91涩漫

This article is part of Bright Spots, a series聽highlighting schools where every child learns to read, no matter their zip code. Explore the Bright Spots map to find out which schools are beating the odds in terms of literacy versus poverty rates.

The science of reading has largely won the policy debate.

Over the last decade, has embraced evidence-based reading instruction. Legislatures have passed literacy laws, and teacher preparation programs are (slowly) shifting their . Those changes are paying off: According to from the DIBELS early reading screener, 30% of second graders ended the year far offtrack in reading, the best mark since 2019-20.聽

Massachusetts is the latest state to join the movement. Last month, Gov. Maura Health a that requires school districts to use evidence-based reading instruction, prohibit the use of three-cueing and other discredited word-guessing strategies, require educator preparation programs to teach evidence-based literacy methods, expand screening for students with dyslexia and create a process for the state department of education to review and approve K-3 reading curricula.

Massachusetts is now a test case for what I like to think of as the Lexington Problem.

If a district has low reading scores and uses instructional practices that are inconsistent with what has been about how children learn to read, the case is clear for switching to an evidence-based science of reading approach.

But Lexington’s young readers are not struggling. They have relatively strong . So, perhaps not surprisingly, the prospect of being forced to change their literacy practices hasn’t sat well with Lexington’s leaders.

Famously, Lexington is the place where the first shots of the Revolutionary War were fired. Today, it鈥檚 a wealthy suburb about 10 miles outside of Boston. Its are extremely well-educated 鈥� 84% have a bachelor鈥檚 degree or higher 鈥� and the median price for purchasing a house is $1.2 million.

As state legislators debated the science of reading bill, Lexington Public Schools attracted because it continued to use literacy materials associated with (much-maligned) balanced literacy approaches, including Lucy Calkins鈥� Units of Study . (The district uses a supplemental program called in an attempt to fill in gaps.) The superintendent has been an outspoken of the state legislature鈥檚 efforts.

Perhaps in spite of its curricular choice, and thanks in part to the families it serves, Lexington鈥檚 students score pretty well on state tests. Last year, 70% of its third graders scored in reading, compared with 42% statewide. Lexington doesn鈥檛 have a lot of poor kids, but its low-income third graders outperformed their peers statewide (44% versus 24%). Only 25% of Lexington鈥檚 children with disabilities reached the same bar, but even so, that was higher than the statewide average of 14%.

91涩漫 even named two Lexington schools 鈥� Joseph Estabrook and Harrington Elementary 鈥� to our list of Bright Spots schools whose third grade reading scores outperformed what would be expected based on their poverty rates.

The new law includes a waiver allowing districts to continue using unapproved reading curricula if those are 鈥渂ased on evidence-based literacy instruction鈥� and can 鈥渕eet quality standards鈥� as determined by the state department of education. While it’s not clear yet what that process will look like, EdReports gives Lexington鈥檚 current program a rating of 鈥�,鈥� so it seems unlikely it would pass muster. 

In an ideal world, Lexington鈥檚 leaders would see the writing on the wall and adopt a new, better curriculum for K-3 literacy. It鈥檚 quite likely that its students would earn even higher scores if it did a better job teaching foundational skills.聽

But Lexington鈥檚 test results illustrate a broader policy problem. Science of reading reforms have been most successful when they focused on basic skills where the evidence is strongest and the policy solutions are clearest. States can require phonics instruction. They can prohibit three-cueing. They can require universal screening and force changes at colleges of education.

But literacy involves more than the basics. Strong reading outcomes also depend on vocabulary, background knowledge, writing and countless other factors that are harder to regulate from a state capitol. 

And that’s what makes cases like Lexington so complicated. As Massachusetts moves from identifying a problem to implementing solutions, it should remain careful not to confuse compliance with success. A district using the “right” curriculum will not automatically produce strong readers, just as a district using a disputed curriculum will not necessarily fail its students. The best way forward is to keep focusing on the goal of helping more kids learn to read.

Did you use this article in your work?

We鈥檇 love to hear how 91涩漫鈥檚 reporting is helping educators, researchers, and policymakers.