13: The List

Speaker 1 There are millions of podcasts out there, and you've chosen this one. Whether you're a regular or just here on a whim, it's what you have chosen to listen to.

Speaker 1 With Yoto, your kids can have the same choice. Yoto is a screen-free, ad-free audio player.
With hundreds of Yoto cards, there are stories, music, and podcasts like this one, but for kids.

Speaker 1 Just slot a card into the player and let the adventure begin. Check out YotoPlay.com.

Speaker 2 The Who's Down and Who Newville were making their list, but some didn't know Walmart has the best brands for their gifts.

Speaker 3 What about toys?

Speaker 1 Do they have brands kids have been wanting all year?

Speaker 4 Yup, Barbie, Tony's, and Lego. Gifts that will make them all cheer.

Speaker 2 Do you mean they have all the brands I adore? They have Nintendo, Nespresso, Apple, and more. What about so?

Speaker 3 The Who answered questions from friends till they were blue.

Speaker 2 Each one listened and shouted, From Walmart? Who knew? Shop gifts from top brands for everyone on your list in the the Walmart app.

Speaker 5 I've gotten a lot of emails from listeners since Solja's story first came out. I have a fat file folder full of actual letters, too, sent in the mail.
One of these letters came from Matt Huffman.

Speaker 5 At the time, he was president of the Ohio State Senate. The letter is three handwritten pages.
Huffman said he was, quote, invigorated after listening to the podcast.

Speaker 5 He could see there was a problem with how reading was taught, and and he wanted to fix it. He wasn't the only one.

Speaker 2 Ohio had a lot of people who listened to our podcast.

Speaker 5 This is my co-reporter, Christopher Peake.

Speaker 2 I got a call just a couple months after Solda Story came out from one of the top education officials saying all the executives in the department were listening to Solda Story and they want to do something about it.

Speaker 5 A few weeks after Chris got that call, the governor gave his state of the state address.

Speaker 7 I'm calling for a renewed focus on literacy.

Speaker 2 He's saying a big proposal is coming. We're going to make changes to how reading is taught in Ohio.

Speaker 5 Two weeks later, legislators introduced a bill.

Speaker 2 And this bill says the department has to come up with a list of programs that are aligned with the science of reading.

Speaker 5 The bill passed in June. The governor signed it into law on the 4th of July.

Speaker 5 Now, it was up to the Ohio Department of Education to make a list of approved reading programs.

Speaker 5 I'm Emily Hanford and this is Sold a Story, a podcast from APM Reports.

Speaker 5 In this episode, we're going to tell you how state education officials in Ohio came up with their list, why the Success for All program wasn't on it at first, and the influential organization that Ohio and other states are looking to for help when they're figuring out what programs count as the science of reading.

Speaker 5 An organization that wasn't set up to do that. We're also going to hear why even an evidence-based program doesn't always work.
Teaching kids to read is about more than just a program.

Speaker 5 So, Ohio's new reading law passes in 2023. It directs the state government to come up with a list of approved reading programs.

Speaker 8 My name is Dr. Melissa Weber-Mayer.

Speaker 5 And it's this person's job to figure out how to do that.

Speaker 8 I work for the Ohio Department of Education and Workforce.

Speaker 5 She and her colleagues have to come up with this list quickly. The law says schools in Ohio must be using a state-approved reading program by the end of the following school year.

Speaker 8 We had a very short window to get things in place.

Speaker 5 Melissa Weber Mayer and her colleagues knew what wasn't going to be on the list.

Speaker 8 If there was any indication of any part of a three-queuing method being used, they didn't move forward.

Speaker 5 That's because the Ohio law included a ban on queuing, the flawed strategies we focused on in this podcast. At least 16 other states now have similar bans.

Speaker 5 So, programs that included queuing were out in Ohio. But what was in?

Speaker 5 The law said programs had to be, quote, aligned with the science of reading.

Speaker 5 Melissa Weber Mayer and her team decided it wasn't feasible for them to do their own analysis of research on reading programs.

Speaker 8 We actually did not review efficacy studies.

Speaker 5 They had to come up with a way to do this quickly. So one thing they did.

Speaker 8 We looked at what our other state colleagues who already had similar laws had done.

Speaker 5 They looked at other state lists. A program could make a case to get approved in Ohio if it had already been approved by another state.

Speaker 5 At least nine states have recently created new science of reading lists. And there was another way to make it onto Ohio's list.

Speaker 8 Have you been reviewed by Ed Reports?

Speaker 5 EdReports.

Speaker 5 EdReports is the organization I mentioned earlier that's having a big influence on whether a program makes it onto a state's list.

Speaker 5 My co-reporter, Christopher Peake, has been digging into EdReports for several months.

Speaker 5 Hi, Chris.

Speaker 2 Hi, Emily.

Speaker 5 So let's start with some basics. What is EdReports?

Speaker 2 It's a pretty new organization. It's a nonprofit, and it's only 10 years old, and it's already built up a lot of cloud by billing itself as a kind of consumer reports for curriculum.

Speaker 5 So what exactly does EdReports do?

Speaker 2 They review curriculum. Teams of teachers actually do the reviews.
They review not just reading curriculum, but math and science curriculum too, and they rate it. It's a red, yellow, and green system.

Speaker 2 So if you're a publisher, you want an all-green rating from EdReports.

Speaker 2 Nearly 2,000 school districts have used its reviews reviews to make their purchasing decisions, and the organization says 40 publishers have actually adjusted their products in response to EdReports review.

Speaker 2 This is bigger than just the new state list. EdReports was having a big influence on the publishing industry before SoldaStory and the current conversation about the science of reading.

Speaker 5 And it turns out there's a bit of a disconnect here, right? EdReports wasn't set up with the science of reading in mind.

Speaker 2 No, it was set up with something else in mind, something called the Common Core State Standards.

Speaker 7 48 states have now joined a nationwide partnership to develop a common set of rigorous, career-ready standards in reading and math.

Speaker 2 Common Core was a thing during the Obama administration. It was an effort to raise education standards across the country.

Speaker 2 The goal was to make sure students in different states were learning the same core skills. But it ran into the same kind of problem that George W.
Bush's big education effort ran into.

Speaker 2 Publishers were saying their programs are aligned to the Common Core, just like publishers were saying their programs were scientifically based during reading first.

Speaker 5 And there was no one really policing that.

Speaker 2 And that's why EdReports was established to review curriculum and say, yes, this curriculum really was designed with the Common Core standards in mind, or no, this curriculum wasn't.

Speaker 2 It's not aligned with the new standards.

Speaker 5 So EdReports released its first reviews in 2015, and it becomes very influential, very fast. But then along comes the science of reading, and people are starting to ask a different question.

Speaker 5 Not is your curriculum aligned with the Common Core, but is your curriculum aligned with the science of reading?

Speaker 2 Exactly.

Speaker 2 And what I found in my reporting is that EdReports has given high marks to some programs that include the queuing strategies, which, as you know, is the opposite of what science has taught us about how kids become good readers.

Speaker 5 So say more about that. Do you have an example?

Speaker 2 So I talked to Carrie Curtow. She was a literacy specialist at the State Department of Education in Rhode Island, which was one of the first states to really try to push for better reading curriculum.

Speaker 2 Rhode Island had looked at EdReports to come up with a list of programs that districts should be using. And Carrie had been in the job for just a couple of weeks when she had a jaw-dropping moment.

Speaker 9 I was in my cube on the, was it fourth floor of the Department of Ed, and I began to go through the materials on the approved list.

Speaker 9 And some of them had some great evidence-aligned instruction, and others I started flipping through and said, uh-oh.

Speaker 2 She was seeing programs telling teachers to say things like, read the pictures, and to use cues other than the sounds of the letters.

Speaker 9 They had a lot of the strategies and guidance that we know runs counter to the science of reading. And yet they were on this list that said go ahead and adopt these programs.

Speaker 9 This is what the Rhode Island Department of Education stands behind.

Speaker 5 I think to understand how this happened, it helps to know a bit about what the Common Core standards are.

Speaker 2 Yep. The Common Core standards basically lay out what kids should know and be able to do at each grade level.
I have a copy of the English language arts standards right here. It's 66 pages long.

Speaker 2 And here's an example of one of the standards for a first grade. It says that a first grader should be able to ask and answer questions about key details in a text.

Speaker 2 But the Common Core standards don't say anything about how to do that. They don't say anything about how to teach.
They just say what to teach.

Speaker 5 And you can see how this could be in conflict with the science of reading. Because one of the big things the science of reading has revealed is that how you teach kids matters.

Speaker 5 But EdReports was basically agnostic on how things were taught.

Speaker 5 What EdReports essentially wanted to see was that a curriculum was covering everything in that 66-page standards document you've got there.

Speaker 2 Right. Even some of the people who were once supporters of EdReports are recognizing this conflict now between the science of reading and the Common Core standards.

Speaker 2 I talked to David Lieben. He's an educator with more than 50 years of experience.

Speaker 10 I've been involved in education since shortly after the Civil War.

Speaker 2 As you can tell, he likes to joke around a bit too. David Liebin worked with EdReports when it was first set up.

Speaker 2 He thought the organization was needed because of that problem we mentioned earlier: publishers slapping Common Core stickers on their products and no one checking to see if this program really living up to that label.

Speaker 2 But David Liebin now says EdReports' methodology is flawed.

Speaker 10 Success is dependent upon how we align with standards as opposed to how we align with science of reading.

Speaker 2 He says one of the biggest problems with EdReports is that some programs that are backed by rigorous research are not getting those coveted all-green ratings.

Speaker 2 They've got good studies that show they're effective, but EdReports doesn't factor studies into their ratings. That's not part of their review process.

Speaker 5 So EdReports was designed to look at, does your program cover all of the standards? Not does your program deliver on the science of reading.

Speaker 2 Right. And I should note, too, too that both David Liebin and Carrie Curtow, the woman from Rhode Island, they're both now associated with organizations that do their own curriculum reviews.

Speaker 5 I want to ask about Success for All, the program they use in Steubenville. Success for All has never been reviewed by Ed Reports.

Speaker 2 Why not? Because of what we learned in the previous episode, Success for All is not just the reading curriculum. It's a whole school reform program.

Speaker 2 So I asked an Ed Reports spokesperson about this, and she told me that reviewing just the reading curriculum wouldn't have provided a complete picture of Success for All.

Speaker 2 So Ed Reports decided not to review it.

Speaker 5 Interesting. Nancy Madden, the co-creator of Success for All, told me that she didn't want her program to be rated by Ed Reports.

Speaker 11 I don't want to validate that approach to reviewing what instruction should be. It's the wrong approach.
We need to judge what's the outcome. We need to look at what is the evidence of effectiveness.

Speaker 5 She and her late husband, Bob Slavin, spent their careers trying to get schools to use evidence.

Speaker 11 What we wanted to do was show that the evidence could matter.

Speaker 5 I was surprised when Nancy told me they left the country for a while because they were so frustrated by what they saw as a lack of interest in evidence here in the U.S.

Speaker 5 And what she told me when I interviewed her was that when our podcast came out, she was feeling hopeful again. The CEO of Success for All said the same thing.

Speaker 4 This idea of science of reading coming to schools across the country, we were thrilled.

Speaker 5 Her name is Julie Weibel.

Speaker 4 Finally, you know, we're going to look at the evidence, we're going to look at the science, and kids are going to get what they need.

Speaker 5 But she and Nancy told me it was kind of deja vu when states started making lists, and Success for All wasn't getting on those lists.

Speaker 2 Success for All was actually on one state list, Arizona. But Melissa Weber-Mayer, the education official in Ohio, she told me that her team didn't think Arizona's review process was rigorous enough.

Speaker 5 That seems kind of ironic to me. Success for All is on Arizona's list in part because Arizona doesn't look at Ed Reports.
You get on Arizona's list if you have evidence for your program.

Speaker 2 And we know Success for All has that evidence.

Speaker 2 But most states are not looking at evidence to decide what belongs on their list. Some of them are looking at Ed Reports instead.

Speaker 2 And that's why when Ohio's list first came out, Success for All wasn't on it. The program has never been reviewed by Ed Reports.

Speaker 5 I'm going to have you come back later to tell us what the CEO of Ed Reports had to say about all of this in your interview with him.

Speaker 2 All right, see you soon.

Speaker 5 First, I'm going to finish the story of what happened in Ohio.

Speaker 5 When the superintendent in Steubenville first heard about Ohio's new science of reading law, she wasn't worried.

Speaker 2 Oh, no big deal. SFA is the science of reading.

Speaker 5 This is Melinda Young.

Speaker 12 As naive as I guess I was, I really just never gave it a second thought.

Speaker 5 When I first visited Steubenville, the news was still kind of sinking in. They were hopeful that Success for All might eventually make the list.

Speaker 5 State officials said a second review process would be coming, but they were already looking at new reading programs.

Speaker 13 We are proactive here.

Speaker 5 This is Tricia Sakoch, the principal of East Elementary.

Speaker 13 We're not just sitting here waiting. We're getting ready just to be prepared.

Speaker 5 They were looking at the programs on the state's initial list.

Speaker 4 And there are a lot of school districts who are using approved curriculum already.

Speaker 5 That's Lynette Gorman, another principal in Steubenville. She and her colleagues were looking up test scores in the school districts that were using an approved program.

Speaker 5 Close to a third of districts in Ohio were already using something on the state's initial list. But only one of those those districts was doing better in reading than Steubenville.

Speaker 5 It's a tiny district with a very low poverty rate. The teachers in Steubenville were having a hard time understanding why they might have to stop using Success for All.

Speaker 1 I don't want a new program.

Speaker 15 Why get rid of something that is proven to work?

Speaker 13 I would be upset about it.

Speaker 5 They were upset, but they weren't panicking.

Speaker 15 Either way, we'll be fine. We're a strong district.

Speaker 13 We'll get through it if we have to. I feel in good hands, so I don't worry.

Speaker 5 This is Nicolette Hill, an eighth-grade grade English teacher.

Speaker 13 We have a wonderful Board of Education and higher-up staff, and they put a lot of thought into everything we do.

Speaker 13 And I think that they'll make sure that we stay where we need to be and keep excelling and doing what's right for the kids.

Speaker 5 It really struck me the way teachers here trust their administrators. I don't sense that same kind of trust in a lot of school districts I visit.

Speaker 5 I think it has something to do with the frequent turnover in leadership in many districts. The average superintendent in a poor school district in the United States lasts only about five years.

Speaker 5 The superintendent in Steubenville has been on the job for 10. And before that, she was a principal and a teacher here.

Speaker 5 Stability is a feature of this place. Steubenville has low principal turnover and low teacher turnover too.

Speaker 5 And according to the school district, 48% of the people who work in Steubenville schools went to Steubenville schools.

Speaker 5 I think this stability, the commitment to this place, is one of the reasons Success for All has worked here, why it's lasted for 25 years.

Speaker 5 But it doesn't work everywhere. Often, it doesn't even last very long.

Speaker 5 More on that and how Success for All finally got on Ohio's list.

Speaker 5 After a break.

Speaker 4 Let's listen in on a live, unscripted Challenger School class.

Speaker 14 They're reviewing the American Revolution.

Speaker 18 The British were initiating force, and the Americans were retaliating.

Speaker 13 Okay. Where did they initiate force?

Speaker 18 It started in their taxation without representation.

Speaker 4 Why is that wrong?

Speaker 17 The purpose of a government is to protect individual rights, and by encroaching on individual rights, they cannot protect them.

Speaker 4 Welcome to eighth grade at Challenger School.

Speaker 5 Learn more at challengerschool.com.

Speaker 6 Oh, oh, oh,

Speaker 3 O Riley Auropars can

Speaker 3 revisit the cheque engine, lose ABS or Mantermiento with O Riley Veriscan. The servicio es gratis y received an information with solutiones verificadas por technicos maestros certificados ASE.

Speaker 3 Si necesitas ayuda o Riley autopars te puede recomendar una yer. Pregunta poro Riley Veriscan o y inismo.

Speaker 3 Auto parts.

Speaker 5 Hi, it's Emily.

Speaker 5 A quick update. We just released a new batch of Solda Story discussion guides.
They cover the latest episodes, including this one.

Speaker 5 If you've seen the guides for our earlier episodes, you know they're full of questions, conversation starters, and information that we couldn't fit into the podcast.

Speaker 5 And if you haven't seen our discussion guides yet, now's a great time. The new version helps you talk about the most recent reporting.
Use it to have a book club, but for a podcast.

Speaker 5 Or if you work in education, these are great for professional development days. You can grab the guides for free at soldastory.org/slash discuss.

Speaker 5 Download them, print them, share them with your group, and keep the conversation going.

Speaker 16 Went to Rome. I thought that my boyfriend was going to propose to me.

Speaker 16 I did use my Sapphire Reserve for the flights, so the points did make up for the whole no proposal.

Speaker 19 Earn eight times points when booking for Chase Travel with Chase Sapphire Reserve. Now, even more rewarding.
See more rewards at chase.com/slash reserve. at cards issued by J.P.

Speaker 19 Morgan Chase Bank North America. Member FTSC, subject to credit approval terms apply.

Speaker 5 I talked to William Corin.

Speaker 5 He's been overseeing evaluations of education programs for decades and knows a lot about Success for All.

Speaker 5 I told him that Steubenville had been using the program for 25 years. Does it surprise you that a district has been using SFA for that long?

Speaker 2 Yes.

Speaker 5 He said it would surprise him to hear that a district used any program for 25 years.

Speaker 20 The practicality is often that priorities shift over time and districts and,

Speaker 20 you know, their new administration comes in and they say, here's the new stuff we want to do.

Speaker 5 Program churn is kind of a defining characteristic of American education, and that churn has not been favorable to Success for All.

Speaker 5 We identified more than 150 schools that had adopted Success for All at some point, but then dropped it. We wanted to know why.

Speaker 14 I started with emails.

Speaker 5 Our research fellow Olivia Chilcote reached out to those schools.

Speaker 14 Almost nobody got back to me, so I just started cold calling.

Speaker 5 She made close to 100 phone calls. Eventually, she got some interviews.
Here's what she learned about why schools dropped Success for All.

Speaker 14 So a lot of the time it came down to administrative turnover.

Speaker 14 It was common for Success for All to be shepherded in with a new superintendent, but when the superintendent left, Success for All was out too.

Speaker 14 There was one district where people who didn't like Success for All used the change in leadership to lobby for something else.

Speaker 5 That's something we heard in the last episode. There tends to be resistance to Success for All.
Some people just don't like it.

Speaker 14 For sure, that is one dynamic. I talked to Ryan Mario.
When he got a teaching job at a charter school in Detroit, the school had recently started using Success for All. You know,

Speaker 14 I was enthusiastic about the program. I don't know if it was necessarily as welcomed by everybody.

Speaker 14 You know, one of the biggest downfalls that a lot of teachers would talk about was the scripted nature of it.

Speaker 14 You know, they didn't necessarily love having to be on a certain page on a certain day at a certain time. They almost felt like it was robotic.
But it didn't feel robotic to him.

Speaker 14 He says Success for All helped him become a better teacher.

Speaker 5 So why did the school stop using it? Was it resistance from teachers?

Speaker 14 No, actually. In this case, it came down to money.
The school had gotten a grant to adopt Success for All, and when the grant money ran out, they dropped it.

Speaker 5 So, cost is a factor here. Leadership change is a factor.
What else did you learn about why schools stop using Success for All?

Speaker 14 What emerged during my phone calls was a portrait of how complicated and delicate implementing a new program can be. I talked to Jennifer Hansen.

Speaker 14 She's the English language arts specialist for Geary County Schools in Kansas. She says Success for All worked better for some schools than it did for others.

Speaker 16 They weren't always seeing the same results.

Speaker 5 What was going on?

Speaker 14 So, this district includes a military base, and the teaching staff turns over a lot. Jennifer Hanson told me they get about 100 new teachers a year.

Speaker 5 Wow, that's a lot.

Speaker 14 Yeah, that's like 15% of their teachers. She says there was inconsistency in how different schools and different teachers were using Success for All.

Speaker 14 Eventually, a new superintendent came in and decided it was time for a new program, and they looked to Ed Reports to decide what that should be.

Speaker 16 On Ed Reports, they had to be all green. If there was an area that they were not green in, we didn't even look at them or have them come and talk to us.

Speaker 5 Another reminder of how influential Ed Reports has become.

Speaker 14 Yeah.

Speaker 14 And something else that came up was how SuccessForall groups kids for reading instruction. Remember, kids get grouped by ability instead of grade level.

Speaker 14 Several people I talked to said they had a tough time making that work.

Speaker 14 They said kids who were behind weren't catching up, and the schools ultimately gave up on success for all because they couldn't get enough kids up to grade level.

Speaker 5 I talked to the folks in Steubenville about that.

Speaker 5 They said that was a challenge for them at first, too, that it took a couple of years for them to really figure out how to group kids and monitor them and get the tutoring right.

Speaker 5 But now it's a rare exception when a child is still behind by the end of third grade.

Speaker 14 It does sound like Success for All is something you have to stick with for a while to see the full results. It may be that some schools are giving up too quickly.

Speaker 14 And often it's because a new leader comes in who wants to take things in a new direction.

Speaker 5 I was struck by something else you learned in your calls. You told me not all schools that adopted Success for All did the whole program.

Speaker 14 That's right. Some schools were using it just as a reading curriculum.
They weren't doing all the elements, like the tutoring and the attendance.

Speaker 14 In some cases, it was because they didn't have the staff to do all that. Those schools didn't see great results with Success for All.

Speaker 14 And maybe that's not surprising since they weren't doing the whole program.

Speaker 5 Did you come across any schools that had dropped Success for All because it wasn't on a new state list?

Speaker 14 Yes. Franklin County Public Schools in Virginia had been using Success for All in several of its schools.
Some schools had been using it for 17 years,

Speaker 14 but then Virginia passed a science of reading law and created a list of approved programs.

Speaker 21 The SFA was not on the list of approvals from the state.

Speaker 14 Brenda Mews is the director of curriculum and instruction.

Speaker 21 We all were really a little bit shocked that they didn't make the cut.

Speaker 14 She said the district could have tried to get a waiver to keep using Success for All, but district leaders decided it made more sense to adopt a state-approved program for the entire school district.

Speaker 5 There are other schools that we know of that have dropped the program because of a state list.

Speaker 5 The Success for All organization sent us the names of 42 schools in seven states that, according to their records, had recently dropped the program because it wasn't on their state's list of approved programs.

Speaker 14 I think there's a lot of confusion about the research base for Success for All. Some people I spoke with said they dropped Success for All in favor of a program that was backed by evidence.

Speaker 14 One person said explicitly that they dropped Success for All because it wasn't backed by evidence, which was probably the most puzzling thing I heard in all my calls.

Speaker 14 There seems to be a perception out there that Success for All is not the science of reading.

Speaker 14 Maybe because the science of reading is new to so many people, and Success for All has been around for a long time. It seems like it's not current or something.

Speaker 5 Really interesting insights. Thanks for making all those phone calls, Olivia.

Speaker 14 No problem.

Speaker 5 So now I'm going to turn back to Ohio. As we were wrapping up the reporting for this episode, the state updated its list.

Speaker 5 Just over a month ago, a year after the initial list was published, The Ohio Department of Education added Success for All and some other programs too.

Speaker 5 I emailed the education official you heard earlier to find out what happened. She said programs that failed in the first round were allowed to reapply last fall.

Speaker 5 This time, the state didn't rely on Ed Reports. They did their own review of Success for All.

Speaker 5 And the program was approved.

Speaker 12 As soon as I got the news, I sent it out to all of the principals.

Speaker 5 This is Melinda Young, the Steubenville superintendent.

Speaker 12 It was on a Friday evening and it was crazy because they all responded back within, I would say, five minutes. It was like relief.

Speaker 8 Yes, relief.

Speaker 5 Ohio's list was updated in time to save Success for All in Steubenville.

Speaker 5 But we know of two charter schools in Ohio that had already been told by their parent organizations to drop Success for All because it wasn't state approved.

Speaker 5 And as hundreds of Ohio school districts were looking for new programs over the past year, year, not a single one reached out to the Success for All organization about adopting their program.

Speaker 2 The decisions schools and districts are making now will affect how reading is taught for the next five, ten years, maybe more.

Speaker 5 This is my co-reporter, Christopher Peake.

Speaker 2 And a lot of money is being spent. Ohio gave out more than $50 million to help districts pay for new reading programs.
And most of that money is going to programs that got good ratings from EdReports.

Speaker 22 So could you just start off by introducing yourself?

Speaker 19 Sure.

Speaker 23 I'm Eric Hirsch, and I'm the chief executive officer of EdReports.

Speaker 2 Eric Hirsch started off our interview by talking about the history of the organization.

Speaker 23 It'll be our decade anniversary in March, and it's been fairly amazing.

Speaker 2 But he hesitated a bit when I asked about the influence this organization is having right now.

Speaker 22 I've seen EdReports come up a lot in state regulations or state laws about, you know, you should be looking to EdReports to figure out is this a good program or not.

Speaker 22 And I was wondering what you make of that. Is that a good thing to have Ed Reports in state regulations? How do you feel about that personally?

Speaker 23 We say Ed Reports is a place to start.

Speaker 2 He repeated this several times in our interview.

Speaker 23 Ed Reports is a place to start. Ed Reports is a place to start.
You believe curriculum is a place to start, right? And Ed Reports is a place to start.

Speaker 2 He told me Ed Reports shouldn't be the final say on what the best reading programs are.

Speaker 23 Ed Reports provides information from the lens of our educator reviewers, and we believe it's helpful to districts and states in understanding what's in the materials.

Speaker 22 Before EdReports, there was not a lot out there, not much to go on.

Speaker 5 But the thing is, a lot of states and school districts have been treating EdReports as more than a starting point.

Speaker 5 They've been treating it as a gatekeeper, a place that can tell them which programs are compatible with the science of reading and which ones aren't.

Speaker 2 And EdReports has been telling teachers its reviews were based on that science. I found a blog post they published in 2023.

Speaker 2 It said EdReports has always reviewed instructional materials for the science of reading.

Speaker 5 But then critics started pointing to curriculum with the queuing strategies that were getting good reviews from EdReports and curriculum that were not getting good reviews but had evidence that showed they were effective.

Speaker 2 Right. And recently, EdReports has made changes.
They now include a science of reading summary with their reviews. It highlights how well programs teach foundational skills.

Speaker 2 And just a few months ago, they changed the review tool. Programs that teach the queuing strategies will now automatically fail.

Speaker 5 So is EdReports going to go back and re-review all the reading programs they've already rated?

Speaker 2 No, they've already released ratings for 86 reading programs and they are not going to go back and do those reviews again.

Speaker 5 So let's talk about what this all means, like what to make of it all.

Speaker 2 Well, it's clearly a problem when a program that has lots of evidence behind it, a program like Success for All, when a program like that is having such a hard time getting on state lists.

Speaker 5 Yeah, states could be doing the opposite. They could be saying schools should only use programs that have research evidence.

Speaker 2 But that could be a problem too. Rigorous studies are expensive and complex and take a long time.
Lots of programs never get studied. Right.

Speaker 5 They might be good programs, programs that include effective practices, but they haven't actually been tested.

Speaker 5 One of the reasons Success for All has so many studies is that Bob Slavan and Nancy Madden were researchers before they created a program.

Speaker 5 I asked the education research guy we heard earlier if he thought schools should use only programs that have been rigorously studied and proven to work. And William Coren said no.

Speaker 20 We can't hamstring ourselves by saying you can only do these things that reach, you know, this very high standard.

Speaker 5 He says there wouldn't be enough programs, not enough choices. He thinks choice is important, that there isn't a program that will work well everywhere.

Speaker 2 But there is a real risk here, that schools and districts are committing time and money to programs that aren't effective.

Speaker 2 That's the potential downside when programs that haven't been proven get popular.

Speaker 5 Right.

Speaker 5 I'm thinking about why we made this podcast in the first place.

Speaker 5 We made this podcast because there is something else to consider here. And that is, what's the idea about how reading works that a program is based on?

Speaker 5 If you recall, scientists behind the government's Reading First initiative were trying to get rid of the queuing idea.

Speaker 5 They were trying to get rid of that disproven theory that beginning readers don't need to sound out written words.

Speaker 5 But then Reading First got caught up in arguments about programs and the whole thing fell apart.

Speaker 2 What we wanted to do was focus attention on the idea again, to show people that there was an idea about reading that wasn't right, that was still in popular curriculum materials.

Speaker 5 Yeah, lots of people, lots of teachers, didn't know there was anything wrong with that idea. And I think that's because many of them didn't actually know how kids learn to read.

Speaker 5 I thought teachers needed to know that. I thought they needed to understand what cognitive scientists had figured out about how reading works, that this was one of the missing links here.

Speaker 5 But Steubenville challenged my thinking about that in an interesting way.

Speaker 5 When I was there, some of the teachers were taking a new state-mandated science of reading course, and they told me they were learning a lot. Some of them hadn't really known how kids learn to read.

Speaker 5 They didn't know the science behind it. But they didn't need to know that to teach reading well.
They were given an effective program, and they did it, and it worked.

Speaker 2 But as Steubenville clearly shows, it is more complex than just handing teachers a program. They got all that training.
There were resistant teachers there that needed to be convinced.

Speaker 5 And the community has things going for it that many others don't. The consistent leadership, the low teacher turnover, all the people working there who grew up there.

Speaker 5 It's clear that improving reading achievement is about more than just a program.

Speaker 2 Right. It's not like the answer here is that every school should be doing success for all.

Speaker 5 Even Nancy Madden says that, and she was one of the people who created the program.

Speaker 11 We don't want Success for All to be the thing that everybody uses.

Speaker 5 What she wants is for states and schools to consider evidence.

Speaker 5 And she's worried that all the talk these days about the science of reading won't actually result in better outcomes for kids. That we'll look back in a few years and say, that didn't work.

Speaker 5 And after everyone is done blaming each other, we'll be left with the same narrative that took hold after that big report by James Coleman back in the 1960s.

Speaker 5 The report that seemed to indicate schools don't matter that much.

Speaker 11 We have to maintain the expectation that kids really can succeed.

Speaker 5 And the expectation that schools can make a difference.

Speaker 11 We have to remember that kids can learn, we can do better. There's a way to do it.
You could be Steubenville.

Speaker 5 Before we go, I want to say one more thing.

Speaker 5 A main theme of this podcast is research matters. And the body of research known as the science of reading, a lot of that research was funded by federal grants.

Speaker 5 I'm recording this in early March of 2025.

Speaker 5 The Trump administration recently announced it is terminating hundreds of millions of dollars in federal contracts related to education research, including research on reading.

Speaker 5 If you have information you'd like to share with us about that or anything else, we want to hear from you. You can call us, send us a voice memo, or write us an email.

Speaker 5 Our address is soldastory at apmreports.org. The number is 612-888-7323.

Speaker 5 That's 612-888-READ.

Speaker 5 All those ways to reach us are in the show notes. Let us know if we need to keep your name or other identifying details confidential.

Speaker 5 This podcast is not over. We're going to keep following events and looking for more stories about schools and districts that are succeeding.

Speaker 5 You can sign up for our newsletter so you'll be notified when we have new episodes. You can do that on our website, soldastory.org.

Speaker 5 You can also find a story there by my co-reporter Christopher Peake about Ed Reports.

Speaker 5 He has more on the history of that organization, how they became so influential, and how they're responding to the science of reading. It's a great read.

Speaker 5 This episode of Soul a Story was produced by me with reporting from Christopher Peake, Olivia Chilcote, Kate Martin, and Carmela Walianone.

Speaker 5 Our editor is Curtis Gilbert. Our digital editor is Andy Cruz.
Fact-Checking by Betsy Towner-Levine. Mixing, Sound Design, and Original Music by Chris Julin.
Final Mastering by Derek Ramirez.

Speaker 5 Our theme music was written by Jim Brunberg and Ben Landsberg of Wonderly. Special thanks to Margaret Goldberg.

Speaker 5 Tom Scheck is the deputy managing editor of APM Reports, and our executive editor is Jane Helmke.

Speaker 5 Leadership support for Soul to Story comes from Hollyhawk Foundation and Oak Foundation. Support also comes from IBIS Group, Esther A.

Speaker 5 and Joseph Klingenstein Fund, Kenneth Raynan Foundation, and the listeners of American Public Media.

Speaker 3 O Riley Autopars can

Speaker 3 revisit the check engine, lose ABS or Mantermiento with O'Reilly Veriscan. The servicio is gratis y received an information with solutiones verificated by

Speaker 3 certificates ASE. Y necesitas ayuda o Riley Auto Pars te puede recommendar una yer, pregunta por O Riley Veriscan or inismo.

Speaker 6 Oak, oh, oh, O'Reilly

Speaker 6 Auto parts.