Committee advances SB242 to require teacher‑prep programs to adopt structured literacy instruction

Senator Stewart sponsored Senate Bill 242, titled the Advancing the Science of Reading Act, directing educator preparation programs (EPPs) to align teacher training with structured literacy—commonly called the science of reading. The bill requires teacher preparation programs to include coursework and clinical experience in the five components of reading instruction (phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary and comprehension), requires alternative‑license candidates to take at least six credit hours in reading during their first 12 months, and directs the Public Education Department (PED) to provide parent‑notification templates districts can use twice a year to report reading progress.

Dr. Jackie Costales of the Public Education Department described ongoing collaboration between PED and higher education institutions and said the bill codifies prior guidance: “In October '23, a memo went out from the public education department requiring that all EPPs must establish science of reading aligned curricula…This helps us to codify that expectation.” The sponsor said the bill addresses long‑standing deficits in how colleges of education prepare teachers, pointing to previous legislation (Senate Bill 398 in 2019) that required dyslexia screening and structured literacy training for K‑1 teachers.

The bill would also require higher education institutions to designate literacy coordinators to support program alignment and review syllabi, and to ensure preservice teachers complete fieldwork and clinical experiences in structured literacy methods. Supporters told committee members the policy builds on state training investments such as LETRS (Language Essentials for Teachers of Reading and Spelling) and cited improved outcomes in other states. Dominique Chavis of New Mexico Kids Can asked members to “vote yes,” citing comparable gains in Mississippi and Louisiana after similar reforms. Parent and student testimony was strongly emotional: Maya Sandoval described her son Francisco’s struggle with dyslexia and credited structured literacy instruction at the May Center with restoring his confidence.

Opponents and neutral commenters raised concerns. Central New Mexico Community College (CNM) supported the bill’s goals but asked for clearer implementation timelines and raised concerns about an outright statutory ban on balanced literacy in higher education as a precedent that could chill academic freedom. The Bilingual Multicultural Education Advisory Council (BMEAC) and Transform Education New Mexico (comments provided by Loretta Trujillo) warned the bill could undermine multilingual and culturally sustaining instruction if implementation does not explicitly accommodate bilingual and indigenous language contexts.

The committee first considered and adopted a set of technical amendments (replacing references to "educator" with "teacher" preparation programs, clarifying preservice language, and adding alternative licensure language). Following discussion and public testimony, the committee voted SB242 out with a due‑pass recommendation as amended. Committee members asked PED to use rulemaking to address classroom exceptions (for example, instruction for deaf students) and to work with higher education institutions on timeline and funding concerns.

Because the bill changes teacher‑preparation requirements rather than K‑12 mandates, PED will administer details of rollout through rulemaking and continued collaboration with the Higher Education Department and deans/directors of education programs.