CHILDREN WHO struggle with reading in third grade often grow up to struggle with everything. State education officials need to get busy on behalf of the 65 percent of low-income third graders who scored below proficient on last year’s MCAS reading test.
Boston-based Strategies for Children commissioned a recent report that pointed out a glut of literacy programs supported by state grants. Often, success is measured by how many children are served, not test outcomes. Sales hype and glossy images of reading-instruction programs, not solid evidence, influence choices, write the authors.
The report does not compare the effectiveness of the roughly 30 literacy programs competing for public dollars in Massachusetts. Instead, the authors urge an independent third party to evaluate the programs. Strategies for Children is a good candidate to conduct such a follow-up study.
Some specialized reading programs make a difference. The nonprofit Bay State Reading Institute, for example, operates a program called Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills in 18 schools. It uses brief, frequent testing measures of students’ abilities in phonics, vocabulary, and comprehension. Then teachers organize students into small groups tailored to improve their skills.
Forty-two percent of the low-income students who started the program in first grade scored proficient or better on last year’s third-grade MCAS reading test, according to Bay State chairman Edward Moscovitch. Toss in a dynamic principal and talented literacy coach, and nearly 70 percent of low-income students hit the proficiency mark at the Beachmont School in Revere.
Other programs may make even stronger cases for themselves. But with only $4 million in state funding available this year for literacy efforts, education officials should settle on the one or two best ones.
