How the 'science of reading' bill could change California schools

As California wrestles with a statewide literacy crisis, a bill poised to hit Gov. Gavin Newsom’s desk could fundamentally change the way students learn to read in California.

The bill, AB 1454, would move the state one step closer to implementing evidence-based reading instruction in California classrooms, which has been hotly debated for decades.

Authored by Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, who represents Salinas, and Assemblymembers Al Muratsuchi of Torrance and Blanca Rubio of Baldwin Park, AB 1454 would adopt new evidence-based reading instructional materials and training. Often referred to as the “science of reading,” evidence-based reading focuses on foundational reading skills like phonics and vocabulary rather than word recognition and memorization.

Unlike many other states, California has previously stopped short of mandating evidence-based reading instruction. Past efforts to overhaul the state’s reading curriculum have stalled in the state legislature, with a former bill by Rubio (AB 2222) failing to garner critical support from the teacher’s union and English-learner advocates, who worried it would not meet the needs of English learners and limit educators’ creativity and innovation in the classroom.

The California Teachers Association supports AB 1454, which gives school districts more flexibility to select instructional materials and the option to decline state-funded teacher training, unlike previous versions of the bill.

For decades, educators and state leaders have gone back and forth on the best way to teach young students how to read, a battle often referred to as “reading wars.” California public schools, which have a large amount of control over instructional materials and methods compared to other states, have alternated over the years between two main methods: an emphasis on phonics and whole language.

California was an early adopter of the whole-language approach to reading instruction in the 1980s, which teaches students to read through literature and promotes a love for reading rather than explicitly teaching kids how to sound out words and connect spoken sounds to their written symbols — the phonics method. Whole language advocates argued it was easier and more natural for students to focus on the meaning and context of words rather than breaking them down into sounds.

But as California students’ reading scores continued to drop into the 1990s — with only 12% of 4th graders at or above reading proficiency in 1992 and 11% in 1996 — some educators and experts blamed schools’ emphasis on whole language and advocated for a shift to phonics, which the state transitioned to for a few years before moving toward “balanced literacy,” a blend of both methods.

Kristin Koeller, a San Jose-based reading specialist with more than 22 years of experience teaching California students, said California latched on to the balanced literacy method, even though it was not supported by cognitive research and focused more on word memorization and guessing than comprehension.

“Balanced literacy took whole language and sprinkled in a little phonics and said, ‘Yeah, this will work, this is good enough,’ even though the evidence didn’t support it,” Koeller said.

She said the science of reading began to emerge as growing evidence revealed how the brain learns to read and what instruction is most effective in schools, leading some school districts across the country to begin adopting the “structured literacy” method.

Danielle Gomez, an education and policy research associate at the Stanford-based nonprofit research center, the Policy Analysis for California Education, said structured literacy emphasizes phonemic awareness — the sounds letters make — along with phonics, reading fluency, vocabulary and comprehension.

“When we actually pick up a book, actually learning how to tie the written representations of the alphabet and of words … to the way that they sound must be taught. We must be taught how to learn to read,” Gomez said. “We have decades of interdisciplinary research across the world that support this idea of reading … this evidence of how the brain develops.”

But it wasn’t until Mississippi became the only state in the nation to improve its fourth-grade reading scores in 2019 — referred to as the “Mississippi Miracle” — after the state passed several policy changes focusing on early literacy screenings, teacher training and a shift toward the science of reading, that the movement really began to gain support in U.S. schools. Other states like New York, North Carolina and Colorado quickly modeled Mississippi, mandating phonics-based reading instruction and dyslexia screening.

But California stalled, and Tony Thurmond, the State Superintendent of Public Instruction, rejected a state-mandated phonics curriculum in 2022, arguing a “one-size fits all” approach wouldn’t work for the large and diverse state.

California has spent more than $600 million in recent years to support literacy improvements, including through literacy coach and reading specialist training, dyslexia screening, pandemic recovery, and high-impact tutoring. Most recently, Gov. Gavin Newsom approved one-time funding of $200 million in the state’s budget for optional elementary school teacher training in evidence-based reading instruction — a previous component of AB 1454.

AB 1454 unanimously passed the Assembly Education Committee, Appropriations Committee, Assembly Floor, and Senate Education Committee. It heads to the Senate Appropriations Committee on Monday and, if approved, then a full State Senate vote before landing on Newsom’s desk.

Marshall Tuck, CEO of the educational advocacy nonprofit EdVoice — a key supporter of AB 1454 — said the state bill is important because it’s difficult for locally controlled school districts, which have taught kids the same way for years, to change their approach.

He said the state’s recent investments in evidence-based literacy reflect a major shift in California’s priorities and demonstrate that its leaders are taking literacy efforts more seriously. Tuck said he’s optimistic the bill will pass the legislature because of the large-scale and bipartisan support behind AB 1454 — something previous versions have lacked.

“It took a while to get there, and I do think that big systems are hard to change,” Tuck said. “I think (it was) the growing focus nationally on the issue … and the leaders in this state stepping up and prioritizing kids and reading in a different kind of way.”

_____