At the Alabama State Board of Education's November work session, staff described the department's process for selecting an early‑literacy assessment and updated members on delays in bringing an outside review contractor on board.

The literacy task force reported that three vendor responses to the department's request for tests were received earlier in the year; committee reviewers concluded one submission did not meet needs, leaving two candidate instruments: the department's current test and a second test developed in Massachusetts. A departmental subcommittee is reviewing the two options and aimed to finish its work in December, with a possible board review early in January. Staff cautioned timelines remain tentative because of remote meeting constraints and the possibility a chosen test would require a separate validation process that could extend implementation.

Separately, the board discussed a planned contract with an external reviewer (referred to in the meeting as Barksdale/Barksdale Institute) to visit and study postsecondary institutions that prepare teachers. Staff explained the vendor has not previously been a registered vendor for the State of Alabama and therefore must be assigned a state vendor number through the centralized state purchasing office before the department can finalize a memorandum of agreement and begin virtual visits. Board members asked staff to pursue an interim briefing with the vendor (for example, a Zoom presentation) while vendor onboarding completes; staff said they would schedule that as soon as approvals permit.

Why it matters: The literacy‑test choice will drive what teachers are expected to teach and what diagnostic information is available for early readers. The external institutional review is intended to produce reports on teacher preparation programs that may inform future policy and supports.

Board next steps: Staff said they expected the literacy test review to be finalized by the subcommittee in December and to appear for board consideration in January, but they cautioned that a validation step could delay formal adoption. On the vendor review, staff agreed to invite the external reviewer to brief the board in a work session once vendor approvals are completed.

Ending: Board members expressed interest in receiving the subcommittee's report and in seeing the external reviewer explain its approach to the board before the full program of site visits begins.