a superintendent, Wallace knows the exact number of third graders in her district who were not proficient in reading last year 鈥� 133 鈥� and she has set it as her goal to reduce that number to zero. When asked why, she pointed out that kids tend to fall behind over time and worried that those 133 kids who weren鈥檛 reading proficiently by third grade are, 鈥渕ore likely to be incarcerated, more likely to live in poverty and more likely to suffer food insecurity鈥� as adults.

Worcester is not just a literacy story, but it is getting amazing results in early reading. So what can we learn from them? On the surface, Worcester鈥檚 might look pretty familiar. When I spoke with Cassidy Hamborsky, the district鈥檚 coordinator of instruction (who was also an – educator), she talked me through what a typical day might look like. In grades K-2, teachers devote 150 minutes per day to literacy, divided among 90 minutes of core instruction using Great Minds鈥� , 30 minutes to foundational phonics skills and 30 minutes for the 100 Book Challenge from the .

But what seems different about Worcester is its clarity of purpose. This comes out in a few ways. One, Hamborsky says the district is vigilant about protecting core instructional time for all kids. For example, they wouldn鈥檛 take a student away from that time for personalized help or even something like talking with a school counselor. Those things can happen during other parts of the day, but they don鈥檛 want any kid to miss out on the time dedicated to building vocabulary and language development.

Two, they are religious about giving kids lots of time to practice. This is mostly through the 100 Book Challenge. During the school day, kids are typically reading physical books that help them build phonics skills or engage in sustained independent reading. Students are expected to complete two 15-minute blocks of reading at school 鈥� and then read for 30 additional minutes per day at home. This regimen may vary based on the child鈥檚 age and skill level, but kids have to log what they read and then have their teacher or parent sign off.

Families, in fact, are the third key component of Worcester鈥檚 reading plan. At the beginning of the school year, they鈥檙e asked to sign a 鈥渉ome coach contract鈥� saying that they will check and monitor their child鈥檚 reading. Throughout the year, kids are expected to read for half an hour at home five days a week. Over the course of a 180-day school year, that could add up to 900 extra minutes of practice.  

Four, Worcester鈥檚 reading instruction is both personalized and data-driven. Every district says it’s data-driven, and Worcester uses some of the same off-the-shelf reading assessments (such as and ) that other districts use. But what separates Worcester from others is that it uses student reading logs to track each kid鈥檚 progress. The teachers know exactly which books each child has read and whether kids are keeping up with their reading on a weekly and even daily basis. Teachers will also hold regular check-ins with students, ask them about their reading and even listen to them read aloud.

I suspect this last piece is one of the reasons Worcester sees such consistently strong results. For example, low-income students in the district outperform wealthier peers across the rest of Maryland.

But while Worcester has a lot to be proud of, I think the most enduring reason for its success is that it has leaders like Wallace and Hamborsky who continue to strive for better. Wallace, for example, told me she lies awake at night thinking about those 133 kids who aren鈥檛 proficient readers yet and what it will take to get them there. There鈥檚 a lot to learn from what Worcester has accomplished so far, but perhaps the biggest lesson is that its leaders don鈥檛 think they鈥檙e done. 

My own state, Arkansas, is preparing to implement a key piece of its 2024 , which is modeled after legislation in Mississippi. This summer will be the first in Arkansas when third-graders will be retained if they are not reading proficiently. As expected, parents and educators are on edge and questions abound. The prospect of thousands of students being held back is generating lots of attention and anxiety. 

But as Arkansas moves to implement its version of the Mississippi law and other states look to emulate it, policymakers would be wise to consider what the research says about retention. In short, like everything else in education, there is no panacea for increasing student learning. Retention in and of itself is not going to singlehandedly raise literacy rates. The key to success in Mississippi was the supports the state provided before and after students were retained. 

惭颈蝉蝉颈蝉蝉颈辫辫颈鈥檚 , passed in 2013, was a comprehensive K-3 reform law designed to ensure that all third graders read on grade level. Core elements included intensive professional development aligned with the science of reading, early identification of struggling readers, targeted intervention beginning well before grade three, deployment of state-funded literacy coaches and the retention of a small share of third graders who did not meet the reading benchmark.

As science of reading reforms expand nationwide and districts work to address pandemic-related learning losses, third-grade retention policies have become more common. As of 2024, have laws requiring promotion based on reading proficiency, and 13 additional states allow districts to retain students for this reason. Importantly, these laws typically are more generous in allowing exemptions than previous versions.

But while exemptions are often well-intentioned, suggests that, when broadly used, they can undermine policy effectiveness. Exemptions tend to reduce participation among the students who may benefit most from intensive intervention, including English learners who could benefit from extra help. The primary benefit of promotion-linked literacy policies is early detection paired with substantial supports, such as additional instruction, tutoring and coaching, before students reach third grade. So when exemptions are granted, they must be coupled with the same level of structured intervention Mississippi requires through individualized reading plans and intensive instruction.

Evidence from Mississippi helps clarify why retention alone is not the driver of literacy gains. In the first year of implementation, roughly 15% of the state’s third graders who scored below the promotion cutoff in the 2014-15 school year were retained, and among students just below the threshold, were held back. Yet fourth-grade scores began improving almost immediately, from 2013 to 2024, making Mississippi those children for reading and math gains during that time 鈥� well before retention could plausibly affect outcomes at scale. This timing strongly suggests that the gains were driven primarily by early identification, targeted intervention and intensive instructional support rather than by retention itself.

Importantly, Mississippi paired promotion decisions 鈥� whether retention or exemption 鈥� with structured, mandatory resources. Even students promoted via exemptions were required to have individualized reading plans, summer literacy programs and ongoing intervention. Survey and administrative evidence suggest that these promoted-but-still-supported students made meaningful reading gains, underscoring that the policy鈥檚 effectiveness hinged on the , not simply on whether students were retained.

Evidence from other states reinforces this point. In Florida, where third-grade retention has been studied extensively, outperformed exempted peers who did not two years later. This suggests that exemptions, when not paired with intensive intervention, can dilute policy effectiveness by allowing struggling readers to advance.

Survey evidence suggests that in part by the supplemental assistance provided to low-achieving students who were promoted via exemptions. By contrast, evidence from Florida shows that in reading two years later, indicating that exemptions were not consistently granted to those who would benefit most from promotion.

As Arkansas moves toward implementation, it would do well to consider not just 惭颈蝉蝉颈蝉蝉颈辫辫颈鈥檚 experience, but also Indiana鈥檚, which saw the rubber meet on the road on retention more recently. students are repeating third grade after failing the state test or qualifying for an exemption. State leaders had expected to retain more, but passing rates on the reading assessment jumped nearly 5 points last school year, to just over 87%. Officials said the progress stemmed in part from the expansion of a statewide program, the Indiana Literacy Cadre, that focuses educators鈥� attention on research-based instructional methods. Participation increased from 41 schools in 2022 to more than 550 in 2025, and schools in the Literacy Cadre saw a 7-point increase in passing rates, compared with gains of 3.6 points at other schools. 

Arkansas can hope for similar outcomes of this year鈥檚 state tests. There is cause for optimism 鈥� when it comes to not just retention but the resources that come before these critical decisions, is more expansive and students have access to more assistance both at school and home (through a $1,500 grant to families for literacy tutoring). Secretary Jacob Oliva, who leads the state Department of Education released in January to ensure families are aware of their students鈥� standing and students are receiving ample supports both before and after the testing window.听

Across studies, the evidence is consistent: retention mandates alone do not drive literacy gains in isolation. only when retention is part of a that intervenes early and intensively. 惭颈蝉蝉颈蝉蝉颈辫辫颈鈥檚 experience demonstrates that it is the comprehensive series of interventions鈥斕� 鈥� that produces lasting improvement.

On a chilly morning at Leonard Flynn Elementary School, first graders played with jump ropes and hula hoops outside while reading tutor Lillie Reynaga set up her materials at a table in the hallway nearby. One by one, kindergarteners came to her table and practiced blending sounds to make one-syllable words.

鈥淲e鈥檙e going to make words and they鈥檙e all going to rhyme because they鈥檒l all end with at,鈥� Reynaga told 5-year-old Violet, who kicked her legs back and forth on the low bench. 

For the next 15 minutes Violet repeated at-at-at and read mat, rat and fat.

鈥淣ow, do you have any guesses and what S and at come together to say?鈥�

鈥淪at!鈥� Violet called out.

鈥淗ow did you know that this word is sat?鈥�

鈥淏ecause it starts with s!鈥� 

The benefits of high-impact tutoring are on full display at this Spanish immersion public school on the edge of San Francisco鈥檚 Bernal Heights and Mission District neighborhoods. Flynn introduced the program last year and saw almost immediate results.

Among the second graders who received tutoring in first grade, nearly a third started this school year reading at grade level or above, while more than half of students who did not work with tutors last year started second grade reading at a kindergarten level.

This year, those second graders are getting the support they missed out on in first grade, along with other Flynn students from kindergarten through third grade. Tutors trained and paid by provider Chapter One visit Flynn every day to deliver short bursts of high-impact tutoring in word recognition and language comprehension.

It鈥檚 not the first reading intervention Flynn has tried, said principal Tyler Woods, but it鈥檚 having the most impact.

鈥淟iteracy interventionists would provide intensive interventions but only serve 20 or 30 students across the school,鈥� he said. 鈥淭his is a lighter touch but focused on the areas that we know our kids really struggle with, and it just reaches a lot more students.鈥�

High-impact tutoring 鈥� a intervention characterized by its frequency, duration and alignment with school curriculum 鈥� has been so successful in San Francisco that district officials recently expanded the program to serve more than 2,700 students across 20 priority district schools. 

鈥淭his is the single most effective literacy intervention we have,鈥� said Ann Levy Walden, CEO of the San Francisco Education Fund, which helps to fund and implement the program in partnership with the school district. 鈥淭his expansion allows us to do what we know works.鈥�

Nearly half of students in San Francisco Unified schools . A year ago, the district set a goal that specifically targets third grade proficiency: By 2027, 70% of third graders will meet state standards, up from 52% in 2022. High-impact tutoring is one of the targeted supports the district is using to meet the benchmark.

鈥淓nsuring students are proficient readers by the end of third grade is one of our most important student outcome goals,鈥� said district superintendent Maria Su. The district also adopted a curriculum based on the science of reading last year 鈥� the first reading curriculum change in the district in a decade. This change, along with expanding tutoring, are meant to help 鈥渇ocus resources on the grade levels and school communities where high-impact tutoring can most effectively accelerate literacy development,鈥� Su said.

The cost of high-impact tutoring is $500 a student, which includes up to four sessions a week, assessments, individualized tutoring plans, progress monitoring and integration with classroom instruction. The Education Fund raises money continuously, but a year of high-impact tutoring in San Francisco costs about $2 million. This year, the district contributed $830,000. 

The district expanded high-impact tutoring after seeing results last year. After working with Chapter One tutors for five months last year, the number of students district-wide who met grade-level reading standards more than doubled, from 24% to 54%. At Sanchez Elementary in the Mission District first graders reading at or above grade level went from 15% to 59%.

At Guadalupe Elementary, in the city鈥檚 Crocker-Amazon neighborhood, the share of kindergarteners reading at grade level jumped from 39% to nearly 68%, after students participated in the tutoring program.

鈥淚t’s an early literacy gain that we have never seen before,鈥� said principal Raj Sharma. Nearly 70% of students at Guadalupe are English learners, and about 10% are newcomers to the United States, Sharma said. 鈥淪ometimes our students don鈥檛 have any school experience at all.鈥� 

Sharma said he specifically chose to bring high-impact tutors in to work with very young students because he believed the impact for them could be so substantial. 

鈥淥nce your foundation is strong, you can build the house on there,鈥� he said. 鈥淔amily or socio-economic status matters, but in our situation we saw that it’s beyond that. We can make a difference.鈥�

A big challenge for school leaders is how and when to connect tutors with students. At Guadalupe, tutors meet with every student in a class either individually or in small groups in their classrooms. This approach is less disruptive for students, Sharma said, and allows for more continuity in their learning experience.

鈥淭hey are just one of the small groups and others are with the Chapter One tutor, and then they can rotate,鈥� he said. 鈥淭hey are not missing any instruction that’s given in the classroom. At the same time, they’re getting the reading foundations.鈥�

Sharma and other principals said that the way high-impact tutoring is being delivered in San Francisco stands out, because tutors are trained and paid and because principals get help integrating the program into their schools. The San Francisco Education Fund partners with the San Francisco Literacy Coalition to help school leaders to develop schedules and determine which students will receive tutoring.

鈥淭he scheduling of it has been really seamless, which is not always the case when you’re trying to pair any type of extra support or intervention,鈥� said Woods of Flynn Elementary. 鈥淢any of our students are needing support from the moment they join our school and in the past, we just haven’t had the scope of support to provide some meaningful development. This is third time we’ve been able to say, let’s figure out who needs the intervention and everybody gets it.鈥�

Correction: An earlier version of this story misidentified a literacy organization. It is the San Francisco Literacy Coalition.

Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, in her final budget proposal this week, is set to unveil a budget proposal for funding schools that invests $625 million in programs aimed at addressing the state鈥檚 K-12 literacy crisis.

The literacy investment would come at a time of increased focus on the troubling performance of Michigan students in literacy in the early grades. Just 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 last year.

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

On the national front, , an exam known as the 鈥渘ation鈥檚 report card.鈥� That compares to 30% being proficient nationally. More concerning is that Michigan student performance has been stagnant and declining as other states that have invested heavily in early literacy have improved.

Whitmer, during her State of the State address last year, called for urgency in addressing the low performance, noting that Michigan spends more than most states.

鈥淚t鈥檚 not acceptable,鈥� Whitmer said. 鈥淔or our kids, let鈥檚 do better. Let鈥檚 face our literacy crisis with fierce urgency.鈥�

鈥淲hen every child reads, Michigan wins,鈥� Whitmer said in a statement provided by the governor鈥檚 office. 鈥淎s we face a nationwide literacy crisis, my education budget proposal includes big investments to build on the work we鈥檝e done to help kids read.鈥�

For the budget proposal she will deliver to the Michigan Legislature Wednesday, Whitmer鈥檚 Every Child Reads plan notes that investing in preschool and wraparound programs is just as important as improving curriculum and ensuring teachers are trained.

Here are some specifics of the plan the governor鈥檚 office shared with Chalkbeat this week:

• Part of the $625 million investment includes expansion of the state鈥檚 initiative, which aims to provide free preschool to children regardless of income. 鈥淚t starts with high-quality early learning, because the sooner kids start learning to read, the better they become,鈥� the governor鈥檚 office said in a media advisory.
• The budget would also invest more in Language Essentials for Teachers of Reading and Spelling (or LETRS) training. LETRS is a professional development program based on the science of reading. The refers to a body of knowledge that emphasizes phonics along with building vocabulary and background knowledge.
• The budget will include funding that helps districts implement new science of reading-aligned curriculum. The Michigan Department of Education recently published a list of curriculums aligned with the science of reading. School districts aren鈥檛 required to adopt from the list. However, the current state budget has language requiring schools or risk losing a small percentage of their state funding.
• The budget proposes additional funding to expand summer, before-school, and after-school programming.

Additional details, such as information on how the additional funding would help districts implement curriculum aligned to the science of reading, weren鈥檛 available.

State Superintendent Glenn Maleyko, in a statement included in the governor鈥檚 advisory, said Whitmer鈥檚 focus on literacy is one shared by the Michigan Department of Education, which he oversees, and the State Board of Education, the elected board that hired him last year.

鈥淣othing is more important to our students and our state than improving literacy,鈥� Maleyko said. 鈥淩eading and writing are the foundation for long-term success, and I look forward to working with the Legislature through strong teamwork and shared responsibility to advance these priorities and continue improving student outcomes statewide.鈥�

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

But that short-term focus on the averages loses sight of what鈥檚 happening at the tails 鈥� the top performers and the weakest 鈥� and how things have evolved over longer periods of time. 

To zoom out, I worked with Eamonn Fitzmaurice, 社区黑料鈥檚 art and technology director, to build the time-lapse tools below. 

The first one shows you the evolution of 12th grade math scores. This particular test was first administered in 2005 by the National Assessment of Educational Progress. When the 2024 scores came out in September, 社区黑料 wrote about the declines overall and for the lowest-performing students.

The reading scores for 12^th graders are even more depressing. They haven鈥檛 gotten as much attention as the math scores, perhaps because the averages scores haven鈥檛 followed as dramatic of an up-and-down rollercoaster as the math scores have followed.

These graphs show the scores of 12^th graders in math and reading, but it鈥檚 likely that other grades and subjects would show similar patterns. It鈥檚 not just that average scores have declined across a wide range of tests, grades and subjects; we also have a lot more low-performing students than we did in the past. 

While the data presented here are at the national level, any state, district or school leader could see how things are changing in their community. At the classroom or school level, increased variability in student performance makes it harder for teachers to personalize their instruction and for school leaders to design systemwide supports. To get things back on track, policymakers should pay special attention to how their lowest-performing students are faring.

That idea is comforting. It is also wrong.

Dyslexia is not a visual disorder. It is a language鈥慴ased learning disability rooted in how the brain processes speech sounds and connects them to print. People with dyslexia struggle with foundational skills such as phonics and with reading fluency not because letters look confusing, but because written language does not come automatically.

For decades, peer鈥憆eviewed research has whether fonts can meaningfully improve reading for people with dyslexia, and it is clear that . Studies comparing so鈥慶alled dyslexia fonts with standard typefaces such as Times New Roman, Arial or Calibri show no reliable gains in accuracy, speed or comprehension. In some cases, unfamiliar fonts even slow readers down.

This does not mean presentation is irrelevant. Reasonable font size, spacing and contrast can make text more comfortable to read and reduce visual fatigue. But these benefits apply to everyone. They do not address the core difficulties that define dyslexia, and they should not be mistaken for evidence鈥慴ased solutions.

So why does the font narrative keep resurfacing?

Because it offers a visible, low鈥慶ost response to a complex, invisible problem. It is a form of performative accessibility 鈥� easy to announce, easy to implement and easy to celebrate 鈥� while leaving the real barriers intact. Changing a font is simple. Teaching children to read using systematic, explicit instruction in phonemic awareness and phonics is not. Providing early screening, trained teachers and assistive technologies like audiobooks and text鈥憈o鈥憇peech requires time, money and political will.

Accommodations that actually help people with dyslexia, such as audiobooks, computer apps that read documents aloud and write by listening to students speak, or extended time are often necessary to help students stay engaged with grade-level content while they are learning. They preserve access and dignity in the classroom by providing students with the opportunity to show what they know without struggling.

Children with dyslexia also need explicit, systematic instruction to learn to read and write independently. When accommodations like those above replace teaching rather than support it, students are denied the very skills that would allow them to access text on their own. Genuine accessibility means providing both: access to content now, and the instruction needed for independence later. These are not cosmetic changes. They are structural ones.

New York offers a telling contrast. Last year, Gov. Kathy Hochul signed creating a Dyslexia and Dysgraphia Center in the state Department of Education. The center will share best practices by setting standards for dyslexia screening in elementary schools, define evidence-based instruction, set expectations around teacher preparation and professional development related to dyslexia. The law is grounded in the science of reading and acknowledges dyslexia for what it is 鈥� a that has long been ignored and requires research鈥慳ligned screening and specialized instruction for students as well as professional support for teachers, leaders and other school staff throughout New York state.

New York City鈥檚 NYC Reads initiative, launched under former Schools Chancellor David Banks and now continuing under Mayor Zohran Mamdani and new Chancellor , reflects the same understanding. By prioritizing curriculum quality, teacher training and evidence-based instruction, NYC Reads shifts the focus from symbolic gestures to systemic change. These reforms are harder, slower and far less photogenic than a font swap. They are also far more likely to work.

Crucially, strong instruction is a prerequisite for identifying dyslexia. When classroom reading instruction is weak or inconsistent, it becomes nearly impossible to distinguish between children who were poorly taught and those who have a language-based learning disability. Teachers cannot reliably find dyslexic students until high-quality, evidence-based instruction is in place for everyone. Accommodations for access to grade-level work must be accompanied by evidence-based instruction. That is why literacy and dyslexia advocates were delighted to hear the new chancellor announce that NYC Reads will be deepened rather than abandoned by the new administration. When all kids get strong reading instruction schools, it creates the conditions under which dyslexia can be identified early and addressed appropriately.  It allows for all children to thrive.

Policy reform changes how systems function; performative accessibility changes how documents look. The distinction matters and the stakes are high. Literacy is not just an academic outcome 鈥� it is a gateway to affordability, opportunity and dignity. People who can read fluently are better positioned to navigate housing applications, understand contracts, access health care, secure stable employment and participate fully in civic life than those who cannot. Teaching children to read well is not merely an educational goal; it is a commitment to a more equitable society.