Legislature’s Joint Finance Committee approves 4 reading curriculums under Act 20

Editor’s note: With low reading proficiency scores across the state, USA TODAY NETWORK-Wisconsin is exploring the causes and consequences of low literacy. This article is part of the By the Book series, which examines reading curriculum, instructional methods and solutions in K-12 education to answer the questions: Why do so many Wisconsin kids struggle to read, and what can be done about it?

To read other stories in the series, click here.

Wisconsin’s Joint Committee on Finance approved Monday a list of four reading curricula schools can adopt to be in compliance with the state’s new reading law, Act 20. The curricula approved are those recommended by the state’s Early Literacy Curriculum Council, a nine-member council created to specifically evaluate K-3 reading curriculums for their compliance with Act 20.

The four curricula approved are:

Core Knowledge Language Arts K-3
Our EL Education Language Arts
Wit and Wisdom with Pk-3 Reading Curriculum
Bookworms Reading and Writing K-3

Act 20, signed into law last summer, requires curriculum to be backed by the “science of reading”: a decades-old body of research that explains how the brain learns to read. It includes an emphasis on phonics, which teaches students the sounds letters make and how those sounds combine in predictable patterns to form words.

The law’s changes are aimed at improving reading proficiency in the state, which has been low for years. Fewer than half of students at the state’s five largest school districts are considered proficient in reading, according to state exam scores since 2018.

Part of the law’s revamping of reading instruction requires schools to use specific instructional methods that are systemic and explicit by next school year. This instruction must include fluency, phonological awareness, phonemic awareness, phonics, oral language development, vocabulary, writing, comprehension and building background knowledge.

The list of approved curricula is significant because school districts that adopt one of them can receive reimbursement for up to half the cost, which can be millions of dollars. Many districts will be turning to this list as they redefine how they teach reading.

Lukicia Diggins reads with her 8-year-old granddaughter, A'aNilah Hamlin, now in third grade, at Diggins home in Milwaukee on Sept. 5. Hamlin was tutored in reading through a program launched at Milwaukee Public Schools last school year and continuing this year called Forward Scholars and was launched by Common Ground.

Committee Democrats, DPI worry list will open state up to litigation

This list was approved 10-4 along party lines with all Republicans on the committee voting in favor and no Democratic support. While Republicans were in favor of the four curricula recommended by the Early Literacy Curriculum Council, Democrats wanted to approve the Department of Public Instruction’s broader list.

In February, the Early Literacy Curriculum Council released its list of four recommended curricula. About 30 curriculum vendors submitted materials for evaluation by the council, and by February, it had reviewed about half, according to a memo from the Legislative Fiscal Bureau.

Given how much time curriculum review requires and the swift deadlines in Act 20, the council didn’t have enough time to review all the submitted curricula, the bureau’s memo said.

DPI, the state’s education agency, did its own evaluation of all the curricula, recommending 11. It rejected one of the council’s recommendations (Bookworms Reading & Writing for K-3) and added others that the council hadn’t rated.

More on Act 20:Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction asks lawmakers to change deadline for implementing part of Wisconsin’s new literacy law

In a letter to the Joint Committee on Finance, the DPI said the council’s process for evaluating curricula had exposed the state to “an unacceptable level of risk.”

Because not all vendors who submitted curriculum materials were evaluated by the council, one that wasn’t evaluated could sue, according to the Legislative Fiscal Bureau.

Democrats on the Joint Committee on Finance said that was reason enough to go with DPI’s recommendations. However, Republicans saw that as weak argument, opting for the four curricula from the Early Literacy Curriculum Council.

“This council, they’re experts. This is what they do,” said. Sen. Duey Stroebel during the committee meeting. “And I’m sorry I’m not going to look to DPI as, my god, the only people in the world who can pick the correct curriculum.”

He said the committee shouldn’t “water down, not give our kids the best quality curriculum” because of a “far-fetched legal theory.”

More on Act 20:Wisconsin passed a landmark literacy law 3 months ago. So what happens next?

The committee’s move is a “missed opportunity,” said state Superintendent Jill Underly in a media release.

“The DPI’s list of high-quality materials is robust, offers more support and flexibility, meets the definition of science-based early literacy detailed in Act 20 and mirrors materials recommended by other states undergoing similar changes,” Underly said.

The Early Literacy Curriculum Council is required to annually recommend science-based K-3 reading curricula, so Monday’s list is subject to expansion next year.

A new library at Forest Glen Elementary School in Suamico.

Why does the list of curricula matter?

Districts aren’t required to adopt the approved curricula, but those will be the only ones eligible for partial reimbursement — a large incentive for districts, given the cost of curriculum adoption.

Many districts will likely make the switch to new reading curriculum, if not the four approved Monday. In the past, DPI has recommended that districts use curricula positively rated by a third-party curriculum evaluation organization called EdReports.

At least 79% of school districts surveyed by the Department of Public Instruction in 2021 said they use a curriculum that is either not rated or is negatively rated by EdReports. About 80% of school districts participated in the survey.

Districts have been waiting for the release of curricula so they can adopt new practices, train their staff and be in compliance with Act 20 by the 2024-25 school year. The Green Bay School District, for example, has been waiting for the literacy council and DPI to release its curriculum list before it buys new reading curriculum. It plans to select something for grades kindergarten through eight in March.

Danielle DuClos is a Report for America corps member who covers K-12 education for the Green Bay Press-Gazette. Contact her at [email protected]. Follow on Twitter @danielle_duclos. You can directly support her work with a tax-deductible donation at GreenBayPressGazette.com/RFA or by check made out to The GroundTruth Project with subject line Report for America Green Bay Press Gazette Campaign. Address: The GroundTruth Project, Lockbox Services, 9450 SW Gemini Drive, PMB 46837, Beaverton, Oregon 97008-7105.