Most states don’t actually know if teachers are qualified to teach reading.

Key points:

• States Are Using Inadequate Primary Reading Licensure Tests
• States must transition to more robust testing and testing providers must clearly identify weaknesses in testing.
• See related article: Teacher Q&A: Strengthening professional development with ai
• For more news on teacher preparation, visit eSN’s Educational Leadership page

Most states (29 states and the District of Columbia) use a weak elementary teacher reading license test, meaning they do not effectively measure teachers’ knowledge of science-based reading instruction before entering the classroom, according to a new analysis by the National Council. on Teaching Quality (NCTQ).

In fact, one state, Iowa, does not require any exam to obtain a reading license. This deficiency means that each year, nearly 100,000 elementary teachers across the country enter classrooms with false assurances that they are prepared to teach reading.

The data summary, False Assurances: Many States’ Licensure Tests Don’t Indicate Whether Elementary Teachers Understand Reading Instructionprovides the most up-to-date analysis of the quality of the elementary reading teacher licensing exams used by each state.

More than 50 years of research has shed light on the most effective way to teach children to read. It requires systematic and explicit instruction in the five core components of the science of reading: phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. Preparing teachers to teach these five components, known as science-based reading instruction, can ensure that more than 1 million additional students enter fourth grade capable of reading each year.

Unfortunately, too often states allow teachers into classrooms who are insufficiently prepared to teach reading. Licensure exams, if rigorous and aligned with the science of reading, can serve as an important barrier to ensuring that teachers have this critical knowledge. However, many licensure tests are weak because they do not adequately assess teachers’ preparation to teach reading. Too many states are using these weak tests.

“All children deserve excellent reading instruction, but many children do not receive it,” said NCTQ President Heather Peske. “As part of a comprehensive strategy to improve reading instruction, states can help ensure that teachers are prepared to teach reading effectively by requiring more stringent licensure tests.”

By examining all reading licensing exams for elementary teachers currently used in states, the NCTQ looked for evidence that the tests adequately address the five basic components of reading. The NCTQ also examined whether these tests devote undue attention to reading instruction methods that have been discredited by research and
can prevent students from becoming good readers, like the three signs.

Additionally, the NCTQ tested whether these tests combine reading with other subjects. This is important because if subjects are combined, the teacher’s reading comprehension could be masked. Using these criteria, the NCTQ determined whether the evidence was strong, acceptable, weak, or unacceptable.

Key national findings:

• Of the 25 reading licensure tests for elementary teachers that states use, most (15) are weak. Only six exams are rated as “solid” and four as “acceptable.”
• Of these 15 weak licensure tests: Ten do not adequately address the five components of the science of reading and five combine reading with other subjects, such as social studies or science. (Note that a test fits into both categories listed above.) One includes too much emphasis on content, contrary to research-based practices.
• Most states (29 states and the District of Columbia) use “weak” tests that do not indicate whether teachers have the knowledge they need to teach students to read.

“Teachers who are not prepared in the most effective instructional practices for teaching reading unknowingly enter classrooms ill-prepared to help students become successful readers,” Peske said. “This lack of preparation has a profound impact on students’ literacy skills and their future prospects, especially among students of color and
those who live in poverty.”

About a third of children in elementary classrooms nationwide cannot read at even a basic level by the middle of fourth grade. The situation is even bleaker for historically marginalized students, for whom inadequate reading instruction is yet another barrier to educational equity, with 56 percent of Black students, 50 percent of Hispanic students, 52 percent of students in poverty, 70 percent of students with disabilities, and 67 percent of English learners reading below basic reading level.

Students who cannot read are four times more likely to drop out of high school, face lower lifetime earnings, and higher unemployment rates.

recommendations

To address this pressing issue, the NCTQ recommends the following solutions.

State education leaders should:

• Transition to a stricter reading license test: States select and approve the tests their teachers must pass to become licensed. Requiring a more robust test will likely lead to better reading instruction in elementary classrooms across the state, as preparation programs will be motivated to align their courses with the reading components addressed in a more robust test.
• Require a robust reading test for anyone teaching students in the elementary grades.. In some cases, states require reading tests for general education elementary teachers, but not for special education teachers or for early childhood teachers who are licensed to teach in the lower elementary grades. These loopholes ultimately harm the students who most need teachers capable of laying the foundation for literacy.

Testing companies should:

• Underpin weaknesses and clearly identify limitations in existing evidence.: The two major testing companies, ETS and Pearson, have solid and acceptable reading license tests on the market, but they also offer tests that omit numerous topics from the building blocks of reading and combine reading with other subjects, which that dilutes the assessment’s ability to verify teachers’ reading knowledge.

This press release originally appeared online.

Laura Ascione is the editorial director of eSchool Media. She graduated from the prestigious Philip Merrill School of Journalism at the University of Maryland.

Latest messages from Laura Ascione (see everything)