If you’re not at the table - you’re on the menu!

 

The Utah Association for Superintendents joined the conversation surrounding Senate Bill 241 - Early Literacy with intention to stay off the menu by taking a seat at the proverbial legislative table. Authored by Senator Ann Miller and championed by the Governor's Office, the First Lady, and Philanthropy, the bill passed through the senate 24:1 and currently has a favorable recommendation from the House Education Committee. 

Should 3rd-graders who are not reading on grade-level be held back?

Of the many topics this bill proposes and the one gaining most attention is the option that students who are not passing by 3rd-grade on the end of year Acadience assessment will be held back to repeat their 3rd-grade school year. Opponents to this bill suggest that if retention is appropriate due to low levels in reading, would 3rd-grade be the optimal age to send a student back through their previous year, or would an earlier grade be more likely to increase their chances of acquiring the necessary reading skills to pass the exam?

SB 241 creates a change in the reading requirement level and establishes a new 3rd-grade reading goal for 2030. The current level of mastery for the Acadience assessment by the state of Utah is at the highest level “Above Benchmark” labeled as “Blue” with a requirement of 70% of all students passing the exam. For reference, the state average is currently less than 40% of students reaching the “Above Benchmark” or “Blue”. This new bill increases the goal to 80% of students by 2030 to be reading on 3rd-grade level on the assessment but allows the passing rate to include both the “At Benchmark, or Green” and the “Above Benchmark or Blue”. By adjusting the passing rate to include both levels as passing the initial response has been favorable by some opponents. 

A third layer to SB 241 requires schools, based on this assessment, to provide an “individual Ready Plan” for students not passing the assessment at the required level. This IRP would identify key reading interventions to remediate students’ deficiency in their reading ability, and included in this part of the bill is the requirement to retain a student in 3rd-grade except in cases of certain good cause exemptions.  Some questions raised by this IRP include:  Who writes the IRP and who implements the plan? Is this similar to an IEP and are parents part of the IRP team? Part of this legislation includes language such as “requires . . .certain school districts provide formal learning and information training in the science of reading, progress monitoring, exclusion of the three-cueing method for reading, funding for literacy training, and paraprofessionals who support literacy. 

A major concern for many of the superintendents, and why they decided to take a seat at the table was the potential requirement that school districts use a certain portion of the Teacher and Student Success Program -TSSA (up to 50%) to provide for literacy interventions to support this Early Literacy bill. Earmarking funding that currently is quite flexible for schools and districts to allocate creates concerns for many district and school leaders, especially Business Administrators and Superintendents. 

With only one week left before this legislative session ends, will SB 241 pass?