The Science of Reading

[Gavel sounds.] Okay, good morning. The subcommittee will come to order, and it's my pleasure to convene our first hearing for the year on critical issue of childhood literacy. As we all know, developing strong reading skills at an early age is foundational building block for a lifelong success. When students master basic reading skills by the fourth grade, they make the important transition from learning to read to reading to learn. That is why these early years are so critical and why we owe it to our children to provide them with proven, effective instruction in reading. To that end, I hope today's hearing will highlight the tremendous work of state and local leaders to advance what has become known as the science of reading. Also want to thank my colleague from California, Mr. Harder, for his championing this issue and building awareness around today's topic. So thank you, Mr. Harder, for your support and encouragement in that point. Also, Congressman Dale Strong from Alabama, my colleague, while he's not on the subcommittee, he's been a champion of this issue and I appreciate his input as well on it. The science of reading is a research-based approach to literacy instruction that places a strong emphasis on phonics. States have adopted science of reading strategies that have adopted have implemented comprehensive literacy plans featuring high-quality coursework and rigorous teacher training. These states are achieving remarkable success for their students. From 2013 to 2024, Mississippi, for example, rose from 49th to ninth in the nation in fourth grade reading scores and is now tied for the third-highest reading proficiency rate among underprivileged students. While many refer to this achievement as the Mississippi miracle, others have more accurately called it the Mississippi marathon, reflecting that sustained effort and perseverance required to produce such a result. Other states adopting science of reading strategies have experienced similar gains. Louisiana, for example, improved from last to 16th in the nation in fourth grade reading between 2019 and 2024. Tennessee moved from 31st to 23rd. And I'm also proud to report that my home state of Alabama advanced from 49th to 34th during the same period. We still have a long way to go, but this progress is important step in the right direction. And let me just note that Alabama was one of only two states, along with Louisiana, to exceed pre-COVID levels in fourth grade reading achievement. Much of this progress has been achieved with fewer financial resources per people than are available in many other states, which demonstrates that increased spending alone is not always the answer. The key is the wise and prudent use of resources directed toward proven teaching methods and a strong focus on the fundamentals. This record of success also underscores the importance of a bottom-up approach to education reform rather than a top-down mandate from Washington. States are rightly leading the way as laboratories of innovation and improvements in our education system. I look forward to hearing from our distinguished panel today and as they talk about the science of reading and the promise it holds to improve literacy outcomes for our nation's young students. I would like to ask that for unanimous consent to enter a statement that Mr. Guest of Mississippi would like to put into the record. So before we turn to our witnesses, I next want to recognize our distinguished ranking chairman, Ms. DeLauro, and ask for her for any opening remarks that she would like to make.

Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. And as you were talking about the Mississippi experience, our governor, Governor Lamont, when he did his state of the state address just a few days ago, has introduced literacy coaches. Lamont's proposed budget revisions for education include $4.5 million in funding to create a quote, "statewide network of literacy coaches to counteract a drop in reading scores based on the successful program initially launched in Mississippi." The coaches would go to certain kindergarten through third grade classrooms, work with existing school staff to lesson plan, model, demo lessons, implement universal screening programs, etc., create action plans according to the budget proposal. So the Mississippi model is really gaining traction around the country and I'm so proud of my state for and my governor for adopting this effort. I say good morning to everyone and thank you so much for being here. A big thank you to our witnesses. So glad that you could be with us today to share your knowledge and insight with this committee. And Chairman Aderholt, I think this is an important committee and thank you for convening it. And I also want to commend my colleague, Congressman Harder, for his advocacy and support for the matter that is of important to all of us and before us today, the science of reading. Teaching our children to read and to love reading is one of the foundational responsibilities of our nation's education system. We're all sitting here, all of us who have either read to our kids, our grandkids, etc., because it's what you do in order to be able to help to educate them and to get them to have an appreciation of reading and to love it. And it's also wonderful when you try to skip over the passages and they tell you, well, you missed this, you know. That used to happen in our house. You missed this piece or you missed that piece because they know the material. There are it is clear that there are serious shortcomings when it comes to reading achievement nationwide. In her testimony, Dr. Lane will highlight the value of our federal investments in education research and high-quality teacher preparation programs. Many of these programs were slated to be eliminated, but through bipartisan negotiations, we were able to craft a Labor-HHS-Education bill that maintains and in many instances increases funding for this crucial work. Dr. Lane will also share that only 31 percent of fourth graders and 30 percent of eighth graders reached proficient levels of reading on the 2024 National Assessment of Educational Progress. In other words, more than two-thirds of children in the United States are not reading proficiently. That is unacceptable. Which is why it is so important that we are holding this hearing today on the science of reading. In fact, this subcommittee is responsible for the creation of the 2000 National Reading Panel report, a landmark document that went on to reflect the scientific consensus regarding effective reading instruction, a legacy that endured to this day. The 1998 Labor-HHS-Education bill under Chairman John Porter, who not only understood the value of research in education, but was instrumental in substantially increasing investments at the NIH as well, directed the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and the Secretary of Education to quote, "to convene a national panel to assess the status of research-based knowledge, including the effectiveness of various approaches to teaching children to read," end quote. Our subcommittee tasked this panel with publishing its conclusions along with a strategy for disseminating its findings to quote, "facilitate effective reading instruction in our schools," end quote. This report mandated by an appropriations law marked the beginning of a data-driven, evidence-based consensus on what it takes to mold proficient readers. It laid out five pillars of this science which include: phonemic awareness, the ability to identify and play with individual sounds in spoken words; phonics, reading instruction should focus on understanding how letters and groups of letters link to sounds to form letter-sound relationships and spelling patterns; fluency, the ability to read words, phrases, sentences, and stories correctly with enough speed and expression; vocabulary, knowing what words mean and how to say and use them correctly; comprehension, the ability to understand what you are reading. In a moment, you will hear from Dr. Holly Lane, a director of the University of Florida Literacy Institute, who will share the critical challenges we face nationwide in translating our theoretical understanding of effective reading instruction into practice. We will also hear from Ms. Bonnie Short, the director of the Alabama Reading Initiative, and Mr. Larry Saulsberry, the director of teaching and learning for literacy for Huntsville City Schools, who will share their insights into applying these principles on the state and local levels. I sincerely looking forward to this hearing because I believe the Appropriations Committee has a central role to play in helping our nation's teachers and our schools apply the science of reading so that every child not only has a chance to succeed, but to experience the intellectual, emotional, and cultural exploration that reading makes possible. I look forward to working with you to build on the NICHD report and the Department of Education's 2000 National Reading Panel report and support federal investments in education programs designed to help educators effectively teach the science of reading. This starts with our important investments in education research and technical assistance, such as comprehensive centers, regional education laboratories, and the Institute of Education Sciences grants. It continues with our investments in teacher preparation and training, such as teacher quality partnerships, Title II-A, and it must include our robust support for Title I, English language acquisition, and IDEA, so that children from all backgrounds have the skills they need to succeed. Finally, I believe this committee has a responsibility to make sure that the United States has an effective federal Department of Education that works with grant recipients in states and districts nationwide so that federal dollars are used effectively to drive literacy gains through the science of reading. The Department of Education is critical to increasing literacy and reading, and I believe we should be dedicating even more resources to this vital mission. I thank you and I yield back, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. DeLauro. At this point, we will start our testimony hearing from our witnesses. Again, we have three witnesses here today: Bonnie Short, director of the Alabama Reading Initiative; we have Larry Saulsberry, the director of teaching and learning for literacy for Huntsville City Schools; and Holly Lane, director of the University of Florida Literacy Institute and professor. So with that, Dr. Lane, we'll begin with you and look forward to your testimony.

Thank you so much. Good morning, Chairman Aderholt and Ranking Member DeLauro and members of the subcommittee. It's an honor to be here to speak with you about the science of reading, something clearly near and dear to my heart. And as an academic, limiting my comments to five minutes will be a special challenge. My name is Holly Lane and I am a professor of education at the University of Florida and I'm the director of the University of Florida Literacy Institute, better known as UFLI. Most people would agree that learning to read is a child's most important accomplishment in the elementary grades. Reading proficiency in the early grades is closely linked to later academic, social, and economic outcomes. It's what makes productive citizens. The term science of reading means different things to different people, so allow me to explain what I mean when I use that term. The science of reading is the vast accumulated body of evidence about what reading is, how people learn to do it, and how it is most effectively taught. The evidence comes from numerous fields of study, including education research, psychology, linguistics, and neuroscience. One of the more useful frameworks for understanding reading is called the simple view of reading, and it was first proposed four decades ago by Gough and Tunmer. The simple view does not suggest that reading is a simple process. In fact, it's just a simple way of understanding a very complex process. The simple view can be stated in a single sentence: that reading comprehension is the product of word recognition and linguistic comprehension. That is, in order to read and comprehend text, one must be able to read the words on the page and understand the spoken language that's used in the text. It does sound simple, but a lot goes into both of these areas. So what's the problem? We know that reading achievement is a big problem in this country. Why are we seeing such poor reading outcomes? These are complex questions, but I'll attempt to address some of what I see as the core problems we face. The first problem is the expertise of educators. Although there are many, many excellent reading teachers out there, many others enter the classroom ill-prepared to teach reading, either because their teacher preparation programs taught them outdated and ineffective methods or because they received no teacher preparation at all. Many alternatively certified teachers are teaching kids how to read. Or their ongoing professional learning about reading is focused on the latest fads rather than on the latest evidence. A closely related problem is the lack of reading expertise among education leaders. Few school or district leaders have deep knowledge about reading, which means reading instruction seldom gets the attention or support that it deserves. Another key problem is the quality of the tools provided to teachers. Few published reading programs have any systematic, rigorous evaluation before they're sold to schools. Many programs are marketed as being aligned with the science of reading, but there are no safeguards in place to ensure that this is true. There's no equivalent of the Food and Drug Administration to evaluate reading programs to ensure that they're effective or at least to ensure that they're not harmful. This leaves schools and districts susceptible to every snake oil salesman that comes along, and there are many. Most state approval processes tend to ignore efficacy data altogether while focusing instead on superficial elements that have little impact on student achievement. Also, the approval processes almost never consider program usability in any substantive way. So even when a program does have data demonstrating efficacy under controlled study conditions, it may not be effective in real classrooms. Programs are bloated with useless activities that do nothing to promote learning, and few programs these days have children actually reading real books or tackling content of substance. I've heard it said that most reading programs today are designed to be successful in the curriculum adoption process, not in the classroom. I concur with that statement. We must ensure that the tools provided to educators are effective, and educators in the field need guidance and protection from snake oil salesmen. We need safeguards in place. So most of the problems in reading today are related to these two main issues: teacher and leader expertise and the quality of their tools. If we want to improve reading outcomes, we need to address both of these. There are certainly bright spots in the reading world: schools, districts, and states that have beaten the odds and made remarkable gains in reading, some of them represented right here with me. Their efforts have focused largely on these two issues. We need to learn from these examples and replicate their efforts to ensure reading success for all children. We need to follow the science we have and we need to continue to add to the science through ongoing rigorous research efforts. Thank you.

Okay, thank you. All right, Ms. Short, look forward to hearing from you. Thank you.

Chairman Aderholt, Ranking Member DeLauro, and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to share Alabama's experience strengthening literacy through evidence-based policy and sustained implementation. My name is Bonnie Short and I'm the director of the Alabama Reading Initiative at the Alabama State Department of Education. The Alabama Reading Initiative is a statewide effort focused on ensuring all students develop the foundational skills needed to meet or exceed grade-level standards. Alabama's experience shows meaningful literacy improvement does not come from isolated programs or short-term initiatives. Instead, it comes from coherent policy paired with long-term, job-embedded implementation supports that help educators deliver strong instruction, identify risk early, and respond quickly when students need additional support. This work has been successful because literacy has been a shared priority of state leadership, including our state superintendent Mackey, the legislature, and our governor, along with a commitment of local schools and educators. In 2019, Alabama enacted the Alabama Literacy Act with a clear goal: reading at or above grade level by the end of third grade. The law prioritizes prevention through strong core instruction, early and frequent screening, and timely evidence-based interventions. Independent policy analyses have described Alabama's approach as comprehensive, noting components were intentionally designed to function together as a coordinated system. Implementation at scale has been central to this work. First, Alabama has focused on strengthening core literacy instruction in every classroom through explicit, evidence-based practices that build foundational reading skills and connect them to language development and comprehension. Second, we have invested in professional learning, not one-time training, but ongoing job-embedded support that helps educators translate research into daily instructional practice. Third, assessment is coherently and purposely. Alabama provides universal screening and early literacy assessment resources to identify students at risk and monitor progress while emphasizing clear, family-facing communication so parents understand the results and what schools plan to do. Fourth, when students require additional support, schools are equipped to respond quickly through tiered instruction and what we call student reading improvement plans aligned to the Alabama Literacy Act, which includes outside of the school day learning opportunities. Finally, Alabama has prioritized student-centered coaching, grounding professional learning in student work and outcomes so it leads to measurable change in the classroom practice. In addition to this implementation, Alabama has invested in long-term prevention by partnering with education preparation programs in our institutions of higher ed to ensure teachers enter the classroom with a solid foundation in evidence-based reading instruction. These efforts have produced measurable results. Public reporting on the National Assessment of Education Progress shows Alabama's fourth grade reading performance moved from 49th in the nation in 2019 to 34th in 2024. Federal investments are most effective when they support the structures that make evidence-based practice durable at scale: professional learning and coaching capacity, early identification and intervention support, and family-facing data systems that protect instructional time. Teaching children to read is both an educational imperative and sound public investment. Thank you for your commitment to improving literacy outcomes for the children in our nation.

Thank you, Ms. Short. And Mr. Saulsberry, look forward to hearing from you. Thank you.

Thank you, Chairman Aderholt, Ranking Member DeLauro, and members of the House Appropriations Subcommittee for the opportunity to speak at today's hearing. My name is Larry Saulsberry, Jr. and I currently serve as the director of teaching and learning for K through 12 literacy within Huntsville City Schools of Huntsville, Alabama. In 2022, I enrolled in my first science of reading course, Lexia Language Essentials for Teachers of Reading and Spelling with the Principles Primer. It was a one-year course that opened my eyes to what could be as I became more intentional in learning alongside teachers who were enrolled in Letters for Elementary Educators and also leading all teachers in the process of teaching students how to read. At that time, a financial incentive of $500 funded by my local education agency, Limestone County Schools, was allocated for course completers. In addition, I was leading a school that had been designated as limited support two by the Alabama Reading Initiative. Also our school had been designated as an additional targeted and support improvement school under the Every Student Succeeds Act. There is work that is happening across the state to close reading gaps by continuing the implementation of student reading improvement plans beyond grade three. However, in my current role, an important component of the work to advance literacy involves constantly assessing our programs and resources to determine if they lead to mastery of the content area standards and essential skills. Often times, students who grapple with phonological awareness will most likely have limited vocabulary and encounter challenges with grammar and language structures and semantics. How should schools and districts continually address this? One approach is through ensuring that teachers have increased awareness of the five pillars of literacy, including phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. Another approach is by engaging teachers in coaching and professional development. Furthermore, while growing up in Gee's Bend, located in Wilcox County, Alabama, I learned the value of literacy. My parents and my deceased maternal grandmother, Deborah Pettway Young, a Gee's Bend quilter, ensured that I found enjoyment in reading. I now make it a goal to make certain that my three sons do as well. During spring 2025, 88 percent of Alabama's third graders were reading on or above grade level as measured by the Alabama Comprehensive Assessment Program summative reading subtest, which is required for third graders to be promoted. As I mentioned, we're working to close reading gaps by continuing the implementation of student reading improvement plans beyond grade three. Thus, funding support is needed to ensure access to high-quality instruction, resources, and interventionists for fourth and fifth graders. In October 2025, I had the opportunity to attend the ninth annual conference of the Reading League. It was evident that the work of researchers like Dr. Anita Archer and Dr. Julie Washington is surely helping to change the landscape of teaching and learning. That fundamental question remains of how to encourage all states to embrace the need for stronger science of reading policies. As Dr. Clarence Sutton, Jr., our superintendent, would say, "From vision to victory: every department, every school, every student." Currently in HCS, there is a strong partnership with the Schools Foundation in which teachers are invited to become Orton-Gillingham trained. In addition, the HCS dyslexia coordinator along with a kindergarten teacher at Hampton Cove Elementary recently became certified academic language therapists. Moreover, there are 26 local reading specialist positions funded by ARI and eight reading interventionist positions which are also funded by ARI. In addition, HCS locally funds literacy specialists at several schools. Furthermore, the partnership with Lexia remains strong as there are three cohorts of 63 participants enrolled in the Letters for Administrators course. Moreover, while teachers are also encouraged to enroll in Letters for Elementary Educators and Letters for Early Childhood Educators, a barrier has included the dissolution of the one-time $1,000 stipend funding support for stipends and substitute teacher costs as needed. In conclusion, one of the greatest gifts that we can give a student is the gift of reading, not just reading, but proficient reading. With support to ensure access to professional development, personnel, and resources, there is hope that greater reading proficiency levels can and will be achieved. Thank you again. Please share any questions that you may have.

Very good. Thank you each of you for your testimony. And we will now begin our questioning. Each member will give about five minutes to ask questions. And I will begin and let me just open it up to any of the witnesses that would like to respond to this. I, you know, there's a broad bipartisan agreement that reading failure has long-term economic and workforce consequences. I think one thing that we can all agree on in Washington, D.C. is that. From your perspective, can maybe talk a little bit about what specific investments that yield the highest return for taxpayers when it comes to early literacy? And I'll just open that up for whoever would like to jump in there and answer that.

I don't think it's a one one item is going to really make everything that we need to have happen happen for children. I do think it's a combination of items that work together. But I will say in Alabama, I think one of the leverage points that we have, one of the strongest elements is the ongoing professional development we have with local reading specialists or coaches in the building of every kindergarten through third grade school. We also have regional specialists that go in side-by-side, they're working in the classrooms with teachers and children supporting their efforts. And we also have coaches that support principals and central office. And I think that's an element that's especially important as well because some of our principals and central office don't come from backgrounds where they learned how to teach children to read. So they need to be able to have those skills to be able to support their staff.

I would, yes. I agree wholeheartedly that literacy coaches are a really important element. As I mentioned a moment ago, I also think that ensuring that both teachers, the ones directly working with students, and school and district leaders need additional support and understanding about systems that work and things that often make reading attempts for reading reform fail. There are there's quite a bit of information out there about implementation science and generally what I see in my work with districts across the country is that very few people on the ground understand the things that facilitate highly effective implementation of strong reading instruction. And so many of the reform efforts fall flat because of that. Every state is attempting to do what Mississippi and Alabama and Louisiana has done at some level, but most don't even know where to begin because there's so much that needs to be done. So helping us expand this area of implementation science, understand how it varies from setting to setting is a really important element.

Let me and Dr. Lane, let me go ahead and ask you this question since you've got the mic there. Should federal dollars support preparation programs that continue to teach approaches that lack empirical support? And if not, how can Congress encourage better alignment without a federal micromanaging the system?

That's a really tough question because I think that there is... ...a little bit of romanticism associated with local control in education. When you have local expertise, that works great. When there is little local expertise, it doesn't work so well. So providing guidance in terms of what does and doesn't work and then expecting that if you are to receive federal dollars for whatever, through Title I support or whatever else, that you are using effective models. Within the realm of teacher education, I know a lot of my colleagues are working really hard to implement evidence-based practices in their educator preparation programs. Others are not, and there is no real ramification for that, so it's a problem.

Thank you. Ms. Short, the gains that we've seen in Alabama suggest that there's a strong state policy paired with consistent implementation and how that can work. What aspects of the Alabama's literacy success require federal support and what worked best because of state retained control?

You know, I think when we talk about the federal support, we are looking at, you know, what do we know to be harmful in situations that we want to make sure that we are protecting the individuals that we serve. I think you have to look at those general elements. I think supporting things we know that are grounded in the science are elements that can continue to support our nation. As you pointed out earlier, in 2000, we were releasing the National Reading Panel. We had the evidence there. We fell off with following the evidence as a nation, and we've got to come back to that. I think building supports that put in front for us where the evidence is is very important at the national level. I think about groups such as the Evidence Advocacy Center that is trying to lift up just that to make sure that we do not fall victim to things that are not following the science any longer. As a state, I'm very blessed that I have the financial support, the legislative support, the governor's support, and the state school board support to be able to implement all the things that we want to have in Alabama. Not every state has that. So how do we support them as we move forward into this work and making sure that all of our students can read? Dr. Lane mentioned about higher ed. I think that's another element. We're blessed in Alabama that we have coaches that are working alongside higher ed to be able to support them in their implementation. And so having that support system built in is one of those elements that I really think helps to make implementation work.

Okay, thank you. My time has expired. Ms. DeLauro.

Thank you very much and thank you so much for your very thoughtful testimony. It is, there is a science which we should, you know, adhere to. You know, I mean, it's we're not just pulling things out of the air, you know, is what you're talking about. Dr. Lane, I understand you've received multiple research grants throughout your career at the U.S. Department of Education, awards made by the Office of Special Education Programs and by the Institute of Education Sciences. Can you walk us through the research you have been able to conduct because of these funding opportunities? How did they advance your understanding of evidence-based reading instruction?

Thank you for the question. One of the things to understand about the science of reading is that the vast majority of that science is a result of federally funded research. This is where the science comes from. So harkening back to Chairman Aderholt's question, I think that's one of the key areas of federal funding that makes a difference. If we want to continue understanding how kids learn to read, we need to make sure that we're providing the funding for that research. The grants that I've had have varied. They're all related to literacy in different ways. I was a part of an IES grant that was studying reading instruction in juvenile corrections. It's an area that when we have kids who can read or who learn how to read while they're incarcerated, they have much lower rates of recidivism, they do much better in society. And so unfortunately, most juvenile correctional facilities don't attract a lot of really strong teachers, so ensuring that we have effective methods is one of the things that we were looking at. A lot of the research that I've done has focused on early literacy and particularly phonics instruction, and that has yielded a program that we now have published called UFLI Foundations. It's a phonics program that is now used very widely across the country in just four years since it was released. I think we're in close to 700,000 classrooms. And it is making a difference. Phonics is not the only element that we need to be teaching, though, and research and those federally funded grants that focus on language development and background knowledge development are also essential. So all of these different federally funded research opportunities weave their way into effective programs. So the development of UFLI was not solely our own research. We have the DNA of NIH, NSF, and DOE research woven all the way through our program.

Well, thank you for that. And I just want to make a point there that what you're talking about in the science of reading is former Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan's original proposal for a National Institute of Education. It led to the creation of the Institute of Education Sciences. I mention this because of your point, the federal commitment to science and reading cannot occur without this subcommittee's steadfast support of IES and its expert staff and its funding opportunities. Ms. Short, in your testimony, you note that high-quality, and this is a quote, "high-quality early childhood and early literacy efforts consistently show strong returns on investments." I couldn't agree more and have been a strong supporter of the investment, the federal investment in early childhood. Walk us through the benefits of high-quality early childhood education helping for kids to arrive at kindergarten and first grade prepared for reading and literacy programs. What happens if a child doesn't have access to that high-quality early education opportunity? How difficult is it for a child to catch up with peers who have spent that time in those important early childhood programs prior to kindergarten?

Well, I'd love to share with you that every child that comes into our schools is ready to learn, but that is not the case. And we take children where they are. And Dr. Eric Mackey, our state superintendent, often says, "Every child, every chance, every day." The goal is that we are looking for with these assessments that we give, what are the risk factors? What are the areas that we need to make sure that we're supporting this child in with the deficiencies that they are showing? And so making sure that we're providing them good core instruction from the beginning. And when we see that that good core instruction is not working based on the assessments that we provide, the research-based assessments, that we intervene immediately, that we're providing them the supports that they need, and that we involve the family. I think that's one of the elements in our law that is a real strength is making sure that we are connecting the people who were there as the other first teachers of their child to be able to support their children, explain to them what is taking place with the deficiencies that we're seeing and how they can be a part of helping as well. Also providing outside of school time for these students. If we have a student who's showing a consistent deficiency, our law triggers that they are automatically invited to our summer learning programs that we have. And Alabama was recently the host of the National Summer Learning Association conference because of the great work that we've been doing in our out-of-school time.

Thank you. My time is up. I would just say that your views and just the investment in early childhood education and literacy is, in your view, essential for kids to be able to succeed, to be able to thrive, to be able to really move through the process and wherever they are at whatever level they are, that that is a critical piece of trying to make sure that they have, if they don't have the two years or so forth, but and then working to have help them to catch up, which is also an investment of federal resources. It's the early childhood investment, but where the deficiencies are, then we need to be able to provide. It would be your view that we need to provide the federal investments in this kind of effort to allow kids to be able to thrive. Thank you so much and thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Simpson.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you all for being here today and for your testimony. This is a fascinating and perplexing subject. The reason I say perplexing is I've been kind of involved in this for a number of years. 30 years ago when I was Speaker of the House in Idaho, my best friend's wife was taught reading recovery. And I made House and Senate Appropriations Committee in Idaho go over and spend a day with her and learn what she did and the challenges she faced. She told me a couple things. One of them is that if someone, if a child doesn't get on grade level by about the third grade, they're just going to get further and further behind and you've essentially lost that child. And that's why third grade is so important. Second thing she taught me was you have to get the parents involved. And these teachers that taught reading recovery would go to parents' homes in the evening to work with the parents and the child. We have parents that at home, they only speak Spanish. And in school, they speak English. How difficult is that and the challenges that they face and stuff? And so we've known this is a problem forever, and yet we keep seeing reading scores go down. Why haven't we fixed it? I mean, that's the thing that's perplexing to me. Why aren't, you would think that first, second, and third grade teachers would already know this. That would be what they would learn in college to become teachers. Why isn't that happening? Anybody want to address that and the issue of parents and getting parents involved in this also?

I'm happy to talk about that. I think one of the big things that I alluded to earlier was that the tools that teachers are provided overall are lacking dramatically. And so a teacher may come from a really high-quality teacher preparation program, learn effective methods, but then are provided reading programs that don't allow them to use those, what they know, in order to teach reading well. That the programs are just of a very poor quality. And it's a really, really concerning issue for me. As someone who's developed a program, we spent years studying what needed to go into it and two years piloting it before we ever even considered publishing it. We didn't set out to publish a program. And the opposite usually happens. A publisher will publish a program and then maybe go back later and study it, but it's already been sold to schools. Teachers have to use it because that's the adopted required curriculum, but it's not working. And so that's one of the big issues. The other issue that you brought up, the problem with parent involvement, what I see very often is that many parents with the children who are struggling the most in reading have literacy issues themselves. That they were poorly served by their schools. How do we expect them to then turn around and provide excellent support at home? It doesn't make sense, right? It doesn't flow. So providing family literacy efforts that actually support the literacy development of the adult in the home is one other way that we can support children in having a literacy-rich environment.

Do we need to do a better job in our teacher preparation classes in colleges?

Absolutely. There's a very wide range of quality from outstanding to really, really poor. And there is no real safeguard or guidance for what exactly needs to be addressed. A lot of other professions have very clearly laid out standards or expectations of what a graduate should know and be able to do. Education really doesn't have that. The Education Advocacy Center that Ms. Short mentioned is an effort to address that, to professionalize the field more, to have agreed-upon standards. You don't see in, you know, medicine or architecture or pharmacy or anything the lack of consistency that we see in education.

It is, it is frustrating. If I was a teacher and I had the skills to be able to teach that and all of a sudden I had this program that didn't actually work, I would think I would be standing on top of my desk and screaming to the superintendent and the school board and everything else that this isn't working, our scores are going down and we need to change. And I think more of that needs to happen across the country. But Idaho has adopted a science of reading program and they've seen over the last year our scores went up. In fact, I think Mr. Aderholt mentioned that only two states had reached pre-pandemic levels. Idaho was the other one that had reached pre-pandemic levels. But they'd gone up from 66 to 70 percent at third grade reading level, which is good, but that still means about one in three students aren't at reading level. And we need to do much, much, much better. Thank you for what you do. It is very, very important. Most important part of primary education, I think. Thank you.

Mr. Hoyer.

Thank you very much. Thank you very much for what you do every day, which I think is so critical. As I told you, my wife was in early childhood education. She ran early childhood education pre-K to third grade in Prince George's County, which is a school system of over 100, well over 100,000 people. So this is a very important issue for me and has been my entire career in the state senate and here. And I share Congressman Simpson's frustration, as I'm sure you share it, that we haven't gotten to where we need to be when we have statistics that children are not reaching the third grade levels at 85 and 90 percent levels, which really ought to be the case and that ought to be our objective. I was interested in both of you, Ms. Short and Ms. Lane, and I think Ms. Saulsberry you as well, not quite as direct, mention the word investment numerous times. And while I accept the theory that money is not everything, it's not. Most parents, particularly elementary school parents, think they have a wonderful school if the teacher in that classroom is wonderful. Ultimately, that's the test. You mentioned, Dr. Lane, that you had received a lot of what you know as a result of federal research. Unfortunately, as you probably know, ADO slashed by 50 percent the education, the research. And they slashed in addition NIH and NSA, which you mentioned in your comment. If we continue to do that, what do you believe will be the result?

It's a great question. I do believe that continued investment in education research is essential. Having served on many grant review panels, I understand how very rigorous the review process is. There isn't a grant getting through the process without it being a really high-quality thing. It's almost impossible. It's not completely impossible, surely that could happen, but every one of the grants that we have reviewed that got funded was really rigorous, and many of the ones that didn't get funded were really rigorous proposals. And so I feel like there's kind of a misconception that a lot of money gets poured into education research that isn't high quality and doesn't produce useful results. That's not the case at all. I, having been on both sides of that, I know the rigor that goes into it. The investment in education research is what brought us the science of reading. And if we want to continue to learn what works and continue to attempt to solve the problem, we have to continue to invest in understanding it. It's not simple. There are many different issues, and some of them are location-based kinds of issues. We work in very affluent districts, we work in extremely resource-poor districts, and they have very different issues that they are addressing. And so understanding the impact of some of these demographic differences, I think, is really important, and we know very little at this point about those things. Understanding, as I mentioned earlier, the implementation science and how effective instruction can be more systematically implemented and sustained over time. I think these are important things. Without continued investment, we will have no idea the effects of technological changes and how those things are affecting kids. We are seeing more and more that some of the technological innovations are falling short and are not producing those results, but we won't know that and so we'll still be subject to the snake oil salesman if we aren't investigating.

I want to thank you for that answer. A, I think it was comprehensive and I think it's right on target. Ms. Short, or is it Dr. Short or Director Short, I suppose. You mentioned on a number of occasions coaching. These were, I presume, people who in addition to the teacher were in the classroom to help specifically with this particular skill, which required additional investment by Alabama in expanding the teachers that were available to that child. Is that accurate?

Yes, sir. Would you think that's absolutely necessary? Absolutely.

Judy, my wife, taught in an experimental school in her early career. And one of the experiments were to provide additional help within the classroom so that Judy could concentrate on the reading, most specifically, first grade. And that required additional expenditures in that school, and that school was very successful. Now, first of all, they'd pick the best teachers in the county, so it was going to be successful no matter, it was an open classroom as well, which was also part of the experiment. Would you say that without the investment that Alabama had made in those extra resources, you would have been as successful as you were or have been?

You have just teed it up for me. Thank you so much. Alabama's really a cautionary tale. If you go back and you look at our data over time, back in the early 2000s, we were on our way. We had made the greatest gains that NAEP had ever seen. We had hit the national average, and then we hit proration. Our vision changed, our policy changed, our investment changed, and our data changed, not for the better. Now that we have sound policy in place, we have invested personnel, and when you talk about investment, yes, the finances is very important, but it's also the commitment of the individuals to be able to say, "Hey, I'm standing in with you. These are tough decisions that we're going to make for the benefit of children, but we're going to do what's right for the long-term success of children." You know, that investment is really making a difference in Alabama. And I definitely think that without it, we have proven that it's problematic.

Thank you very much. Thank you both. Dr. Harris.

Thank you very much and thank you all three of you for, you know, paying attention to taking care of our children, making sure they can succeed in a 21st-century economy. Well, I'll tell you, it's striking to me that the federal government sometimes creates a problem and then spends a whole lot of money trying to solve it. You know, and again, everyone on this committee knows we have a nutrition program that buys junk food and then we have to do research on how to treat obesity and overweight and spend a whole lot of money on GLP-1 drugs for children. And some people argue, well, you got to do the research. No, you got to go back and figure out exactly what's going on here. So I think in this case, we may have created the problem and now we're going to solve it. Why do I say that? Prevention is much better than a cure. This book, Failure Factory, fascinating book written by an investigative reporter on the Baltimore City public school system, talks about a man born in 1908 named Thurgood Marshall. Goes to Frederick Douglass High School. His mother's a teacher, I'm sure read to him. Father taught him how to debate. Goes to Frederick Douglass High School, a segregated high school in Baltimore. Goes on to become the first African American Supreme Court Justice. Obviously well educated, obviously knew how to read. That high school has zero percent of their students proficient in reading now. Zero percent. So what's changed? Well, our single parent, I'm going to ask a question about the effect of the family on reading. You all know about the million-word gap. I mean, look, you're educators, you understand it, right? If you're read to as a child, you're likely not to have the million-word gap. And if you come out of a single-parent household, you're more likely to not succeed in reading and literacy. Now maybe, and family literacy is really important because you're right, we have perpetuated this problem. Maybe we need a Make America Read Again, you know, policy or something. Because this is not something we didn't know about. Back when I was in the state legislature, and Dr. Simpson reminded me about this, this is now 35 years ago, we had what was called the Class Size Reduction Act. And they said this was going to solve our problems, we were going to reduce class sizes across the board. It was a big teacher union effort. And I did a little research and looked at the Tennessee STAR study. And wow, they'd done the research. They said, oh, what you got to do is you got to reduce class sizes before third grade so students can learn how to read. Basically, that's the summary of it. They spent a whole lot of money, increased all the class sizes, couldn't afford it. Now the class sizes are big throughout Maryland. And Maryland is now, the wealthiest nation, is 40th in the nation in reading. And under the air quotes "leadership" of our current governor, in 2024, the Board of Education decides to implement a retention policy for the third-grade reading, but not implement it until 2027. So let's leave three more classes behind, whereas states like Alabama, states like Mississippi are taking the lead on this. I just got to ask, what in the world is going on here? This committee also should be looking at every single policy because again, going back to the single-parent households, and we know the data, 69 percent of black children are born to a single-family household, 52 percent of Hispanics, 28 percent of white children. And our single-parent household rate is three times as high as the rest of the world. Our reading is worse than the rest of the world. We should be looking at every single policy we have and make sure we promote a household that will support literacy. Now it could be family literacy programs, no question about it, because we got some catching up to do. But I'm just going to ask you, is that true that in fact family structure is an important predictor of literacy? I'll start with you, Dr. Lane.

Is it an important predictor? Absolutely. Okay, thank you. I was going to add a mother's level of education is one of the most highly predictive. Sure, especially, yeah. And again, family structure, and I get it, so family literacy is probably important. Ms. Short?

You know, if you have two individuals in a household, I definitely think there's more language likely to be spoken, so that's beneficial. I also don't think it's the determinant. And the children come to us, of course not, just like childhood obesity, what you eat is not solely. We're going to make sure we provide whatever we can for them. Mr. Saulsberry?

Yes, I do agree that it is important, that family structure is very important. And as you were speaking, I was reminded of a school that has a school-to-home literacy project. And it's been amazing. They actually won an award for it. But I think about those families that have multiple students in the home, you know, and whatever we can do to send a book home. This particular school, Monte Sano Elementary, sends a book home with their students. And so just imagine the power of reading in that home because now my older sibling or whomever is bringing it home, so now we're all having that reading time around the book of the week or maybe the book of the month. So I do agree that that's important. Going to libraries, doing whatever it takes, encouraging competition with reading, accelerated reader initiatives, or whatever competition can be encouraged. I do agree that it is important.

Yeah, thank you very much. I yield back. Mr. Pocan.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thanks for having this hearing and thanks to the witnesses for being here. So let me go back to the testimonies you all gave and I think each of you talked about the emphasis on professional development for teachers. And I do think as much as we want to avoid the snake oil salesman and get the right programming, if you don't have that right teacher with the professional development to do that programming, it's much more difficult. Wisconsin is one of the states that passed a science of reading law as well, so we appreciate... ...the work that you're doing, especially in Alabama and Florida on this. But in the last budget cycle, Title II-A funding, which is probably the largest federal investment in teacher professional development, was completely eliminated by the White House in their budget. Fortunately, we were able to put that back in moving forward, but we're going to have another budget coming to us very soon. I know Dr. Lane specifically talked about teacher prep and supporting educators on this, and Ms. Short, you talked about support for educators and ongoing professional development, and Mr. Saulsberry, you also talked about supporting teachers and professional development. So could you just address, if you can't address the fund specifically, I understand if you don't work directly with that, but why investing in that professional development is integral to this work that you're doing? And anyone who wants to take it is more than welcome, or all of you.

The science of reading is complex. It involves, as Ranking Member DeLauro mentioned earlier, it involves those five pillars, and those five pillars have elements all within them. And so we're looking at individuals who are coming with their own background, and we're having to navigate what are the areas that they're strong in and what are the areas that they're weak in. So having that knowledge, making sure that we have the professional learning, the understanding of what the science of reading is, and probably more importantly, what it is not, is essential for our teachers to make sure that they have that. I mentioned to you earlier about coaching in Alabama, and... Alabama's known for their football. I'm remiss in not bringing that up. But obviously, the first-string players, they have coaches. Coaches are not just for the weak. Coaches are for everyone. Everyone deserves a coach. Everyone deserves to have someone who's going to work alongside them and see how can we make this better for the outcome that you're looking for. Thank you.

I would also like to add, it's very important that we challenge the mental models of how teachers, as they're coming into the classroom, were taught how to read themselves. So they're thinking maybe I need to take the approach that I was taught. But that PD is important for them, such as I mentioned in my testimony about LETRS for elementary educators and/or early childhood educators, taking those teachers through those courses. But even if you can't do that, our coaches, our reading specialists are very important. They have to implement, let's just say for first semester in our district, there were 18 PD sessions that they had to turn around at schools. There were full coaching cycles, which could be anywhere from six to eight weeks, mini coaching cycles, maybe roughly one to two weeks, that they are expected to implement. So even if I can't go enroll in a full course, maybe I have demands from my family at home or maybe I'm pursuing another degree, I'm able to get something during that day from another educator who can assist me in really breaking down those challenges that maybe I'm encountering, maybe at the small group table with my students. So I think the professional development, the funds that we have for substitute teachers to pay them so that teachers can have days to go and get the learning that they need or have time to work on any requirements that they need to submit for the Alabama Literacy Act, etc., I think that's very important.

One of the things that Ms. Short mentioned earlier was the statewide effort to really build background knowledge about reading. When we go into a school or a district to prepare them to implement our program, one of the things that we can immediately tell is if they've had that kind of background knowledge building. And it's not a quick one-day workshop. We're talking long hours spent really digging in and learning. And if you don't have that professional development, then the science just stays with the academics. We need to get it into the hands and into the minds of the teachers who are using it. And coaching is one of the most powerful tools if you have a really well-trained literacy coach that can guide a teacher, model effective lessons for them, help them plan effective instruction. You will see better outcomes.

Great. Thank you. I yield back, Mr. Chairman.

Ms. Frankel.

Yeah, thank you. Thank you all for being here. Dr. Lane, I'm from Palm Beach County, and our school system actually has a contract with University of Florida on your subject. And my son's a Gator. Go Gators. And he reads very well. So it's interesting how one of my colleagues introduced the subject of the single parent. I want to just say, I look at what you are promoting, which sounds very logical. It's a tool. But it's not the end-all because children, and you know, just look at this committee, we don't just deal with education. We deal with health, we deal with safety for children. And I would like to just hear your comment on the importance of taking care of a child, making sure they have the nutrition, the health, the stable family, how that makes your job easier. Who wants to start?

Sure. Certainly when a child comes to school with extensive language experience, where they've been spoken with a lot at home and in preschool settings, when they are healthy and they don't have urgent other more pressing concerns in their lives and they can focus on learning, when they are well-fed and can focus on learning, they do better. Absolutely. They come to school ready to learn and they do learn. And when those things are absent in their lives, it certainly has an impact. So in terms of the work of educators everywhere, it makes a huge difference. But those children exist and we still need to teach them. And we need to not expect that, oh, they won't be able to learn because they don't have all of this ideal circumstance. We need to ensure that we're using effective practice.

Yeah, I mean, we have seen over the past year, we're going to see cuts to SNAP, which is food security, food security to parents. We're going to see people losing their healthcare. And let me go, Mr. Saulsberry, I don't think we've given you the time that you deserve to answer some of these questions, but can you explain why it's important also for the parents to be well-fed, to be healthy, to have a job? And incidentally, there's 10 million children growing up in single-family homes, and we're not going to play the match game, folks, okay? That's like, really? But what is it that the parents need?

So for the parents, I think about the different demands. You have several parents who are working more than one job. You may have parents who are taking care of elderly family members. We even have teachers who are taking care of elderly family members. So there are additional people in the home that they're trying to feed, and they're working against or working with all of the different systems that they're trying to get that funding from or get that support from to help pay a bill or whatever it may be or to help keep food on the table so that everyone's fed. So parents really sometimes, in some situations, are really relying upon what's happening at the school. So anything that we can do to provide a full tummy bag, to make sure that the kid is getting those meals each day, sometimes it's three meals a day. For us, we provide tutoring after school. Some schools do it before school. So the students are able to get an additional meal, even if they're not staying for tutoring, an additional meal to take home, maybe on the bus or maybe in the car. So that helps take some of that stress off of, okay, you haven't eaten and I've got to rush home and get a meal prepared for you. So if the parents are knowing that their kids are taken care of, if they know that they're taken care of, they have more confidence maybe to say, you know what, let me sit down at the table with you and work on this homework assignment or read through this work.

Let me just, I'm sorry to interrupt you, I'm running out of time, but thank you for sharing that. Because here's the point, and I've just a couple of things. When grandma or grandpa gets kicked out of a nursing home because of the Medicaid cuts, right? Or we lose all our workers in the nursing homes because they're being sent back to Haiti. The fact of the matter is that's more stress on the family. And the point really I want to make, which is this, and thank you because we're using your tool of science in Palm Beach County. The point I want to make is, and this committee has the ability in so many ways to make sure that children get off to a good start. And we should understand that there are policies that we are engaged in right now that make it much harder to implement what you are talking about today. But thank you very, very much for being here.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Mr. Clyde.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to our witnesses for appearing before this subcommittee today. I just came from the Budget Committee where we had CBO Director Swagel in front of us, so I appreciate the time. I'm encouraged to hear of your commitment to advancing literacy through the science of reading that puts results first and empowers educators, families, and states to lead the way because I think education should be done at the lowest level possible, the closest to parents and students. Today we face a national crisis in reading proficiency. However, federal costs on education have only skyrocketed since the 1960s. U.S. taxpayers have spent nearly $3 trillion on education in public schools, yet test scores have failed to meaningfully improve, with only about one-third of our fourth and eighth graders reading at proficient levels according to the latest National Assessment of Education Progress data. This isn't just an education failure, it's a threat to America's self-reliance, its future workforce, and its global competitiveness. For much too long, federal education policy has embraced radical ideology, ineffective mandates, and bureaucratic compliance that wasted America's tax dollars without delivering real outcomes for students. And that's what I want. I want real outcomes for students. I want our students to excel. Given this, I think it's time to rethink federal involvement in literacy, focusing on what actually works, which are state-led initiatives, rigorous teacher preparation, and accountability tied to measurable results like grade-level proficiency. We can no longer afford to subsidize failure at the expense of America's students. And I'm a businessman. I believe in return on investment. I think that's the way we grow and the way we make things better. So Dr. Lane, my first question is for you, ma'am. Federal education funding has grown dramatically over the past several decades, yet literacy outcomes have remained largely stagnant from what I've seen. From a research perspective, which literacy investments show the strongest return on taxpayer dollars, ROI, and which types of spending have the weakest or have no demonstrated impact on reading proficiency? What's your thoughts? What are your thoughts on that?

All right. So in terms of investments that have made a big impact, high-quality instruction and making sure that teachers understand how to implement that has the most direct impact. There have been numerous studies over the years of different kinds of instruction. One of the most famous studies in reading was the Follow Through studies, one of the largest federal investments of research dollars in looking specifically at how kids were doing in reading. And very little came out of that, not because there weren't programs identified as very effective and instructional methods identified as very effective, but it was not politically popular.

The will to implement?

That the particular programs that were shown to be effective and the particular programs that were shown to be ineffective were not the popular faddish programs. The program that was found to be very effective was direct instruction and an explicit way of teaching young children. And it proved to be very effective, but the results of that were really never disseminated because of political pressures. And so I think that's one of the things that we need to understand is that really honing in on what does and does not work and ensuring that programs that don't work are not permitted. We have so much expectation of a program that has all the bells and whistles must work best, and that's seldom the case. Sometimes the bare-bones, really simple types of instruction work best.

Getting back to the basics.

Absolutely. And that's not to suggest that we developed a phonics program, so folks may think that I think phonics is the end-all be-all. It is absolutely not. We have to have really strong language development, really strong content and knowledge building as well. And those things are just now starting to gain traction in the education field. And if we don't have all of those things together, then we're not going to see our return on investment at all.

Well, thank you. And in just a few seconds I have left, Ms. Short, if I may. Initiatives under Alabama's Literacy Act have shown remarkable results through state-led implementation and family-focused communication. How can we further support similar state initiatives without imposing burdensome mandates or a one-size-fits-all kind of requirement that undermine local education boards?

I definitely think continuing to support the states in funding is an important element. I also think to kind of piggyback off of what Dr. Lane said, there are some safeguards that we can put into place to help protect to make sure that we are not investing in programs that are known to be detrimental.

Well, thank you very much. And with that, I yield back, Mr. Chairman.

Ms. Watson Coleman.

Thank you very much. I want to thank all three of you because this has been very enriching for me. I'm not an educator, but I'm very concerned. I come from New Jersey. In New Jersey, we have 600-plus school districts. In New Jersey, folks are always talking about nationally we come up number two, number three within the five states the best at this, the best at that, and yet 53 percent of our students are not reading at grade level. I'm wondering if there are studies which have been done in the areas in which the same resources have been applied, financial resources, but the outcomes have not been evidenced improvement. I want to start with you, Mr. Saulsberry, and then I would like for you, Dr. Lane, and Ms. Short to respond.

So right now I'm thinking of actually the community that I'm from where in which we had the funding, we had the support, and there were gains a bit above the state average in reading. So that is my best example of where when the resources are there, when the professional development is there, when the support is there, even for families, that things can move forward. So I don't have maybe that best example of where you're pouring that in and it's not happening. So I don't have that best example, but I do know of an example where if you surround that school district or surround that community with the support they need, that you can see the gains.

How many school districts are there in Alabama?

149 possibly.

Right around there.

Versus 600 and some in New Jersey. That's crazy. Does anyone else have a comment about this? Have you seen research about why it doesn't work in the poorest, whether they're rural or urban school districts, and the students aren't performing, yet you're seeing the dollars go into the effort?

There is quite a bit of research on the role of context in the implementation of a program or the implementation of any type of instructional reform. The research basically is helping us understand that context does matter, and some...

What does it mean? What does it mean when you're talking about in this instance context matters?

Well, when we have a district that has a lot of educator expertise, both the teacher in the classroom and at the district level, then things tend to get implemented more systematically.

So has the research found that you don't have those educational experts in those poor areas or those urban areas or those segregated areas? Is there a correlation?

They tend to have a lot harder time recruiting teachers and keeping teachers. The teacher workforce situation in general is such that teachers are leaving the field in droves. Most teachers don't last more than three years in the field. And so we are investing in high-quality teacher preparation and then they don't stick around because the working conditions are really problematic. And there is quite a bit of research on that.

Ms. Short, do you think that there's a relationship between poverty, race, things of that nature, socioeconomic issues that we're not addressing sufficiently to make those outcomes better in those areas that are not showing the kind of improvement, yet resources to the educational to the schools and to the programs at the schools are actually happening? So is there this correlation between poverty, race, segregation, racism, whatever, low expectations?

What we're seeing in Alabama is that the plan that we're working right now is working for all children. We're seeing increased literacy rates in every demographic and every subpopulation on our state assessment.

Are you doing things with the whole family? Is it holistic? Is it...

Everyone in our state receives support. The level of support they receive is based on their outcome data. So our schools that we see are needing the most support based on their outcome data, our Literacy Act prescribes how much time our regional coaches spend in those schools to provide them the support.

Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I'm going to yield back, but I really haven't hit that nut yet, which is I need to understand what kind of support those communities need that they are not getting in terms of how they're living, how they're living, and the impact of that on their children's outcomes. Thank you very much. I yield back.

May I comment more on that? Is that allowed?

Go ahead.

I just wanted to bring up an example. We are working with a school in Wisconsin. Wisconsin has one of the largest racial literacy gaps in the country. And one of our mantras at the University of Florida Literacy Institute is it's not these kids, it's this instruction. If you give really solid instruction, you will get good results no matter what kids are sitting in front of you. And the school that we're working with in Wisconsin, we're hoping to develop it into kind of a model demonstration site. It is a charter school, but it's unlike a lot of other charter schools in that they actively seek kids who other schools would rather not have. It is predominantly Black, predominantly low SES. But the school itself is committed to ensuring really good outcomes for these children. And they take a holistic approach and they do things like they have started they've worked with philanthropies so they are able to provide support for families that go through a financial literacy program, get those families get access to funding for a down payment to purchase a home that then provides a stable place for these children to live. So it is a wrap-around kind of approach and they have lots of other initiatives, but they're seeing really good outcomes in a state where the outcomes for the students they serve are not good. And so it's a I think learning from examples like that is such an important piece of what we need to do.

Mr. Harder.

Thank you so much to all of our witnesses for being here and a huge thanks to our chair and ranking member for making this hearing possible. One of the few bipartisan education hearings we've had in Congress in recent years. There used to be a lot of discussion on education in a bipartisan way. We had No Child Left Behind during the Bush administration, we had Race to the Top during the Obama administration, and then we've really had a lost decade where there has not been an enormous amount of attention or enough concern at the federal level but also in many states on how we can make sure that kids are getting the reading math outcomes that we need. I think one big reason for that is we've run out of ideas. We have really lost hope that we can change student trajectories. And so I want to thank all of you for giving us some of that hope because it is so rare in education to find success stories that scale from one amazing teacher through to one class, through to a whole school, through to a whole state, let alone to multiple states. And that's why I think this is such a remarkable story is that it has been both scaled and replicated across several different states. One area of concern that I want to dig into is that many states think they're doing this, and yet the outcomes disagree. 40 states since 2013 have passed some semblance of reading bills. And they're patting themselves on the back and they're saying we're using phonics, everything is fantastic in the classroom, and yet their reading outcomes are not budging. And I think it's really important to understand what has happened that's different in Mississippi, Louisiana, and Alabama that hasn't actually happened in these 37 other states that are telling themselves that they have the right curriculums but are lacking some of those different elements. So Dr. Lane, you have probably the best comparative understanding of what's going on in different states. What do you think is different about the states that have actually seen reading outcomes improve and the states that haven't?

Well, quite honestly, states like Alabama have expertise, people who know what they're doing leading the efforts. That is not true in all of the states. We have people in leadership roles in education who don't understand reading. And when you don't understand it, you just don't bother with it as much. It's not as much of a priority. And what they're attempting to do in a lot of settings is check off the boxes that have emerged as, oh, this is what made Mississippi, this is what made Alabama successful. We'll just check those things off, but we're not really investing our time and our effort in learning and understanding them. And I think that's the thing that I see most from one state to the next because we do deal with schools in every state. And the context could not be more different. And it almost always comes back to leadership and what do the people in charge know and what are they able to do in order to effect the kind of changes we want to see.

Sure. I hear you on that. I will say, you know, Maryland has hired Dr. Carey Wright from Mississippi and I think it's a little bit too early to tell what's going to go on in Maryland, but they certainly have not seen the recent improvements that Mississippi has had. So just to push back a little bit, I think it's what I see is a couple of really important components that I think can be scaled through other states. I see a curriculum-aligned teacher training that is driven down into the schools and is evidence-backed. I see accountability metrics and screening that often are not implemented well in other states. How do you sort of think about the role of accountability and do you think that that's a key differentiator between the Mississippis and Alabamas and Louisianas of the world and the states that haven't necessarily seen significant reading improvements?

I do. I think that accountability certainly is a big driver in most states. I know that in Florida under Jeb Bush is when a lot of those things got implemented that have made Florida more successful in reading. We have not grown to the same degree as a lot of these other states in recent years, but a lot of those institutional systemic kind of things have mattered. Ultimately, though, I think the effort to do things quickly often results in them being done badly. And so Chairman Aderholt mentioned the Mississippi miracle is more accurately known as the Mississippi marathon. It started 15 years ago. It didn't start last year or the year before. And the investment of time and effort and expertise is what has made such a difference there.

Thank you. And final question, what do you think is the role of federal support to help states distinguish between evidence-backed programs, effective programs, non-effective programs? How do you think that we use federal resources to drive towards those outcomes that we all want?

I feel like the federal government has kind of kept their hands off in terms of not allowing the Department of Education to make any kind of recommendation of a particular curricula. The only entity that attempts to do that is the What Works Clearinghouse, a function of the Institute of Education Sciences. And although it has a lot of excellent resources, it has fallen short in this particular regard mostly because I think it does a very poor job of translating... ...research in ways that can be accessible to practitioners. So they don't, for example, make it clear the distinction between this was a high-quality study versus it had really good outcomes. And they're very, very restrictive of what gets reviewed. It has to have a standard of research that without a lot of research funding can't happen. The randomized control trial for a program, that's something that's very expensive to get, and if you don't have that level of support, you won't be reviewed by the What Works Clearinghouse. So helping practitioners understand the pros and cons of different programs beyond that when they don't have that level of evidence behind them doesn't mean they're not good, they just don't have that kind of study that shows how good they are. Having an entity like What Works Clearinghouse be more practitioner-friendly and usable in that respect could have a tremendous impact on what happens in schools.

Thank you.

Ms. Dean.

I thank you, Chairman Aderholt, Ranking Member DeLauro. Thank you for convening this hearing. Thank you for the three testifiers today. I admire your passion and your expertise with probably one of the most critical roles that any of us will ever play, educating our kids, teaching them a love of reading. I come at this as a mom to three sons, grown sons, but now grandmother to seven little ones. And it is so fun to watch a kid, and it's renewed in me with these my new little ones, find a love of language and want to turn the page and understand what that word is. So thank you for what you do with such passion and expertise. I'm a former professor of writing at LaSalle University for 10 years, so of course what you're talking about and what you do leads directly to what I had fun doing, which was teaching writing and rhetoric and ethics and the use of language. I come at it at a time we all are talking about this, and that's why I'm glad for the focus on it in this committee. My home state is Pennsylvania. About one-third of fourth graders in 2024 were proficient in reading. That's I think a very sad statistic. I think we talk about the gift of learning to read, I think it is the right. I think every child has the right to know how to read because that is absolutely the key to their future. If we got that right, we would solve so many other ills. Every other subject becomes difficult when a child struggles, you've all talked about that. Children from low-income families as well as children of color, Black and Hispanic, in our state, sadly, the numbers are even worse. And those inequities follow children into adulthood, holding them back from their future. And we've heard today through your expertise that children don't fail to learn, we're failing to teach them and to adequately prepare and resource those who teach our children. It isn't the children's fault. So what I think about is, and maybe I'll start with you, Mr. Saulsberry, your stories and anecdotes and education have been really interesting. Building on what Mr. Harder was asking you about, from the federal level, here we are, this committee has a focus on education. What do you think the federal government can do to support states and school districts in this teaching through science of reading?

So as I mentioned in some of what I submitted, really ensuring that we have access to giving that support to the classroom. We're looking at initiatives that go beyond grade three currently. So if I'm that student that, you know, if I did well or maybe I was sufficient as a third grader and I was able to go on to fourth grade, I will still need that support. And so if we can get professional development for our fourth and fifth grade teachers and even beyond, I mean even after the elementary grades, students are sometimes still behind, right? But if we can get that support for ensuring that those fourth and fifth grade teachers who may not have had that motivation to enroll in a LETRS for elementary educators course, and so now there's that motivation to now get more knowledge of the science of reading training. So giving them that support, giving support for intervention. So even when I've done what I need to do in the classroom for different tiers of instruction, tier one, tier two instruction, and so when it's time for that tier three piece, you know, if I'm going to as the classroom teacher be the one to do that, do I have what I need? And then if it's not me, is there someone else who can come in and support that work of working with those students? So I would say the professional development, the appropriate personnel, additional support for coaching. Right now, we do I feel a good job of coaching grades K through three, but maybe not as far as...

As a country, we need to be doing that as...

Yes, yes, in our state. So going beyond that third grade, going beyond third grade and giving the coaching and support that's needed for fourth and fifth grade teachers and maybe even beyond that.

And I know you all know this, but we are talking about a backdrop of this administration, as evidenced in Project 2025 on what I think is page 319, an ambition, and the Secretary of Education sat here in this very committee room, an ambition to shutter the federal Department of Education. I decry that kind of nonsense. If we want to be the great country that I know we are, we educate our children well, and the federal government has a role to play. Could somebody comment briefly, if you would, on the science of reading methodology as it affects children with differences, learning differences and disabilities?

I'd be happy to, that is my area. I'm a professor of special education. And honestly, when you were asking your previous question, it made me think of something specific that I didn't get to in my response to Ranking Member DeLauro. And that is in the grant funding that we have received at the University of Florida, a lot of the grants are not research grants, they are personnel preparation grants. And so we have this really tragic workforce problem in education, and in special education, there have been available grants to support the training of special education teachers. So giving someone an incentive essentially to maybe make a career change and go into education because we're so desperate for them. And it functions pretty much like a loan if you it has a service obligation attached if you don't teach for however many years is assigned to the grant, then you have to pay it back. So there is some guarantee that there will be some dividend paid from it. And so in terms of the types of reading instruction that we're talking about, reaching children with disabilities, our focus is we do a lot of work with preparing teachers to work with children with dyslexia particularly. And the same practices work across whether you have a disability or not. The amount of time, the amount of practice that you need with the skills is the main distinguisher of what instruction will look like in various contexts, but the same science applies essentially.

Well, I appreciate that and I do appreciate the extra time to hear about instruction for children with disabilities, but also the important role the federal government plays in supporting states and supporting teachers and supporting the research and the wrap-around. We need to do more of that, not less. Thank you. I yield back.

Okay, thank you. I know we're closing in on close to two hours in the hearing, but I know I think Ms. DeLauro, if you've got something you want, let me refer to you and before we close out the hearing. So Ms. DeLauro, you have the floor.

Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman, and I want to thank my colleagues. I think that this has been a when I say an intense hearing, a hearing filled with real content and information about how we should proceed on what is a fundamental issue in our society, and that is the reading capabilities of our children. And for me, it sounds like there are pockets and places in this nation where there are models of programs that are succeeding, that are working. Now, it may be that it is I understand state by state, etc. But our children are not just state by state. It is about looking at how children across the board from wherever they are are being given the opportunity for success and the teachers, and the teachers provided with the tools that they need. And so I think we compartmentalize something that is not having the broadest and biggest effect overall on the nation on this national issue. So there is then a federal role in this effort, which we should not be afraid to acknowledge. No one is proclaiming that like it's you know when people want to just editorialize and say, oh, it's the federal government and it's reaching down and it's hell no. It is about looking at what are the best practices, what is working nationwide, what is providing the biggest and broadest effect on reading. We have looked at and I'm just I'm going to make an assumption because the answer to this would be yes and I would just say to the to the chair, I believe we need to reconvene the National Reading Panel. I think we did this in it's been 26 years since we did this, and this is the committee that did it. So we can do that and you know go back and take a look at what has happened to apply more research on the science of reading. What topics now should we be focused on? And so I think about that this is a proper role for this committee to engage on. I would just say a couple more things if the chair is usually indulgent of my making comments. Look, I'd like to know in Mississippi today is the gold standard, or it appears to be a gold standard. What are the federal resources that have helped to provide that effort, okay? Is it Title I, IDEA, Title II-A, which is the professional development? What is is that the case in Alabama? Where is writ large the federal role in helping us to achieve the goals in this area? So I take you and I'm sorry, Mr. Saulsberry, I was going to ask you about, you know, building on the phonics instruction and it's not the only piece, but how do you build on that on that effort? How do we sustain and increase our investments in federal education research? Okay. The science of reading would not exist without it. Exactly. And if we know that and understand that as you have so well portrayed today, then there shouldn't be any question about our looking at increased investments in this education effort. What works? You talked about the What Works Clearinghouse and Education Department can translate how do we translate effective practices to districts? Safeguard against the snake oil salesman. How do we sustain our commitments to federal education programs? I'm going to just say it, we had to fight like hell on the bipartisan basis to make sure that Title I, IDEA, Title II-A, early childhood were provided with resources for them to do the job that they are intended to do. We should not have to fight like hell to do that. There ought to be an understanding that this is where the strength of this nation lies. And I'm going to just ask all of you, you're just your testimony is on point, not afraid to speak up about what works and what doesn't work. We don't say everything works and here's all the money to do even things that don't work, hell no again. It's what works, you've identified things that are working. As the federal government, which is the largest source of resources, my state of Connecticut is going to put up $4.5 million to deal with coaches. You pointed out people need coaches because they see it as it's something that we should do. At the federal level, you need to help us say these are the things that you should be doing. This is an appropriate role for the federal government. Don't tell us everything we have to do, but help us to reach the goals and the vision that we know can work because of the work that we are doing and we understand it. So I'm just asking you, first of all, I want to thank you, you know, it is in-depth testimony today from all of you and it it works. But help us to help you, but more importantly, help us help you help our kids, no matter where they are, no matter where they are, no matter what that background is, because when you provide a kid with the opportunities and the environment in which to thrive, that child will thrive. We know it, you know it. Help us to make that case here. Tell your story writ large. Thank you so much for being here, really appreciate it. And Mr. Chairman, thank you for convening this hearing today.

Thank you. Well, thank you. I think this has been a good hearing. It has been very good to hear from all of you here today and really how we can try to highlight the tremendous work of state and local leaders in trying to advance what, you know, as we call the science of reading. I was very happy to see this article in the New York Times about how three of Southern states are the best hope in schooling, and that was just published earlier this month. And so very glad to see my home state of Alabama being mentioned on that as one of those as well. So with that, the hearing is adjourned and we look forward to working with you and following your success as you help students across America be able to read better and especially from a very early age. So thank you, we're dismissed. [Gavel sounds.]