In March, the Senate passed legislation regarding the early detection of dyslexia and the screening and support of young students’ literacy efforts. The House Education Committee has since begun hearings on the bill. While the Michigan Association of School Boards strongly supports ensuring we are identifying kids showing signs of dyslexia as well as those with other reading disabilities, we have numerous concerns with the details of Senate Bill 567 (S-3), leading us to remain opposed.

We agree that the current early literacy screeners may not effectively detect students with characteristics of dyslexia. We support updating the criteria for those screeners. We want to ensure our literacy assessments will catch students with the characteristics of dyslexia and those with other reading difficulties so that all students receive the supports needed to be successful readers.

Primarily, we have broad concerns with the overly prescriptive nature of the bills which we outlined to the Committee in written testimony. The bill explicitly dictates how students must be supported through the Multi-Tiered System of Support (MTSS) and who must be on the MTSS team. The bill would change the current make up of MTSS teams to add a bilingual or English as a second language teacher for all students. Currently this requirement is only for English Language Learner students. Requiring this for all intervention response teams is not possible in all districts across the state as many do not have teachers that qualify on their staff.

As experts continue to study the science of reading, the best practices can change. However, if SB567 is enacted with its strict requirements for literacy supports, Michigan schools and teachers would be bound to what is required until the Legislature acted. If the bill was less prescriptive and offered a more flexible approach, schools could better adapt to changing guidance and their students’ needs.  Additionally, the bill may unintentionally limit access to services for those with other reading disabilities not related to dyslexia by banning some specific literacy techniques except under very specific circumstances and dictating a specific process for struggling readers.

Finally, these bills impose significant new requirements on our already overburdened and understaffed educators. And changes made at the last minute on the Senate Floor added onerous reporting requirements. At a time when we are striving to expand our teaching pool, adding further responsibilities to our current teachers and literacy coaches will only harm our efforts. Expanded resources in the state budget would certainly be welcome but can’t solve the issue of hiring more educational staff or encourage potential educators to join the profession.

We would support legislation to update our assessments for K-3 literacy to ensure that students with the characteristics of dyslexia do not fall through the cracks. If a student is identified as having dyslexia characteristics, then the district should be directed to follow the detailed information and best practices created by the Department that is shared with districts. This approach would make it easier to adjust best practices as they change over time while providing necessary support to all students.

SB567 is expected to be considered for approval by the House Education Committee by the end of the month. We continue to try to work toward a compromise that districts can implement with fidelity and identifies and supports all struggling readers, no matter the cause. We encourage you to contact your Representative, especially those on the Education Committee, and urge them to seek a compromise that benefits all students and districts.