Dear Senator Berger,
An advisory board recently recommended that this year be considered a trial year for Read to Achieve. School districts and parents of third graders throughout North Carolina made the same request. You responded with a definite "no." I am writing to ask you to reconsider that position.
As the parent of a third grader, I have to say these children have been dealt a bad hand. With the botched implementation of this program, students have been robbed of many hours of instruction due to testing. Countless parents say that their children have come home frustrated, stressed, and have developed negative attitudes towards reading due to Read to Achieve.
You have cited NAEP's report several times, saying 40% of NC third graders lack necessary reading skills. When asked if you expect such a large number of students to attend summer school, you said that you hope "with remediation," the number will be less. Senator, what remediation? If you are referring to students taking test after test, whether for the so-called portfolio, or for alternative assessments, Read to Achieve is not making students better at reading. This program has provided no help for these children during the school year. In fact, North Carolina cut teacher assistants and increased class sizes, giving students less chance of receiving extra help by overburdening teachers more than ever. All this was done on top of implementing the Common Core State Standards just last year, forcing students to meet different standards than they were taught during their previous two years of schooling.
You said to "read the bill," so I did. I agree that the statue does provide some flexibility as far as identifying students who are successful readers. But I also realized the law is lacking the key component that you mentioned, remediation. Read to Achieve does two things: identifies students who are struggling in reading (so far, this has been accomplished through various tests) and imparts punitive measures on those children (through summer school and retention). Teachers are doing the best job they can. You said, "We have tens of thousands of magnificent teachers. I'm not faulting the teachers." Obviously, every teacher's goal is to have his or her students ready for the next grade level. Passing this law did not change that for teachers. Read to Achieve is not a magic wand that is going to get every student who is behind up to par without any other support given to them.
An overwhelming number of studies show that retention (after kindergarten and first grade) has negative effects on students, and is highly correlated with dropping out of school. You posted one study from Brookings that differs, suggesting retention may help some third graders in reading. Did you read the entire report? Because it also stated, "Policies encouraging the retention of students who have not acquired basic reading skills by third grade are no substitute for the development of a comprehensive strategy to reduce the number of struggling readers." The lack of a comprehensive strategy is a major flaw of Read to Achieve.
To defend your position of implementing Read to Achieve this year, you provided an Annie Casey Foundation report about the importance of being able to read by the end of third grade. This report and numerous other studies prove that it matters a lot. I don't think anyone in the state of North Carolina has disagreed with this. Nowhere in the Annie Casey study (or any other study as far as I know) is there indication that reading struggles begin in third grade. The problems begin much earlier, and so should interventions.
North Carolina, you say, has a "problem of emphasis and using the right tools. We have not provided the opportunity (children) need in education." Flunking students is not the right tool. The right opportunity is not a reading boot camp where students are taught to the test.
Our third graders have suffered enough this year. By continuing Read to Achieve, we are risking children's futures. It is my sincere hope that you will consider this a trial year. In the meantime, perhaps our Department of Public Instruction could figure out that in education, a portfolio is a collection of student work, not a series of tests that aren't even at the correct level. This would help with the over-testing problem current third graders experienced. It would also give you and our other lawmakers time to fund the intensive supports that struggling readers need, such as reading specialists working individually with students beginning in kindergarten. We both want the same thing, Senator Berger. A friend recently reminded me of Gandhi's words, that "you must be the change you wish to see in the world." So, I made a commitment to work with the lowest achieving kindergartners at my children's school every afternoon. I have sacrificed work to make this happen, but I am happy to report the students are making progress. I encourage you to volunteer at an elementary school, and talk with the parents, teachers, and principals to help make these important decisions. If everyone works together for the good of our children, Read to Achieve could become a truly revolutionary program that succeeds in helping each student reach his or her full potential.
Best Regards,
Angie Miller
NC mom to:
A 3rd grade avid reader
A Junie B. Jones-loving 1st grader
An ABC song-singing, future reader and preschooler
