Some teachers are expressing concern about the rollout of a new reading curriculum across all grades at Cleveland Metropolitan School District this year.
The school district is using HMH Into Reading to fullfill the state of Ohio's new science of reading requirement. Science of reading is an approach based on the science of how young brains learn that emphasizes phonics and building children's vocabulary.
A growing number of states across the country are pushing schools to adopt science of reading-backed curricula.
However, the rollout of the curriculum has been rocky at CMSD, said Cleveland Teachers Union President Shari Obrenski. So far, the teachers who are new to the curriculum (some schools already had it in place last year) have only had about two hours of training at the International Exposition Center in Cleveland in August. Obrenski says it did not go smoothly.
“There were huge technological issues," she said. "Most of the training for most grade levels did not go well. Because they (trainers) couldn't really access the technology to show our teachers about the curriculum and what they needed to do. And two hours just isn't remotely enough time to learn a brand new curriculum.”
HMH Into Reading was developed by HMH, formerly known as Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, a large education publishing company.
Obrenski said she’s not sold that HMH Into Reading is the “best curriculum for Cleveland,” but said the district had to rush the decision with the legislature putting into place a requirement that all schools adopt science of reading-backed curricula for the 2024-25 school year.
The district in an emailed statement noted the curriculum was chosen with input from teachers, staff and parents. It also said it's working to provide more training for teachers as the year goes on, through support from administrators, coaches from HMH and twice-weekly professional learning communities that teachers can drop into after school.
A parent's concern
Meanwhile, at least one parent is raising concerns about how helpful, or not, the curriculum is for students of color. Stacey Steggert, a parent of two CMSD students with a Ph.D. in urban education policy studies, spoke during the CMSD Board of Education’s Aug. 20 meeting. Steggert, herself a former teacher, pointed to HMH's own implementation study which shows there was not a "statistically significant difference" in the percentage of Black students performing better on reading in state of Texas assessments after learning under the curriculum.
She also noted a research study from the Metropolitan Center for Research on Equity and The Transformation of Schools at New York University, which found that three of the most commonly used reading curricula in the U.S. – including HMH Into Reading - were “culturally destructive” for students of color.
“The curriculum likely reinforces stereotypes and portrays people of color in inferior and destructive ways," Steggert said. "The curriculum likely centers white or Eurocentric ideas and culture throughout the majority of the text. Microaggressions, biases, and deficit perspectives are prevalent. The curriculum is likely disconnected from students lives and provides zero to very few opportunities for teachers to practice cultural responsiveness.”
The school district in response said HMH, which publishes HMH Into Reading, has said the NYU analysis is deeply flawed, and only takes into consideration 5% of the curriculum.
“The review panel was lacking in pedagogical expertise: The review panel was not independent and did not include educators with expertise in reading pedagogy, which means that report findings may not be appropriately aligned to evidence-based strategies for teaching reading or standards alignment," HMH said in a statement shared by the district.
What about whole texts?
Obrenski said another concern with the program is teachers have been given “mixed messaging” on whether they can bring in their own materials – like novels and reading selections – to their classes.
“Part of being a skilled teacher is being able to select and implement, additional resources in addition to the core curriculum,” she said.
Obrenski said the latest word from the district administration has been that teachers can bring in their own supplemental materials, but she said the opposite has been communicated to teachers in some buildings.
In general, much of the new reading curricula approved for use in schools by the state of Ohio – despite having material that is backed by the science of reading - suffers from a hidden issue, said Karen Vaites. Vaites is a literacy advocate who has previously worked with a major curriculum publisher, who recently founded an initiative to analyze reading curricula. Earlier this year, she looked at Ohio’s approved reading curricula and found that many are bloated with weak "basals” – lessons based on excerpts of novels, rather than students reading the whole book.
That’s a problem, Vaites said.
"For example, one of the most popular basal series always included the first chapter of 'Ramona Quimby,' which is a beloved children's book," she explained "If you taught the entire text of 'Ramona Quimby, Age 8,' that publisher would have to pay a lot to option that text from its original publisher. So this publisher paid for just an excerpt. Children who use that will read just one chapter of a beloved children's book."
In the case of HMH Into Reading, there are thousands of different resources available to teachers on its online platform, everything from lesson plans to instructional guides, Vaites said. First-grade teachers in particular are being asked to sift through more than 7,500 such resources, according to Vaites. She questioned how teachers would ever have time to sift through those lessons and find which are helpful and which are not.
The most popular curriculum developers are major corporations that have been around before the science of reading movement gained traction, Vaites added. Those major curricula publishers have been creating materials for decades, Vaites said, and some of those lessons – not backed by the science of reading – are still among the thousands of resources that comprise HMH Into Reading.
The CMSD Board of Education adopted HMH Into Reading in the spring, at a cost of $3.624 million, which included online materials and coaching from HMH for teachers. The program is highly rated on the EdReports website, a nonprofit organization which uses expert educators to review curriculum, although Vaites noted that EdReports reviews often fail to pick up on the issues she mentioned.
CMSD spokesperson Candice Grose said the district is sticking with the curriculum for now.
“Since this curriculum was selected through a process that included feedback from teachers, principals, parents, and community members (as well as a review of EdReports ratings, an internal review of the curriculum, and an analysis of our current district data), we feel like it is the best curriculum for our students at this point in time,” Grose said in an email.
HMH Into Reading was implemented for the 2023-24 school year at CMSD's Memorial School. First-grade teacher Jillian Ahrens said there are parts of the program she likes, but she agrees with Vaites that there is an overwhelming number of resources that make it challenging for educators to pick out what is most helpful for their students. She said the conversation about the science of reading has driven home the importance of phonics, which is emphasized in HMH Into Reading's program, but, it's just one part of the puzzle.
"It is phonics driven, and I use phonics. I think it (teaching phonics) has been effective with my students," she said. "But it can't be the only thing; you have to make sure that you're teaching, and this program does have, vocabulary, it does have comprehension, it does have the other pieces of literacy that are important."
