Complicating What it Means to ‘Struggle’: One Young Child's Experience with a Mandated Literacy Initiative

In this article, the author explores the implementation of the K-3 Reading First initiative and its recommendation for scientifically based reading curricula. During a time of high-stakes testing and accountability, this policy has emphasized a skills-based approach to reading and placed importance on scripted teaching models. Using data from a qualitative study in a public school in New York City, the author draws on the experiences of one young child to see how the standardization of early literacy curriculum shaped his school-based literacy practices.

Pedagogies for the Poor? Realigning Reading Instruction for Low-Income Students With Scientifically Based Reading Research

In this article, the author argues that there is minimal scientific support for the pedagogical approaches promoted for low-income students in the federal Reading First initiative. In combination with high-stakes testing, the interpretation of the construct systematic phonics instruction in Reading First has resulted in highly teacher-centered and inflexible classroom environments. By privileging these approaches, Reading First ignored the National Reading Panel’s finding that systematic phonics instruction was unrelated to reading comprehension for low-achieving and normally achieving students beyond Grade 1. Also ignored was the significant body of research suggesting that reading engagement is an important predictor of achievement. Alternative evidence-based directions for rebalancing reading instruction for low-income students are suggested in the context of the impending reauthorization of the No Child Left Behind legislation.

Passing Reading First: Prominence and Processes in an Elite Policy Network

Reading became a hotbed of policy activity during the 1990s with both state and federal policymakers launching major initiatives to raise reading achievement. When President George W. Bush introduced his Reading First initiative in early 2001, we saw a unique opportunity to investigate the policy processes, antecedents, and unplanned events surrounding an important and potentially controversial initiative. We began with the assumption that major policy changes are typically made by powerful actors operating in relatively open issue networks. In regard to the Reading First legislation, however, we found a small clique of inside policy entrepreneurs who fashioned major changes in a short period. Upon recognizing this condition, we expanded the research purpose to describe the actions of this insider policy group.