(The Center Square) – Maryland’s venture to create and implement a statewide comprehensive literacy policy is underway, but State Board of Education President Joshua Michael says the board won’t consider adoption until at least September.
Maryland’s journey with literacy policy has been long and winding, involving a patchwork application of the science of reading principles in some school districts and not others. But in January, the board passed a resolution calling for “statewide adoption and implementation of literacy instruction based on the Science of Reading beginning in the 2024-25 school year.”
The science of reading is a body of tested literacy research spanning decades, disciplines, cultures and languages that supports strong phonics instruction and practice as an integral part of learning to read. Since the 1990s, American schools have been teaching reading through techniques like balanced literacy and the three-cueing method that place less of an emphasis on phonics and more on keeping students engaged through instructional variety.
But that all started to change when Mississippi—a state that used to rank at the bottom for its students’ reading scores—began overhauling its literacy instruction statewide, passing a series of laws in 2013. Since then, the Magnolia State has risen from 48th to 22nd, ranking above the national average.
Maryland’s trajectory has been in the opposite direction. In 2013, its fourth graders ranked third in the nation for reading scores. In 2022, they ranked 41st.
In the fall, the board announced it had hired an interim superintendent—Carey Wright, previously the superintendent of Mississippi’s revamp. Months later, the board passed its resolution to adopt “evidence-based” literacy instruction statewide.
Tuesday’s board meeting heard an update on the development of the statewide literacy policy. Wright and her team were charged with crafting a policy outlining curriculum adoption for schools, assessment, data analysis, early warning systems, interventions for struggling readers and accountability.
“I want to be really clear,” Wright said at the presentation’s start, “This is just the beginning. This is our draft.”
About half of the update reviewed statistics on Maryland’s past and present student reading proficiency and facts about illiteracy’s ties to graduation, poverty incarceration rates and even health, but the second half addressed “fundamentals” the policy aims to speak to, as well as stakeholder feedback.
The policy will delineate supports for teachers, early literacy student assessments and parental notification, and instructional and interventional tools and resources – including retention or holding students back if their reading skills have been identified as “severely below grade level” by the third grade.
The last component was the most controversial, though it has been an important piece of recent literacy policy in other states.
Nick Greer, a board member from Baltimore, raised concerns over racial and ethnic minority students who would experience the highest retention rates according to a simulation based on state test scores.
“If we ask the question, which is a question I think we should ask all the time when thinking about equity in policy, ‘Who loses if we enact this?’ The answer is going to be overwhelmingly black and brown students,” Greer said.
Several others said they doubted data showing that third grade retention isn’t harmful to students and has positive effects on their learning.
“I want to reiterate how I am not aligned with a retention policy,” said Calvert County’s board member Joan Mele-McCarthy. “I would like to have copies of that research because… you can prove anything you want with statistics.”
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
“I have a 41-year career as a classroom teacher. Thirty-five years were in pre-k and kindergarten. At no time in my career was retention an option in order to increase student achievement,” said Susan Getty, a board member from Carroll County.
“We have to be very clear what’s resulting in increased achievement. Is it the act of the retention or is it the act of the school system responding to the needs of the student?”
