It’s been nearly three years since policymakers established Ohio’s science of reading initiative. The sweeping statewide effort requires public schools to use state-approved high-quality instructional materials, calls on teachers and administrators to complete professional development, and tasks the Ohio Department of Higher Education (ODHE) with conducting audits on the state’s educator preparation programs to ensure that future teachers are well-trained in the science of reading. It also prohibits three-cueing, an instructional approach that encourages students to guess at words based on pictures or context rather than using phonics-based word recognition skills.
The findings of the first round of ODHE’s audits were released in December, marking the latest step in Ohio’s journey to improve early literacy. In total, the audits examined 614 reading and literacy-related courses across 49 public and private institutions of higher education. For each institution, the audit team—ODHE commissioned The Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk to carry out the work—reviewed course materials including syllabi and textbooks, observed instruction, and conducted interviews. Needless to say, it was a massive undertaking.
Institutions were assigned a rating based on two measures: 1) the percentage of audit metrics their programs addressed within the required 12-Hour Reading and Literacy Core,[1] and 2) the degree of compliance with Ohio’s statutory definition of the science of reading, which prohibits three-cueing. Ratings fell into three categories: “In Alignment,” “In Partial Alignment,” or “Not In Alignment.” Institutions that taught or promoted three-cueing were automatically classified as Not In Alignment.
Seventy-nine percent of the 48 institutions that received alignment ratings achieved designations of full or partial alignment. Thirty-three earned a rating of In Alignment while another five were rated as In Partial Alignment. The primary distinction between the two was the number of audit metrics met: Those that were only partially aligned failed to address three or more metrics. Two institutions that earned In Alignment ratings—Kent State University and Lourdes University—were identified as exemplars and lauded for practices including embedding structured literacy practice into coursework and field supervision, pursuing grant-funded professional learning, and partnering with districts.
Ten institutions (21 percent) earned ratings of Not In Alignment due to a documented use of the three-cueing approach in assigned texts, lecture materials, assessments, or classroom observations. It’s important to note that the presence of three-cueing in even one course section was enough to trigger this rating, regardless of how many audit metrics an institution addressed. For example, six of the ten institutions met 100 percent of the audit’s metrics but were identified as misaligned because some course sections weren’t compliant with Ohio’s statutory definition of reading science. The report identifies the number of noncompliant course sections per institution, which ranges from one at Cleveland State, Ohio Dominican University, and Ohio University to a whopping 17 course sections at Ohio State. (Ohio State’s findings probably shouldn’t be surprising, given that the school hosts Reading Recovery, one of the leading organizations promoting three-cueing.)
Next steps depend on an institution’s rating. Those that were categorized as aligned were provided with advisory recommendations to refine their programs. Partially aligned institutions are required to address all audit metrics by revising syllabi, course content, and assessments. Meanwhile, the ten institutions deemed Not In Alignment were given mandatory and advisory recommendations and must remove all texts, course materials, and instructional practices that promote three-cueing. The report notes that, for some, documenting that they’ve replaced noncompliant texts should be enough. Others, however, will need a “comprehensive review” by ODHE. Either way, state law requires institutions to address audit findings within a year. The chancellor of higher education must revoke approval for programs that fail to do so and are out of alignment.
For the most part, Ohioans should feel encouraged by the audits and these findings. Many institutions put a considerable amount of work into ensuring alignment with state standards, and it shows in the data. On average, they addressed 98 percent of audit metrics. The majority ensured three-cueing wasn’t included in their programming. And the audit team praised several institutions for their active engagement in professional development and providing teacher candidates with extensive opportunities to apply evidence-based literacy practices in the field.
This kind of progress is great news for the kids who will one day be taught by these educators. But Ohio’s work is far from over. Helping institutions address audit metrics they missed and expanding faculty expertise in reading science are both identified in the report as key next steps. Addressing the stubborn presence of three-cueing, however, is the top priority. The ten institutions using instructional methods and materials rooted in three-cueing “risk misinforming preservice candidates about effective literacy instruction.” Going forward, it will be crucial for state leaders to hold these institutions accountable for addressing audit findings and meeting state expectations. Failing to do so could derail efforts to boost reading achievement statewide.
[1] Ohio requires elementary teacher preparation programs to dedicate twelve credit hours to reading instruction, including a three-credit course in phonics.
