Skip to main content

Mobile Navigation

  • National
    • Policy
      • High Expectations
      • Quality Choices
      • Personalized Pathways
    • Research
    • Commentary
      • Gadfly Newsletter
      • Flypaper Blog
    • Events
    • Scholars Program
  • Ohio
    • Policy
      • Priorities
      • Media & Testimony
    • Research
    • Commentary
      • Ohio Education Gadfly Biweekly
      • Ohio Gadfly Daily
  • Charter Authorizing
    • Application
    • Sponsored Schools
    • Resources
  • About
    • Mission
    • Board
    • Staff
    • Career
Home
Home
Advancing Educational Excellence

Main Navigation

  • National
  • Ohio
  • Charter Authorizing
  • About

National Menu

  • Topics
    • Accountability & Testing
    • Advanced Education
    • Career & Technical Education
    • Charter Schools
    • Curriculum & Instruction
    • ESSA
    • Evidence-Based Learning
    • Facilities
    • Governance
    • Personalized Learning
    • Private School Choice
    • School Finance
    • Standards
    • Teachers & School Leaders
    • Think Again
  • Research
  • Commentary
    • Gadfly Newsletter
    • Flypaper Blog
    • Gadfly Podcast
  • Events
  • Scholars Program
Flypaper

Ohio’s implementation of the science of reading

Aaron Churchill
8.20.2026
Student and book
Getty Images/ValerioGalli
Listen to this article
Loading the Elevenlabs Text to Speech AudioNative Player...

Approximately half of American adults read at a sixth-grade level or below, according to the Barbara Bush Foundation. The consequences of poor literacy skills are profound: higher unemployment rates, lower-paying work, and struggles with routine tasks such as reading prescriptions or bills. From a societal perspective, widespread illiteracy means slower economic growth, a less vibrant democracy, and greater taxpayer burdens.

Adult illiteracy rates of course include many who attended school decades ago. But the outlook is—somewhat surprisingly—just as grim for today’s students. In Ohio, 38 percent of fourth graders and 31 percent of eighth graders scored “below basic” (the lowest mark) on the most recent National Assessment of Educational Progress. These failure rates have crept upward over the past decade—accelerating during the pandemic—and in 2024 they reached the highest levels since the turn of the century.

To address this literacy crisis, Ohio lawmakers have enacted two landmark policy reforms: the third grade reading guarantee (2012) and science of reading initiatives (2023).

The third grade reading guarantee requires elementary schools to identify struggling readers in grades K–3 and create an improvement plan outlining the additional supports they will provide. The guarantee initially required schools to retain third graders (with narrow exceptions) who fell short of a state reading target and provide them with more intensive interventions.

The science-of-reading initiative requires schools to align their curriculum and instruction with the five pillars of evidence-based reading practices (phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension). It also requires colleges of education to align their teacher preparation with the science of reading, and included more than $170 million to support implementation in K–12 schools and higher education.

Fordham’s latest report, The Next Chapter: Ohio’s implementation of the science of reading—and where to next, reviews Ohio’s efforts to implement key provisions of these literacy reforms, focusing primarily on state- and district-level activities.[1] Important—but mixed—developments pertaining to the third grade reading guarantee include the following:

  • Ohio recently strengthened its early identification policy. For many years, Ohio allowed schools to choose among more than a dozen diagnostic tests to identify lagging readers. Some tests were lower-quality assessments that allowed districts to avoid identification and intervention. Lawmakers recently limited the number of testing options to just six, thus helping to ensure that tests align with state expectations and accurately identify off-track students.
  • Ohio unfortunately gutted the retention requirement. Regrettably, state lawmakers in 2023 weakened the guarantee’s retention provision by allowing schools to promote struggling students based on parental request. Widespread “social promotion” has followed: In 2024–25, 98 percent of third graders were promoted despite a statewide third grade reading proficiency rate of just 61 percent. Of the grade-promoted students, 21,658 students advanced to fourth grade through the parental loophole.

As for science-of-reading implementation, the report documents the following:

  • Ohio schools have moved toward stronger reading curriculum. Under state requirements, Ohio barred the use of several popular but non-scientifically based curricula. In their place, schools have transitioned to higher-quality curricula such as the well-regarded Core Knowledge Language Arts, which was the most-used core curriculum in the state across grades K–5 in 2024–25.
  • Teachers are receiving professional supports. By the end of 2025, a large majority of Ohio classroom teachers, reading specialists, and administrators—more than 115,000 educators in all—completed an introductory professional development (PD) course in the science of reading. In addition, as of March 2026, Ohio has placed reading coaches in 151 low-performing schools to provide more intensive and personalized instructional support.
  • Ohio now exercises stronger oversight of teacher preparation programs. During 2025, Ohio undertook a first round of audits to ensure that instruction in the state’s colleges of education is aligned to the science of reading. Thirty-eight out of 48 programs were deemed in full or partial alignment but 10 failed the audit, including Ohio University and Ohio State University. Non-aligned programs have 12 months to take corrective action; if they fail a follow-up audit, the program must close.

With one glaring exception (retention), Ohio has a solid early literacy policy framework.[2] When it comes to implementation—how laws are translated into practice—the state has moved aggressively in various areas such as curriculum and teacher PD. But it will take more to sustain this momentum. The following summarizes key ways that state leaders can keep the pedal to the floor.

Steady leadership. Due to term limits, Governor DeWine’s tenure is drawing to a close. The next governor should also embrace literacy reform, making it a top priority and taking actions that challenge schools to rigorously implement the science of reading. As exemplified by Massachusetts and Mississippi, strong and sustained leadership has been critical to keeping education reforms on track and working to produce results. Ohio will need that same type of resolve to ensure that literacy reforms yield long-term benefits for its students.

Strong accountability. State policymakers must hold schools and educators accountable for implementation and improved reading achievement. They can do this in the following ways (further discussion of each recommendation appears at the link noted).

a. Require schools to meet with parents of struggling readers more than once per year.

b. Restore the third grade retention requirement.

c. Support inspections of low-performing schools’ alignment to the science of reading.

d. Strengthen the teacher preparation program audits.

Knowledge-building focus. Discussion around the science of reading tends to revolve around phonics—i.e., teaching children to “decode” by sounding out words. While phonics is absolutely essential, it’s not the only ingredient to reading success. Students also need a rich vocabulary and strong background knowledge to make sense of what they are reading. The good news is that the content-rich Core Knowledge Language Arts has become the most-selected literacy curriculum in Ohio, with roughly one in four districts choosing this program for third grade instruction; another one in five uses another core reading program that is nationally recognized as knowledge-rich. This means, however, that just over half of Ohio districts are using third-grade reading programs of more questionable depth when it comes to foundational knowledge and vocabulary. Policymakers should continue to seek ways to promote vocabulary and background knowledge, whether by focusing future PD efforts on those reading pillars or providing grants for districts seeking to implement content-rich programs.

Rigorous evaluation. While Ohio schools are starting to row in the same direction on literacy, there remains wide variety in the specific programs schools use and quality of instruction. Rigorous research should be undertaken to shine light on which core curricula, intervention programs, and professional supports provide the strongest benefits for students. This can help state and local officials pinpoint programs and initiatives worth promoting through targeted investments (and which should be discontinued).

—

Literacy has the power to change lives. It can unlock further education and rewarding careers. It opens minds to new ideas and ways of thinking. The ability to read is necessary for responsible citizenship and independent adulthood. Thanks to the work of state policymakers, Ohio has moved in the right direction on literacy policy. With continued bold leadership and rigorous implementation in the years ahead, Ohio can make good on its promise of higher reading achievement.

 

[1] Classroom-level implementation is beyond the scope of this report, but a survey of Ohio teachers offers insight into how they view and implement the science of reading: Alanna Bjorklund-Young and Andrea Ochoa, Ohio’s Path to Early Literacy, Johns Hopkins University/Thomas B. Fordham Institute (March 2025).

[2] Though beyond the scope of the present report, a comprehensive policy framework for reading achievement across all grades also includes a rigorous school report card and academically driven graduation requirements. For discussion of these topics and how Ohio can improve those areas, see Aaron Churchill, Ohio’s High School Diploma: Gateway to success or door to nowhere? Fordham Institute (October 2025), and ibid., “Getting Ohio’s early literacy measure right,” Fordham Institute, blog (January 28, 2026).

Policy Priority:
High Expectations
Topics:
Evidence-Based Learning
Curriculum & Instruction
Governance
Teachers & School Leaders
Tags: Ohio Education in Ohio Mike DeWine Curriculum Educational assessment Educational policy Literacy Massachusetts Mississippi National Assessment of Educational Progress Science of Reading. Teacher education
+9 More Show Less
Aaron Churchill 2025 headshot

Aaron Churchill is the Ohio research director for the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, where he has worked since 2012. In this role, Aaron oversees research  and commentary aimed at strengthening education policy in Ohio. He writes regularly on Fordham’s blog, the Ohio Gadfly Daily on topics such as…

View Full Bio

Related Content

view
Nikole Hannah-Jones

A comprehensive list of the responses to the Nikole Hannah-Jones article

The Education Gadfly 10.1.2026
NationalFlypaper
view
Rocky terrain
High Expectations

The uneven ground of the no-zero grading policy landscape

Kennedy Sundberg 10.1.2026
NationalFlypaper
view
F grade
High Expectations

Do dual enrollment students still benefit despite failing college courses?

Jeff Murray 10.1.2026
NationalFlypaper
Fordham Logo

© 2026 The Thomas B. Fordham Institute
Privacy Policy
Usage Agreement

National

P.O. Box 110
Burke, VA 22009

202.223.5452

[email protected]

Ohio

P.O. Box 82291
Columbus, OH 43202

614.223.1580

[email protected]

Sponsorship

130 West Second Street, Suite 410
Dayton, Ohio 45402

937.227.3368

[email protected]