Blog Archives

Ready to Read, SB 734, Receives Favorable Report from House Ways & Means, Moves to House Floor

3/23/2019

LISTEN to the moving speech by Senator Craig Zucker on the Ready to Read bill, SB 734: start at 51:03.

BILL HISTORY
On March 18, after a moving floor speech by Senate sponsor Craig Zucker, D-Montgomery, the bill was approved unanimously by the Maryland Senate. Senator Zucker noted that he would have benefited from reading screening because he struggled to learn for many years. By the time he was tested, he had significant gaps in his learning. Senator Zucker described overhearing someone say that he "would never amount to anything" and he made a promise to himself to someday run for office -- and now here he is in the Maryland Senate! LISTEN HERE.

Please thank Senator Zucker and Delegate Luedtke for their stewardship and advocacy on both bills. They spent countless hours behind the scenes educating colleagues and working with advocates and others to ensure the legislation retained the intent and best practices to benefit students who may struggle to read.

STATUS UPDATE
The Ready to Read bill, SB 734, requires screening & interventions for students at risk for reading difficulties and was heard by the House Ways & Means Committee on Thursday, March 21. Senator Craig Zucker testified in support of the bill in a "sponsor only" hearing. There were no questions for Sen. Zucker. Later in the afternoon, the House Ways & Means Education Subcommittee, Chaired by Del. Eric Luedtke, brought the bill up for discussion -- three technical amendments were read and are noted in the bill text below. Those amendments and the bill were agreed to unanimously by the subcommittee with Del. Reilly (Harford) making the motion and Del. Guyton (Baltimore County) providing the second. The bill was then referred back to the full committee where it received unanimous support, with one excused absence. The bill will next be scheduled for second and third reading on the House floor next week. The Senate is expected to concur with the technical amendments and no further changes to the legislation are expected.

Amended Bill Language Summary
Amended Version of Ready To Read, SB 734

(A): DEFINITIONS

Screening is defined as a brief, valid, and reliable measurement procedure used to identify or predict whether a student may be at risk for poor learning outcomes.
Other definitions include supplemental reading instruction, phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, phonological awareness, student.
DELETED: informal diagnostic assessment, progress monitoring and amended definition of student.

(A)(7): WHO IS SCREENED: Student is amended and defined as:

All students in Kindergarten;
First grade is screened only if the student was not screened in K or demonstrated difficulty mastering grade level reading in K.
Students who enter or transfer to an elementary school from an elementary school, are screened unless a county board determines the student has already been screened and does not demonstrate difficulty mastering grade-level reading.

(B)(1): EFFECTIVE DATE

Beginning in 2020-2021 school year, each county board shall ensure that a student is screened to identify if the student is at risk for reading difficulties.

(B)(3): PARENT NOTIFICATION

description of the screening and supplemental instruction process in the districts; and
any checklists or forms needed to support the screening protocol.

(C)(1): REQUIREMENT FOR SCREENING: A county board shall select one or more appropriate screening instruments that:

accurately and reliably identify students at risk for poor learning outcomes;
are developmentally appropriate;
are economical to administer in time and cost; and
use norm-referenced or criterion-based scores.

(C)(2): WHAT IS SCREENED: Schools must screen all K students for risks of reading difficulties in the following areas beginning in the 20-21 school year:

phonemic and phonological awareness and processing;
DELETED:
1. knowledge of letter names and letter sounds
2. rapid automatized naming
3. PK, Grade 1 and students in 2+ if concerns are noted. Grade one skills included phonological and phonemic awareness and processing, knowledge of letter names and letter sound associations for uppercase and lowercase letters, normed rapid automatized naming, automatic and fluent single word recognition and oral reading fluency.

(D)(1): SCREENING FREQUENCY

Student shall be screened according to the schedule established by the county board;

(D)(2): SUPPLEMENTAL READING INSTRUCTION. If the screening results indicate that a student is at risk of reading difficulties, the county board shall provide supplemental reading instruction in the students’ areas of need.

Supplemental reading instruction is defined; technical amendment corrected "systemic" to "systematic" in the definition.

(D)(2): PARENT NOTIFICATION

Provide a notification letter to the parent or guardian of the student that includes:
1. The screening results; and
2. A description of the supplemental reading instruction that will be provided to the student.

(E): RESOURCES: Each county board shall provide resources on the school district website that include:

Reading screening instruments used in the school district; and
A checklist of early warning signs of reading difficulty/dyslexia by age.

(F): REPORTING: On or before October (was September) 1 each year, beginning in 2020-2021 school year, each district shall report:

# students in each grade,
# students in each grade screened,
# students at risk on screening instrument;
# students who received supplemental reading help,
data must be disaggregated and searchable by district and posted on the state website

(G): RESOURCES FOR COUNTY BOARD: On or before June 1, 2020, MSDE will write regulations with advocates and other interested stakeholders, to develop and update resources for use by a county board. Resources developed under this subsection shall be available on the department’s website.

(H) TECHNICAL SUPPORT: The Department shall provide: technical support for the county boards to provide:

Training opportunities annually for individuals who conduct screenings under this section and for school administrators.
Training may include:
1. The administration and interpretation of screenings, informal diagnostic assessments, progress monitoring instruments, and student data;
2. Interpreting screenings and assessments for parents;
3. Best practices for designing and implementing supplemental reading instruction; and
4. The elements, principles, and best practices of supplemental reading instruction.

(I) REGULATIONS. The department (MSDE) shall adopt regulations to implement the requirements of this section.

Section 2: It is the intent of the GA that money appropriated in accordance with The Blueprint for Maryland’s Future, Chapter xx, Senate Bill 1030 (HB 1413) of 2019, shall be used to offset the cost of implementation of Section I of this act.

0 Comments

Ready to Read Unanimously Passes Senate, Headed to the House

3/19/2019

1 Comment

Annapolis, Maryland. March 18. The Ready to Read Screening & Interventions bill, SB 734, unanimously passed the Maryland Senate on March 18 after a moving floor speech by Senate sponsor Craig Zucker, D-Montgomery. Senator Zucker noted that he would have benefited from reading screening because he struggled to learn for many years. By the time he was tested, he had significant gaps in his learning. Senator Zucker described overhearing someone say that he "would never amount to anything" and he made a promise to himself to someday run for office -- and now here he is in the Maryland Senate.

The bill was referred to the House Ways & Means Committee and a sponsor-only hearing is scheduled for Thursday March 21, 2019 at 1:00pm. The companion house bill 690 is no longer viable and is laid aside in favor of Senate bill 734 as amended. If the House amends SB 734, it could be referred to a House-Senate conference committee fi the Senate does not concur with any House amendments. A conference committee would work out any differences between the House and Senate versions (should there be amendments). Each chamber must then pass the conference version of the bill before April 8 when the legislature adjourns. There also is the option that no House amendments are made to SB 734 and House agrees to the amended Senate version. In this case, the bill would need a signature by Governor Hogan to become law.

Summary of Senate Amendments
Amended Version of Ready To Read, SB 734
History & Documents

(A): DEFINITIONS
1. Screening is defined as a brief, valid, and reliable measurement procedure used to identify or predict whether a student may be at risk for poor learning outcomes.
2. Other definitions include supplemental reading instruction, phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, phonological awareness, student.
3. DELETED: informal diagnostic assessment, progress monitoring and amended definition of student.
(A)(7): WHO IS SCREENED: Student is amended and defined as:
1. All students in Kindergarten;
2. First grade is screened only if the student was not screened in K or demonstrated difficulty mastering grade level reading in K.
3. Students who enter or transfer to an elementary school from an elementary school, are screened unless a county board determines the student has already been screened and does not demonstrate difficulty mastering grade-level reading.
(B)(1): EFFECTIVE DATE
1. Beginning in 2020-2021 School year, each county board shall ensure that a student is screened to identify if the student is at risk for reading difficulties.
(B)(3): PARENT NOTIFICATION
1. description of the screening and supplemental instruction process in the districts; and
2. any checklists or forms needed to support the screening protocol.
(C)(1): REQUIREMENT FOR SCREENING: A county board shall select one or more appropriate screening instruments that:
1. accurately and reliably identify students at risk for poor learning outcomes;
2. are developmentally appropriate;
3. are economical to administer in time and cost; and
4. use norm-referenced or criterion-based scores.
(C)(2): WHAT IS SCREENED: Schools must screen all K students for risks of reading difficulties in the following areas beginning in the 20-21 school year:
1. phonemic and phonological awareness and processing;
2. DELETED:
  1. knowledge of letter names and letter sounds
  2. rapid automatized naming
  3. PK, Grade 1 and students in 2+ if concerns are noted. Grade one skills included phonological and phonemic awareness and processing, knowledge of letter names and letter sound associations for uppercase and lowercase letters, normed rapid automatized naming, automatic and fluent single word recognition and oral reading fluency.
(D)(1): SCREENING FREQUENCY
- Student shall be screened according to the schedule established by the county board;
(D)(2): SUPPLEMENTAL READING INSTRUCTION. If the screening results indicate that a student is at risk of reading difficulties, the county board shall provide supplemental reading instruction in the students’ areas of need.
1. Supplemental reading instruction is defined (p. 4, line 25, systemic must be changed to SYSTEMATIC” so that it aligns with MCCRS, Appendix A and ESSA).
(D)(2): PARENT NOTIFICATION
1. Provide a notification letter to the parent or guardian of the student that includes:
  1. The screening results; and
  2. A description of the supplemental reading instruction that will be provided to the student.
(E): RESOURCES: Each county board shall provide resources on the school district website that include:
1. Reading screening instruments used in the school district; and
2. A checklist of early warning signs of reading difficulty/dyslexia by age.
(F): REPORTING: On or before September 1 each year, beginning in 2020-2021 school year: each district shall report:
1. # students in each grade,
2. # students in each grade screened,
3. # students at risk on screening instrument;
4. # students who received supplemental reading help,
5. data must be disaggregated and searchable by district and posted on the state website
(G): RESOURCES FOR COUNTY BOARD: On or before June 1, 2020, MSDE will write regulations with advocates and other interested stakeholders, to develop and update resources for use by a county board. Resources developed under this subsection shall be available on the department’s website.
(H) TECHNICAL SUPPORT: The Department shall provide: technical support for the county boards to provide:
1. Training opportunities annually for individuals who conduct screenings under this section and for school administrators.
2. Training may include:
  1. The administration and interpretation of screenings, informal diagnostic assessments, progress monitoring instruments, and student data;
  2. Interpreting screenings and assessments for parents;
  3. Best practices for designing and implementing supplemental reading instruction; and
  4. The elements, principles, and best practices of supplemental reading instruction.
REGULATIONS. (I) The department (MSDE) shall adopt regulations to implement the requirements of this section.

Section 2: It is the intent of the GA that money appropriated in accordance with The Blueprint for Maryland’s Future, Chapter xx, Senate Bill 1030 of 2019, shall be used to offset the cost of implementation of Section I of this act.

1 Comment

Are Maryland's Reading Instruction Practices Equitable?

3/15/2019

0 Comments

Lack of Prevention & Effective Intervention Severely Impacts Vulnerable Students

We can all agree that students with less opportunity to develop early literacy at home will be further behind on the reading curve when they enter school and may need more help learning to read. Maryland's reading outcomes tell us we have a problem -- 25+ states responded by enacting reading screening laws to prevent reading failure.

Massachusetts, New Jersey, Arkansas, Ohio and Texas (to name only a few) require that predictive skills for reading be screened in order catch kids early no matter their family income, race, culture, disability or zip code.

Maryland PARCC data from 2018 shows 75% of fourth grade students living in poverty were below grade level in reading and 72% of African American students were below grade level. Poverty, race and disability status do not prevent students from learning to read: poorly chosen curricula, lack of reading screening, poorly designed and targeted professional development, insufficient and inadequate educator preparation programs & lack of knowledge about the science of reading contribute to poor reading outcomes for vulnerable populations.

"Research indicates that student demographic characteristics are related to the probability of needing remedial coursework in college. In a nationally representative sample, African American students were more likely to take remedial coursework when compared to White students, even after controlling for academic preparation, family socio-economic status (SES), and type of high school and college attended (Attewell et al., 2006)." Link to report, MD Longitudinal Data System

Reading Screening: Part of the Solution to Close Gaps
Amended Version, Senate Bill 734

Maryland's Career and College Readiness Reading Standards require that all students, beginning in pre-kindergarten, learn foundational reading skills including phonological and phonemic awareness and phonics. Maryland's poor outcomes for reading tell us that we must do better and provide an early warning system for students who may struggle.

SB 734, the Ready to Read Act, is Maryland's opportunity to address reading failure, and the downstream outcomes and costs, before they develop and before they become chronic. Research shows that students whose reading instruction needs are not addressed early, do not catch up.

"Using measures currently available, we can accurately determine which students are likely to struggle with reading starting in preschool or kindergarten ”

“In fourth grade, students need 2 hours of instructional time to make the same gains as made in 30 minutes of instructional time in Kindergarten.”

Dr. Joseph Torgesen, Florida Center for Reading Research, 2010

Why We Must Screen Students for Reading Difficulties

SB 734 enables districts to accurately and consistently apply screening measures to determine which students may struggle to read. This is done by measuring students' pre-and-early literacy skills that evidence shows are predictive of future reading success.

When school districts wait until a student shows indicators of difficulty, this creates a paradox: reading skills are best developed and addressed in PK, K and 1 -- by waiting for a student to fail to respond to instruction and/or intervention schools are delaying help. This is the current practice and is not working.

Senate Amendments to SB 734

The Senate amendments scale back screening to include Kindergarten students only.

Summary of Senate Amendments: Amended Version of Ready To Read, SB 734

DEFINITIONS, (Section A):

Screening is defined as a brief, valid, and reliable measurement procedure used to identify or predict whether a student may be at risk for poor learning outcomes.
Other definitions include supplemental reading instruction, phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, phonological awareness, student.
DELETED: or amended: informal diagnostic assessment, progress monitoring and amended definition of student.

WHO IS SCREENED: (Section A(7)): Student is amended and defined as:

any student in Kindergarten;
First grade is screened only if the student was not screened in or demonstrated difficulty mastering grade level reading in K.
Students who enter or transfer to an elementary school from an elementary school, are screened unless a county board determines the student has already been screened and does not demonstrate difficulty mastering grade-level reading.

EFFECTIVE DATE: (Section B)(1))

Beginning in 2020-2021 School year, each county board shall ensure that a student is screened to identify if the student is at risk for reading difficulties.

PARENT NOTIFICATION: Section (B)(3)

description of the screening and supplemental instruction process in the districts; and
any checklists or forms needed to support the screening protocol.

REQUIREMENT FOR SCREENING: (Section C(1)): A county board shall select one or more appropriate screening instruments that:

accurately and reliably identify students at risk for poor learning outcomes;
are developmentally appropriate;
are economical to administer in time and cost; and
use norm-referenced or criterion-based scores.

WHAT IS SCREENED: Section C(2): Schools must screen all K students for risks of reading difficulties in the following areas beginning in the 20-21 school year:

phonemic and phonological awareness and processing;
DELETED:
1. knowledge of letter names and letter sounds
2. rapid automatized naming
3. PK, Grade 1 and students in 2+ if concerns are noted. Grade one skills included phonological and phonemic awareness and processing, knowledge of letter names and letter sound associations for uppercase and lowercase letters, normed rapid automatized naming, automatic and fluent single word recognition and oral reading fluency.

SCREENING FREQUENCY: Section D(1)
Student shall be screened according to the schedule established by the county board;

SUPPLEMENTAL READING INSTRUCTION. Section (D)(2): If the screening results indicate that a student is at risk of reading difficulties, the county board shall provide supplemental reading instruction in the students’ areas of need.

Supplemental reading instruction is defined (p. 4, line 25…there is a typo to be fixed)

PARENT NOTIFICATION: Section (D)(2)

Provide a notification letter to the parent or guardian of the student that includes:
1. The screening results; and
2. A description of the supplemental reading instruction that will be provided to the student.

RESOURCES (Section E): Each county board shall provide resources on the school district website that include:

Reading screening instruments used in the school district; and
A checklist of early warning signs of reading difficulty/dyslexia by age.

REPORTING (Section F). On or before September 1 each year, beginning in 2020-2021 school year: each district shall report:

# students in each grade,
# students in each grade screened,
# students at risk on screening instrument;
# students who received supplemental reading help,
data must be disaggregated and searchable by district and posted on the state website

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE: (Section G): On or before June 1, 2020, MSDE will write regulations with advocates and other interested stakeholders, to implement:

training annually for individuals who conduct screening, including administrators, on the administration and interpretation of assessments and data;
best practices to design and implement supplemental reading instruction, and
the elements, principles and best practices of supplemental reading instruction.
Section 2: It is the intent of the GA that money appropriated in accordance with The Blueprint for Maryland’s Future, Chapter xx, SB 1030 of 2019, shall be used to offset the cost of implementation of Section I of this act.

How did your Senator vote on SB 734?

SENATE Floor Debate Audio, 3.14.19
LINK to the Senate Recording (jump to 33:41) or Listen to the Excerpt of the floor session on SB 734 on DDMD's YouTube Channel

Click play below to listen to the except of the floor session debate from 3.14. We’ve excerpted the section of interest for your connivence and included the original link to the officially recorded Senate floor sessions. Official Senate audio recording of the proceedings on March 14 on Ready to Read.

How Much Does it Really Cost to Screen Students in Pk, K and 1?

Screeners are inexpensive and can vary from $0 - $38 per student. Many screeners are free or low cost and were developed by university research scientists. DIBELS and Acadience Reading charge $1 per student for data collection and reports. Virginia recently received a quote to screen each of the the 350,000 K-2 grade students at $1 per student plus and an additional $85,000 for training and data-based decision making support. The total cost to screen each student in Virginia each year is $435,000 or $1.24 per student.

The chart below was prepared by the Coalition to Support the Ready to Read Act and includes the number of students in each county in PK, K and 1 in each school district. Using costs from other states and the actual cost of screening instruments in two price ranges, the table below reflects that an urban district like Baltimore City would pay no more than $133,240 annually even if they purchased the more expensive screening instrument(s).

It would cost an estimated $1.3 million annually to screen every single child in the state. Special education interventions for students who don't learn to read by the end of first grade are much more costly due to more time and intensity needed to help a student learn to read.

What are the Skills that Predict Future Reading Success?

From the Executive Summary of the Report of the National Early Literacy Panel, p. 3:

"These six variables not only correlated with later literacy as shown by data drawn from multiple studies with large numbers of children but also maintained their predictive power even when the role of other variables, such as IQ or socioeconomic status (SES), were accounted for.

These six variables include

alphabet knowledge (AK): knowledge of the names and sounds associated with printed letters
phonological awareness (PA): the ability to detect, manipulate, or analyze the auditory aspects of spoken language (including the ability to distinguish or segment words, syllables, or phonemes), independent of meaning
rapid automatic naming (RAN) of letters or digits: the ability to rapidly name a sequence of random letters or digits
RAN of objects or colors: the ability to rapidly name a sequence of repeating random sets of pictures of objects (e.g., “car,” “tree,” “house,” “man”) or colors
writing or writing name: the ability to write letters in isolation on request or to write one’s own name
phonological memory: the ability to remember spoken information for a short period of time."

Are the Predictive Skills Considered "Screening Instruments"?

During Senate floor discussion it was stated several times that the predictive skills for Pk, K and 1 were removed or limited because they "required a specific screening instrument be used." This is incorrect. The skills to be screened are a minimum baseline standard and include those that are predictive of future reading success. The Ready to Read Act does not require a district to use a specific screening instrument or remediation program.

When Should Students be Screened?

The Senate amendments limit early screening Kindergarten students -- this is not a best practice or recommended by the experts. Reading skills are developed over time and at each developmental level (measured by grade) a student develops new skills. The majority of those skills are developed in pre-kindergarten, kindergarten and first grade where the bill is targeted. Skills continue to develop through fifth grade. Maryland state standards stop teaching foundational reading skills in third grade where students are expected to apply what they know.

FROM THE NATIONAL CENTER ON RESPONSE TO INTERVENTION:
"Screening should occur every year across the elementary grades. To allow early intervention, schools should screen early in the year so that they can allocate instructional resources intelligently."

Reading Screening Measures must be Brief, Cost Effective, Valid, Reliable, Predictive

The Ready to Read bill enables school districts to purchase screening instruments and professional development that follow best practices for reading screening. A comprehensive list of screening measures and informal diagnostic tools was compiled by The Gaab Lab at Boston Children's Hospital and the Gabrieli lab at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (M.I.T.), courtesy of Ola Ozernov-Palchik, Michelle Gonzalez, Lindsay Hillyer, Jeff Dieffenbach, John Gabrieli & Nadine Gaab. The list is available to help school districts make smart purchasing decisions -- there are other lists, in the resources below, that can help districts plan purchases and processes that benefit students and improve reading outcomes.

Are Any Maryland School Districts Screening?

Pockets of Promise

Maryland has a partnership with the National Center on Improving Literacy to provide technical assistance on reading screening. St. Mary's County Maryland began universally screening students in the primary grades at the beginning of the school year in 2019. Other districts, including Frederick, Prince George's and Baltimore County are also screening. There are pockets of promise for reading screening in Baltimore City (PIEL Center) and on the Eastern Shore. These pockets of promise expect to expand as the requirements for SB 734 provide more guidance, technical assistance and funding.

National Center on Improving Literacy, Maryland Beacon Site

No Statutory Protections for Dyslexia

See https://improvingliteracy.org/state-of-dyslexia/maryland

What Do the Experts Say About Reading Screening?

National Center on Response to Intervention, Screening Briefs
Maryland College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards for Foundational Reading, PK, K and Grade 1
National Center on Response to Intervention: Essential Components of Response to Intervention
National Center on Intensive Intervention, Reading Screening Tools Chart
National Center on Improving Literacy, White Paper on Reading Screening & Dyslexia
American Institute for Research, Screening Tool Kit
Doing What Works: Conducting Early Reading Screening, WestEd
How do We Select An Effective Screening Tool?
The National Reading Panel, Teaching Children to Read, 2000
How We Learn to Read: The Key Role of Phonological Awareness, National Center on Improving Literacy
The Alphabetic Principle: From Phonological Awareness to Reading Words
Learning Together About Universal Screening, Dr. Don Compton, Vanderbilt University
Foundational Skills to Support Reading in Grades K-3, Institute for Education Sciences Practice Guide, 2013
Developing Early Literacy: Report of the National Early Literacy Panel
Research Recommendations for Dyslexia Screening & Requirements in Southern Region Education Board States (MD is a member state and is the only state without any protections or requirements for students with dyslexia and the only state that does not have an early screening requirement).
Reading and Dyslexia Screening Components in SREB States
We have a National Reading Crisis, EdWeek, March 2019
What Key Literacy Skills Need to be Developed in Children? National Center on Improving Literacy, Briefs
Maryland Hub for Data Informed Practices, Office of Leadership Development and School Improvement

Ready to Read Act, Resources

Costs, Benefits, Local Control and Savings, HB 734
Fact Sheets
Remedial Coursework in Maryland, Maryland Longitudinal Data System
Laws & Regulations that Govern Reading Instruction in Maryland
Screening Information for Legislators and Policy Makers

Who Supports the Ready to Read bills?

Montgomery County Board of Education
Education Advocacy Coalition (EAC)
Sean Malone
Prince George’s County Board of Education
Maryland NAACP
Maryland Psychological Association (MPA)
MD Speech-Language Hearing Association
Maryland School Psychologists Association (MSPA)
Maryland State Education Association (MSEA)
Maryland Parent-Teacher Association (MD PTA)
Office of Education Accountability, Valerie Radomsky, Governor Larry Hogan
Parent Advocacy Coalition (PAC)

Maryland Education Coalition (MEC)
Advocates for Children and Youth
American Civil Liberties Union of MD
Arts Education in Maryland Schools
CASA
Disability Rights Maryland
League of Women Voters of MD
Let Them See Clearly
Maryland Coalition for Community Schools
Maryland Out of School Time Network
Maryland PTA
Maryland NAACP
Parents Advocacy Consortium
Rick Tyler, Jr.
Right to Read MD
School Social Workers of MD
Sharon Rubinstein

0 Comments

Ready to Read, SB 734, Receives Favorable Report from House Ways & Means, Moves to House Floor

Ready to Read Unanimously Passes Senate, Headed to the House

Are Maryland's Reading Instruction Practices Equitable?

Lack of Prevention & Effective Intervention Severely Impacts Vulnerable Students

Reading Screening: Part of the Solution to Close GapsAmended Version, Senate Bill 734

Why We Must Screen Students for Reading Difficulties

Senate Amendments to SB 734

How Much Does it Really Cost to Screen Students in Pk, K and 1?

What are the Skills that Predict Future Reading Success?

Are the Predictive Skills Considered "Screening Instruments"?

When Should Students be Screened?

Reading Screening Measures must be Brief, Cost Effective, Valid, Reliable, Predictive

Are Any Maryland School Districts Screening?​Pockets of Promise

No Statutory Protections for Dyslexia

What Do the Experts Say About Reading Screening?

Ready to Read Act, Resources

Who Supports the Ready to Read bills?

Archives

Reading Screening: Part of the Solution to Close Gaps
Amended Version, Senate Bill 734

Are Any Maryland School Districts Screening?

Pockets of Promise