Montana committee hears bill to make K-3 reading instruction 'evidence based'

Representative Nicole Rexton, sponsor of House Bill 262, told the House Education Committee the bill is a policy statement that would require Montana schools’ early literacy instruction to be evidence based and include components supported by scientific research. “House Bill 262 is a policy statement,” Rexton said, and she told members the bill would underscore the importance of effective reading instruction in grades K–3. She cited National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) results she said show a long-term decline in Montana reading scores from 1998 through 2024.

The bill text, as described by Rexton during the hearing, requires that early literacy instruction be direct, systematic, explicit and responsive, follow a scope-and-sequence toward mastery and include essential components such as phonemic awareness, phonics (including irregular and multisyllabic-word reading), vocabulary, fluency and comprehension. Rexton said the amended bill adds language directing the Board of Public Education to develop accreditation standards and asks districts to adopt policies and materials that meet or exceed minimum standards.

Proponents who testified said HB 262 would clarify instructional expectations and urged state support for teacher training and materials. Doug Reisig, executive director of the Montana Quality Education Coalition, speaking for the CAMPS coalition, told the committee the bill “delineates that early literacy reading instruction in Montana public schools will be evidence based, follow a scope and sequence, and be direct, systematic, explicit, and responsive.” Caitlin Jensen, executive director of 0 to 5 Montana, and Kim Popham, Director of Public Policy and Research for MFPE, also voiced support and emphasized the need for professional development and resources so districts can implement the approach.

Several witnesses recommended that the Montana University System and state professional-development programs align preparation and in-service training with the bill’s stated approach. Reisig and Jensen both asked the committee to consider statewide supports so districts that lack access to training or curriculum adoption resources can implement evidence-based reading programs.

McCall Flynn of the Board of Public Education appeared as an informational witness to answer questions about implementation and standards. Flynn said the board would be responsible for developing standards and that the amended bill’s language requiring accreditation or minimum standards was an important addition. Committee members asked whether many districts already use the science-of-reading approaches; witnesses said some districts and consortiums do, especially those participating in literacy grants, but statewide adoption varies and some rural districts face barriers in curriculum-adoption cycles and access to professional development.

Representative Rexton and proponents repeatedly said the bill is not intended to usurp local control but to give districts a clear, research-based framework. No formal committee vote on HB 262 was recorded in the transcript; the hearing was closed after sponsor remarks and testimony.