Agency of Education asks a one-year delay before extending supplemental reading mandate to grades 4–12; advocates urge immediate action

Montpelier — Agency of Education staff told the Senate Education Committee on April 18 that they support adding a requirement for schools to provide supplemental reading instruction for students significantly below grade level in grades 4–12, but asked the committee to set the effective date for that expansion to July 1, 2026, to allow time for guidance, assessment alignment and training.

The request concerns Section 10 of House Bill H4 80 (the literacy provisions) and builds on existing statute (the committee referenced 16 V.S.A. §2907 and related MTSS requirements) that currently requires screening and supplemental reading supports in early grades. Agency staff said the expansion to adolescent grades should be launched with clear, evidence‑based assessment guidance and targeted professional learning so districts implement consistently.

Agency rationale and implementation steps

Emily Loesch, project manager for READ Vermont at the Agency of Education, said the agency shares a singular goal: "increasing literacy achievement for all Vermont students." She told the committee that READ Vermont — launched by the agency in September — has already run multiple workshops and that the agency would begin implementation planning immediately upon passage.

Loesch and colleagues described a six‑part implementation agenda the agency would pursue in preparation for a July 2026 effective date: review agency capacity and resources, engage educators and district leaders, complete a research review of evidence‑based adolescent literacy practices and assessments, issue guidance and recommendations (including how to define "significantly below" for grades 4–12), identify accountability mechanisms aligned with existing continuous‑improvement structures, and expand professional learning opportunities for educators of adolescent learners.

READ Vermont work cited in committee

The agency reported that it has already delivered seven READ Vermont workshops since September, with each session drawing 65–80 participants. In March the agency ran a live professional learning workshop on adolescent literacy with about 75 live participants and more than 200 registrants who accessed the recorded session.

Advocates urge no delay; some educators warn of capacity constraints

Gwen Carmeli, chair of the Literacy Advisory Council, told the committee the k–3 statute (Act 139) preserves a set of specific screening and parent‑notification protections tied to early‑grade assessments (phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary and comprehension), and said those requirements are different from the practical approach needed for secondary‑grade screening. "Schools need lead time with the... staffing challenges," she told the committee, and said a July 2026 date would help districts prepare professional learning and staffing.

Parent advocate Cynthia Gardner Morris urged immediate implementation, saying students who struggle need help now and that some students could graduate before a delay takes effect. One commenter quoted in written testimony argued "I can't see any real benefit to waiting; kids can be harmed by waiting." Some experts who submitted comments argued the statutory expansion should not create a gap in student services; the agency repeatedly emphasized that existing MTSS provisions already require interventions for struggling students now.

K–3 vs. 4–12: screening and assessment distinctions

Agency witnesses told the committee that the existing k–3 framework (statute 16 V.S.A. §2907 and Act 139 guidance) centers on universal screening of the “big 5” (phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary and comprehension) and specific parental notification and intervention requirements. For grades 4–12, the agency said available screening tools and assessment approaches differ; the agency argued the state should define what constitutes "significantly below" at those grades with appropriate instruments and guidance before a mandate takes effect.

What the committee heard about timing

AOE recommended July 1, 2026, as the effective date for grades 4–12 so guidance can be issued in advance of full implementation. Agency staff said they would begin work immediately after passage (capacity review, stakeholder engagement, guidance and professional learning) rather than waiting on formal effective dates. Several committee members suggested a shorter runway might be feasible (for example an autumn guidance deadline), while some advocates said the state should not delay at all.

What happens next

The committee heard technical questions and stakeholder views but recorded no vote in the portion of the transcript provided. If the Legislature moves forward with language extending the supplemental reading mandate to grades 4–12, the committee and the Agency of Education will need to reconcile the timing question, adopt assessment guidance for older students, and secure funding or staffing for the planned supports and professional learning.

Ending note

Agency officials framed their recommendation as balancing urgency with a need to ensure consistent, evidence‑based implementation statewide. Advocates framed the choice as one between immediate help for students and the risk of uneven implementation without state‑level guidance and training.