We cannot broadcast these studies loudly enough:

More here: karenvaites.org/p/congress-h… This is one of three big literacy stories to follow right now, the other two in MA and TX. So. Much. Happening.

Mark your calendars: The House appropriations committee is holding Science of Reading hearings on Tuesday at 10:30am. Hear from @HollyLanePhD @Alabama_Reading @ls1906. @MichaelPetrilli @lizcohen12 @marcportermagee @alexanderrusso @smervosh @DanaGoldstein @HKorbey @NedStanley @KJWinEducation @mkhammer @politicalmath @MissyPurcell @Veggievangelist @matthewgburgess @vkoganpolisci

The MTA president talking about how curriculum reform will keep teachers from addressing “a variety of learning styles.” Me: GOOD, it would work as intended. 😂 Y’all, learning styles are a debunked myth: educationnext.org/stubborn-m…

bostonglobe.com/2025/10/29/m… Open access: archive.ph/7cHeb

Watershed Moment: Massachusetts literacy bill passes with unanimous House support (!). The bill would require the use of state-approved materials by all districts. “The bill, which the House passed 155-0, would require districts to use state-approved reading curriculums that include “five research-based areas,” which include not just phonics but also vocabulary and comprehension, among other focuses.” @huffakingit reports.

I thought about writing something comparing New Jersey’s outcomes to Mississippi / Louisiana, but now I don’t have to, because @ChadAldeman knocked it out of the park. When you look at disaggregated data, it’s a very clear that New Jersey’s high average test scores are primarily a function of demographics. NJ has more privileged kids, thus raising the averages. The lesson: Always, always disaggregate your data. Chad’s conclusion is mine, too: “I think Mississippi and Louisiana have a strong case to be made that their schools are performing considerably better than New Jersey’s are at a much lower cost.”

“Started with the best of intentions, the piecemeal system of rating curriculum is frankly bananas” 🍌 🍌 🍌

Read more about the Southern Surge states here: karenvaites.substack.com/p/t…

.@natwexler makes a compelling case that socioeconomic status deserves more attention in the way we look at NAEP scores. The low-high SES reading gap is 45 percentage points: 32% vs 77%. The black-white reading gap is 28 percentage points. Socioeconomics are "the heart of the reason" for score gaps.