California's ELSBG Initiative Yielded Gains - Now What?
autside.substack.com
Another week, another cheerleading article on how amazing the so-called “science of reading” (SOR) is. I say cheerleading because what the article omits is more interesting than what it contains.
The article begins by noting that California is facing a major literacy crisis, with less than half of 3rd graders able to read at grade level. The situation is worse for minority students. In 2017, a lawsuit alleged the state had violated students’ rights by failing to teach them to read. I touched upon this a bit in June.
A 2020 settlement created a 3-year, $50 million ELSBG programme targeting the 75 elementary schools with the lowest test scores. It funded extra staffing, training in the SOR, new assessments and interventions, community engagement, and oversight by literacy experts.
A Stanford study noted early positive results. Reading achievement improved significantly compared to other schools. The 0.14 SD gain reported equaled a quarter year of additional learning, according to the reserchers. Smaller math gains were seen as well.
These results are viewed as a success given the programme occurred amidst the COVID learning disruptions. The lead researcher called it a “win” if such struggling schools can make gains now. The study’s lead author said it shows implementing the SOR at scale can be done effectively.
However, neither the study nor the article (or the links within the article) state if California extended ELSBG beyond the initial 3-year term. Taking the report at face value, the programme appears to have made substantial strides in a short period. But with literacy still a crisis, if the state and districts have not sustained or expanded this model, it raises real questions.
The ELSBG approach - extra funding and expertise, needs-based flexibility, “evidence-based practices,” local and state coordination - seems a blueprint if California desires to make rapid progress on literacy gaps - if you believe the research and reporting. If gains occurred already amongst the very lowest performing schools, similar efforts could benefit many - one would think.
Letting these gains slip away once the mandated funding ended would conflict with the settlement’s “right-to-read” vision. California’s fragmented local control structure poses challenges for unified progress. But officials should determine if and how ELSBG principles can scale to equip all schools and teachers to teach reading successfully.
What next?
The state settled the lawsuit by creating a temporary literacy improvement programme for struggling schools. But, the state did not extend this effective initiative despite half of California’s 3rd graders still reading below grade level and an ongoing literacy crisis. If a programme can drive notable achievement gains even in the lowest performing schools, don’t similar efforts warrant scaling. Rather, California let these promising buds of progress wither, conflicting with the lawsuit’s spirit. The choice not to perpetuate initiatives that expedite more students’ reading proficiency leaves California still struggling to fulfill the “right to read” vision behind the settlement. This inaction indicates the state’s education apparatus remains dysfunctional despite the lawsuit’s noble intentions … perhaps on purpose.
These incidents, and others, prompted my latest book - Holistic Language Instruction. The advice in the book can be implemented in a wide variety of contexts - not just K-3 - at low or no cost. I wonder if EdWeek will do a feature on it? I won’t hold my breath.
The AutSide is a reader-supported publication. To support my work, consider becoming a paid subscriber.
California's ELSBG Initiative Yielded Gains - Now What?
California's ELSBG Initiative Yielded Gains - Now What?
California's ELSBG Initiative Yielded Gains - Now What?
Another week, another cheerleading article on how amazing the so-called “science of reading” (SOR) is. I say cheerleading because what the article omits is more interesting than what it contains.
The article begins by noting that California is facing a major literacy crisis, with less than half of 3rd graders able to read at grade level. The situation is worse for minority students. In 2017, a lawsuit alleged the state had violated students’ rights by failing to teach them to read. I touched upon this a bit in June.
A 2020 settlement created a 3-year, $50 million ELSBG programme targeting the 75 elementary schools with the lowest test scores. It funded extra staffing, training in the SOR, new assessments and interventions, community engagement, and oversight by literacy experts.
A Stanford study noted early positive results. Reading achievement improved significantly compared to other schools. The 0.14 SD gain reported equaled a quarter year of additional learning, according to the reserchers. Smaller math gains were seen as well.
These results are viewed as a success given the programme occurred amidst the COVID learning disruptions. The lead researcher called it a “win” if such struggling schools can make gains now. The study’s lead author said it shows implementing the SOR at scale can be done effectively.
However, neither the study nor the article (or the links within the article) state if California extended ELSBG beyond the initial 3-year term. Taking the report at face value, the programme appears to have made substantial strides in a short period. But with literacy still a crisis, if the state and districts have not sustained or expanded this model, it raises real questions.
The ELSBG approach - extra funding and expertise, needs-based flexibility, “evidence-based practices,” local and state coordination - seems a blueprint if California desires to make rapid progress on literacy gaps - if you believe the research and reporting. If gains occurred already amongst the very lowest performing schools, similar efforts could benefit many - one would think.
Letting these gains slip away once the mandated funding ended would conflict with the settlement’s “right-to-read” vision. California’s fragmented local control structure poses challenges for unified progress. But officials should determine if and how ELSBG principles can scale to equip all schools and teachers to teach reading successfully.
What next?
The state settled the lawsuit by creating a temporary literacy improvement programme for struggling schools. But, the state did not extend this effective initiative despite half of California’s 3rd graders still reading below grade level and an ongoing literacy crisis. If a programme can drive notable achievement gains even in the lowest performing schools, don’t similar efforts warrant scaling. Rather, California let these promising buds of progress wither, conflicting with the lawsuit’s spirit. The choice not to perpetuate initiatives that expedite more students’ reading proficiency leaves California still struggling to fulfill the “right to read” vision behind the settlement. This inaction indicates the state’s education apparatus remains dysfunctional despite the lawsuit’s noble intentions … perhaps on purpose.
These incidents, and others, prompted my latest book - Holistic Language Instruction. The advice in the book can be implemented in a wide variety of contexts - not just K-3 - at low or no cost. I wonder if EdWeek will do a feature on it? I won’t hold my breath.
The AutSide is a reader-supported publication. To support my work, consider becoming a paid subscriber.