SB0567: SUMMARY OF SUBSTITUTE BILL IN COMMITTEE (Date Completed: 2-12-24)

INTRODUCTION

Collectively, the bills would increase the education field's knowledge of and support for pupils with dyslexia. By the 2025-2026 school year, the bills would require school districts, intermediate school districts (ISD), and public school academies (PSA) to screen K-3 students, as well as 4-12 grade students who exhibited difficulty reading, for characteristics of dyslexia and difficulties in learning to decode accurately and efficiently. Pupils who exhibited characteristics of dyslexia and difficulty learning to decode would have to be provided a multi-tiered support system (MTSS), a framework composed of a collection of evidence-based strategies designed to meet the individual needs and assets of the pupil. An MTSS would have to include a reading improvement plan, of which the bills would modify current requirements.

Additionally, the bills would require the Michigan Department of Education (MDE) to develop dyslexia expertise to provide technical assistance to school districts, ISDs, and PSAs. Between August 1, 2024, and December 31, 2024, the MDE would have to update its list of approved reading assessment systems and identify systems that could be used to identify pupils with dyslexia or difficulties learning to decode. By August 1, 2025, each school district, ISD, and PSA would have to update its selected assessments to ensure that they included elements that could screen for dyslexia and difficulties to decode. The bills also would modify the duties and responsibilities of district-identified literacy coaches and require all personnel providing reading intervention or reading instruction from pre-K to grade 12 to receive professional development concerning dyslexia. Finally, the bills would prohibit the MDE from approving a teacher preparation program unless the program offered instruction on dyslexia, instructional adjustments, and the MTSS framework, by September 30, 2027.

BRIEF FISCAL IMPACT

The bills would have a negative fiscal impact on the MDE and on local school districts, ISDs, and PSAs, though the size of the effect is indeterminate. The MDE would experience additional costs to oversee the implementation of the bills, including to provide technical assistance to schools, approve assessments and diagnostic screenings exams, and update teaching preparation program oversight. Districts would see additional costs to screen pupils for dyslexia if the screeners currently in use did not fulfill the bill's requirements; however, if current screeners did test for dyslexia, districts could use those to satisfy the requirements.

MCL 380.1280f (S.B. 567) Legislative Analyst: Abby Schneider

Proposed MCL 380.1531e (S.B. 568) Fiscal Analyst: Ryan Bergan

Cory Savino, PhD

CONTENT

Senate Bill 567 (S-1) would amend the Revised School Code to do the following:

-- By the 2025-2026 school year, require the board of a school district or ISD or board of directors of a PSA to ensure that pupils were screened for characteristics of dyslexia and difficulties in learning to decode accurately and efficiently using a reliable and valid universal screening assessment.

-- Require all K-3 pupils, including in-State and out-of-state transfer students who had not been previously screened, to be screened for dyslexia at least three times a year.

-- Require grade 4-12 students who demonstrated certain behaviors that could indicate dyslexia to be screened.

-- If a screening assessment indicated that a pupil exhibited characteristics of dyslexia or had trouble in learning to decode, require the pupil's school district, ISD, or PSA to ensure that an MTSS was provided to the pupil.

-- If a pupil needed an MTSS, require an ISD or PSA to notify the pupil's parent or legal guardian of such and include information concerning changes to instruction.

-- Prescribe the standards and requirements for each of the three MTSS tiers.

-- Modify reading intervention plan requirements.

-- By September 1, 2024, require the MDE to develop dyslexia expertise to provide technical assistance to school districts, ISDs, and PSAs.

-- Between August 1, 2024, and December 31, 2024, require the MDE to update its list of approved valid and reliable screening, progress-monitoring, and diagnostic reading assessments for selection and use by school districts and PSAs, and identity within each system a list of the elements of a reliable and valid universal screening assessment for the purpose of identifying pupils with characteristics of dyslexia or difficulties in learning to decode that were or were not included in the approved assessment system.

-- By August 1, 2025, require each school district, ISD, and PSA to ensure that its selected assessments included a reliable and valid universal screening assessment for dyslexia.

-- Modify the responsibilities and duties of literacy coaches to require them to provide teachers with professional development and advice on how to implement the bill's provisions.

-- Require, beginning not later than the 2027-2028 school year, each school district, ISD, and PSA to ensure that all literacy consultants, literacy coaches, and other personnel providing reading intervention or reading instruction to pre-K to grade 12 pupils in the school district, ISD, or PSA received professional learning about dyslexia, instructional accommodations, the MTSS framework, and more.

Senate Bill 568 (S-1) would add Section 1531e to the Revised School Code to prohibit the MDE from approving a teacher preparation program or an alternative teaching program, and require the revocation of an existing program, unless the program taught about dyslexia, instructional accommodations, the MTSS framework, and more.

The bills are tie-barred. They also are tie barred to House Bill 5098, which would add Section 1280h to the Code, requiring the Superintendent of Public Instruction to establish a 10-member advisory committee within the MDE to help the MDE with the guidance required by Senate Bill 567. The committee generally would have to consist of members with experience in the fields of dyslexia intervention and screening, speech pathology, and structured language and literacy.

Senate Bill 567 (S-1)

Dyslexia Screening

The bill would require, by not later than the beginning of the 2025-2026 school year, and each school year thereafter, the board of a school district or ISD or board of directors of a PSA to ensure that pupils were screened for characteristics of dyslexia and difficulties in learning to decode accurately and efficiently using a reliable and valid universal screening assessment.

"Dyslexia" would mean both the following:

-- A specific learning disorder that is neurobiological in origin and characterized by difficulties with accurate or fluent word recognition and by poor spelling and decoding abilities that typically result from a deficit in the phonological component of language that is often unexpected in relation to other cognitive abilities and the provision of effective classroom instruction.

-- A specific learning disorder that may include secondary consequences, such as problems in reading comprehension and a reduced reading experience that can impede the growth of vocabulary.

All the following pupils enrolled in a school district, ISD, or PSA would have to be screened with fidelity:

-- Each pupil during kindergarten, grade 1, grade 2, and grade 3.

-- Each pupil who was in kindergarten, grade 1, grade 2, or grade 3 who transferred to the school district, ISD, or PSA from another school district, ISD, or PSA in the State and who had not been screened for dyslexia by a reliable and valid universal screening assessment.

-- Each pupil who was in kindergarten, grade 1, grade 2, or grade 3 who had transferred to the school district, ISD, or PSA from a school that was not located in the State, unless the pupil presented written documentation to the school district, ISD, or PSA showing that the pupil had been subject to a reliable and valid universal screening assessment.

Each pupil during kindergarten, grade 1, grade 2, and grade 3, would have to be screened at least three times during the school year. Pupils who had transferred to a school district, ISD, or PSA from another Michigan school or from an out-of-state school who did not show documentation of prior screening would have to be screened three times during a school year.

Additionally, each pupil who was in any of grades 4 to 12 who, as determined by that pupil's teacher, educational-support staff, or the pupil's parent or legal guardian, demonstrated any of the following would have to be screened for dyslexia with fidelity:

-- Escape or avoidance behaviors when asked to engage in reading or writing activities.

-- Effortful or laborious reading.

-- Reading-comprehension difficulties caused by inaccurate or inefficient word reading.

-- Significant spelling or encoding difficulties not caused by fine-motor or visual-motor difficulties.

-- Low performance on school-district-, ISD-, or PSA-approved English language arts standards.

-- Low performance on school-district-, ISD-, or PSA-approved standardized assessments.

-- Reading deficiency.

Beginning with the 2025-2026 school year, for a pupil in grades 4 to 12 who demonstrated any of the above behaviors, the school district, ISD, or PSA in which the pupil was enrolled would have to ensure that additional assessment data was gathered, including the pupil's historical results on reliable and valid universal screening assessments, as available, and would have to review this data with the pupil's teacher and school staff to inform the type and frequency of screening assessments that should be administered to the pupil to avoid unnecessary assessments while effectively assessing whether the pupil demonstrated characteristics of dyslexia, difficulties in learning to decode, or difficulties with word reading that could require an intervention placement for the pupil.

Beginning in the 2025-2026 school year, a pupil who was an English language learner and who was assessed at an entering level or beginning level of English language proficiency on a State-required language proficiency assessment, or at a comparable level, would not be required to be screened for characteristics of dyslexia and difficulties learning to decode, unless the pupil's school staff determined that the pupil appeared to demonstrate characteristics of dyslexia that were not due to language transference or limited English proficiency. A pupil who was an English language learner and who had been assessed at a developing level or higher on a State-required language proficiency assessment, or at a comparable level, would have to be screened for characteristics of dyslexia and difficulty decoding as appropriate for the pupil's grade level and, as appropriate and consistent with the MDE's guidance, the pupil's screening would have to include spelling skills, phonemic awareness in the pupil's native language, and oral reading fluency in the pupil's native language.

MTSS Support

Beginning with the 2025-2026 school year, if a reliable and valid universal screening assessment indicated that a pupil exhibited characteristics of dyslexia or experienced difficulty in learning to decode accurately and efficiently, the pupil's school district, ISD, or PSA would have to ensure that a tiered delivery system was provided to the pupil, including decoding and word recognition instruction. A reading intervention program would have to be included as part of an MTSS.

The MTSS would have to be a comprehensive framework composed of a collection of evidence-based strategies designed to meet the individual needs and assets of the whole pupil at all achievement levels. It would have to include three distinct tiers of instructional support.

Tier 1 support would have to encompass a combination of evidence-based strategies that were available to all learners and effectively met the needs of most pupils. Additionally, the instructional methods and curriculum resources used to address the decoding and word-recognition components of reading would have to use a code emphasis[1] instructional approach supported by the science of reading; however, the methods and resources used could not minimize the importance of primarily using letter-sound information to decode or recognize unknown words. This would include the following:

-- Prompting pupils to guess unknown words using pictures and illustrations.

-- Skipping over an unknown word or words to use the meaning of the passage to recognize the unknown word or words.

-- Identifying only the first sound of an unknown word and then being prompted to guess the word using the word's initial sound and the meaning of the text surrounding the word.

-- Memorizing a word in its written form.

-- Using predictable text[2] and leveled text[3] to provide initial word recognition instruction and practice in reading new learned letter-sound correspondences.

Tier 2 support would have to be provided to small groups of pupils to whom screening-assessment data indicated a need for intervention to address difficulties in learning to decode and recognizing words accurately and efficiently or to whom Tier 1 instructional data indicated a need for intervention to address difficulties in learning to decode and recognizing words. Like Tier 1, Tier 2 support would have to include instructional methods and curriculum resources that used a code emphasis approach to address the decoding and word-recognition components of reading and that were supported by the science of reading. The instructional methods and curriculum resources would have to include instructional procedures, duration, and frequency; however, these methods and resources could not include instructional methods that minimized the importance of primarily using letter-sound information to decode or recognize unknown words.

Pupils receiving tier 2 support would have to be provided intervention consistent with Tier 2 support and have their progress monitored by the individuals providing the intervention instruction using appropriate assessments to determine the pupils' response to intervention instruction. If pupils receiving tier 2 support were not making measurable progress in response to reading intervention at a rate that would result in meaningful improvements in performance, intensive, tier 3 support would have to be provided to the pupil using evidence-based instructional adaptations that would have to be documented in the pupil's required individual reading intervention plan. For such a pupil, a multidisciplinary team at the school district, ISD, or PSA in which the pupil was enrolled would have to refine the pupil's individual reading improvement plan with the teacher providing the intervention instruction to the pupil to meaningfully accelerate reading outcomes.

If a pupil's response to the intervention instruction were insufficient for accelerating reading outcomes after repeated attempts to adapt and intensify the instruction, the school district, ISD, or PSA would have to consider the need for a full and comprehensive evaluation to determine eligibility for special education services, subject to State and Federal laws concerning special education.

Beginning with the 2025-2026 school year, if a reliable and valid universal screening assessment indicated the need for intervention, to the extent that the school district, ISD, or PSA was not already providing the pupil with evidence-based intervention services, the school district, ISD, or PSA in which the pupil was enrolled would have to provide the pupil with evidence-based intervention services that were grounded in the science of reading and the principles of structured literacy approaches or programs.

If it were determined by the school district, ISD, or PSA in which a pupil was enrolled that the pupil had functional difficulties due to characteristics of dyslexia or underlying factors that placed pupils at risk for difficulties in learning to decode accurately and efficiently, the board of the school district or ISD or board of directors of the PSA in which the pupil was enrolled would have to ensure that the necessary accommodations or equipment were provided to the pupil as required under Section 504 of Title V of the Rehabilitation Act,[4] and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act.[5]

Reading Intervention

Generally, the Code requires a school district or PSA to provide reading intervention for pupils in grades K-3 who exhibit a reading deficiency. The bill would require the MTSS, provided to pupils who displayed characteristics of dyslexia or difficulty decoding, to include a reading intervention program. The bill would modify reading intervention requirements.

Firstly, it would require a reading intervention to use intervention curriculum resources and evidence-based practices aligned to the research requirements consistent with the science of reading. It would have to be provided to any pupil who displayed a reading deficiency, not just K-3 students. Reading deficiencies could be identified by assessments that were used to identify the source of the reading difficulty.

Reading intervention would have to provide evidence-based tier 1 class-wide reading instruction that was comprehensive and met the majority of the general education classroom's needs. The bill would specify that reading interventions would have to provide intensive development in evidence-based reading instructional practices, which would include the five major reading areas identified by the Code (phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension), as well as other skills or processes consistent with structured literacy. Reading interventions would have to include extensive explicit instruction[6] consistent with structure literacy in decoding, word recognition, and language comprehension skills and processes for skillful reading.

Currently, reading interventions must be systemic, explicit, multisensory, and sequential. Under the bill, they only would have to be systematic and explicit. The bill would maintain other requirements, such as requiring three screenings for reading skills a year, which must be implemented during regular school hours.

The bill would prescribe reading intervention program requirements for grade 3 pupils exhibiting a reading deficiency as determined by the pupil's teacher through the diagnostic reading assessment system selected by the school district or PSA to pupils in grades K to 12 who received tier 2 or 3 MTSS support. These reading interventions would have to be consistent with structure literacy. In addition, it would require a reading intervention program to include a written description of the pupil's individual program, including at least the following:

-- Quarterly and annual learning goals that described how and when the pupil was expected to progress from the pupil's current reading proficiency level to grade level proficiency.

-- The type, content, frequency, and duration of evidence-based interventions, curriculum resources, and assessments that would be utilized, and the extent to which these conformed to best practices identified by the MDE for addressing the pupil's specific identified reading difficulties.

-- A summary of why the intervention resources and evidence-based practices selected for the pupil's individual reading intervention program were best suited to address the pupil's particular needs.

-- A description of the assessment data that would be used to monitor the pupil's progress and adaptations to the intervention instruction that would be provided based on feedback from the assessments.

-- Information about adjustments that could be made to intensify the intervention instruction as needed.

The program would have to be administered with fidelity.

The Code prescribes reading intervention program requirements for pupils who are English language learners, including instruction in academic vocabulary, ongoing assessments that provide data for teachers to use, and common English language development strategies. The bill would delete these requirements. Instead, for English language learners who were identified as demonstrating characteristics of dyslexia or difficulty decoding by an appropriate screening assessment that was consistent with the MDE's guidelines to distinguish characteristics of dyslexia from limited English proficiency, intervention services would have to include at least the following:

-- Language support in word recognition and decoding.

-- Language comprehension skills to support expanding vocabulary and understanding text.

-- Intentional English language development that included using only the words and text to teach decoding and word recognition.

-- Instruction that 1) assisted pupils in developing the ability to read at grade level; 2) provided intensive development in evidence-based reading instruction practices; 3) provided extensive explicit instruction consistent with structured literacy in decoding, word recognition, and language comprehension skills and processes for skillful reading; 4) was systemic and explicit; and 5) was implemented during regular school hours in addition to regular classroom reading instruction.

The Code allows a grade 3 pupil who has a reading deficiency based on the grade 3 State English Language Arts assessment to be provided a reading intervention program only until grade 4 and prescribes requirements for this program. Generally, the program must assign the pupil to an effective teacher, be evidenced-based, meet daily small group requirements, and have an at-home plan portion. The bill would delete these requirements. Instead, any pupil who had a reading deficiency based on a screening assessment would have to be provided a reading intervention based on the research requirements consistent with the science of reading.

A school district or PSA would have to provide a copy of each individual reading intervention or tier 2 or tier 3 MTSS plan to the ISD. The ISD would have to collate this information and provide it to the Center of Educational Performance and Information (CEPI) each school year.

Notification Requirements

Beginning with the 2025-2026 school year, if it were determined by the pupil's school district, ISD, or PSA that a pupil needed tier 2 support or the pupil was required to be given an individual reading intervention plan, by not later than 30 days after either of those occurred, the board of the school district or ISD or board of directors of the PSA in which the pupil was enrolled would have to ensure that the pupil's parent or legal guardian was sent a written notification that did the following:

-- Included information from any screening assessment relating to the pupil's reading development with specific information about indicators that suggested, as applicable, that the pupil could struggle with decoding and word recognition.

-- Included information concerning evidence-based instructional practices to be provided by school personnel that were grounded in the science of reading and the principles of structured literacy that were designed for pupils exhibiting the characteristics of dyslexia or difficulties in learning to decode accurately and efficiently.

-- Included information concerning instructional adjustments for pupils exhibiting difficulties in learning to decode accurately and efficiently.

-- Included information describing the MTSS framework.

-- Was written in the language primarily used in the pupil's household, if that language was primarily used by 3% or more of households with pupils enrolled in the district, ISD, or PSA, and, if practicable, in any other primary language regardless of prevalence.

If the parent or legal guardian of a pupil had an independent, comprehensive evaluation conducted for dyslexia or other learning disabilities, the board of the school district or ISD or board of directors of the PSA in which the pupil was enrolled would have to ensure that any applicable requirements under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act were fulfilled.[7]

Dyslexia Expertise

By September 1, 2024, the bill would require the MDE to develop dyslexia expertise to provide technical assistance to school districts, ISDs, and PSAs regarding dyslexia and underlying factors that placed pupils at risk for difficulties in learning to decode accurately and efficiently. In consultation with an advisory committee, the MDE would have to offer expertise by providing guidance on at least all the following:

-- The appropriate selection and use at each grade level of reliable and valid universal screening assessments for the identification of pupils who exhibited characteristics of dyslexia and pupils who displayed difficulties in learning to decode accurately and efficiently, to minimize the impact on instructional time.

-- Structured literacy.

-- Evidence-based instructional methods and the features of evidence-based interventions for pupils who exhibited the characteristics of dyslexia or pupils who had difficulties in learning to decode accurately and efficiently that included instructional methods and curriculum resources that used a code emphasis approach to address the decoding and word-recognition components of reading and that were supported by the science of reading; however, these instructional methods and curriculum resources could not include elements that minimized the importance of primarily using letter-sound information to decode or recognize unknown words.

-- Professional learning about dyslexia to school districts, ISDs, and PSAs.

To support the implementation of these requirements, the MDE, in consultation with the advisory committee and based on current research, would have to regularly review and update the Michigan Dyslexia Handbook (see BACKGROUND) or a similar publicly available dyslexia resource guide that included information regarding the education of pupils with dyslexia or characteristics of dyslexia, to be used by school districts, ISDs, and PSAs. Reviews and updates would have to be conducted at an interval not to exceed five years.

Grade 3 Reading Assessment

The Code requires the MDE to help ensure that pupils will achieve a score of at least "proficient" in English language arts on the grade 3 State assessment.[8] This includes approving three or more valid and reliable screening, formative, and diagnostic reading assessment systems for selection and use by school districts and PSAs. Under the bill, instead of approving formative assessments, the MDE would have to approve progress-monitoring assessments.

Currently, in determining which assessment systems to approve for use by school districts and PSAs, the MDE must consider: 1) the time required to conduct the assessments; 2) the level of integration of assessment results with instructional support for teachers and students; and 3) the timeliness in reporting assessment results. The bill would add to these requirements a consideration of the degree of compatibility with other approved statewide assessment measures, to minimize the impact on instructional time.

Under the bill, between August 1, 2024, and December 31, 2024, the MDE would have to update its list of approved valid and reliable screening, progress monitoring,[9] and diagnostic reading assessment systems for selection and use by school districts and PSAs and, in addition to meeting applicable requirements, identify, within each approved assessment system for selection and use by school districts and PSAs, a list of the elements of a reliable and valid universal screening assessment for the purpose of identifying pupils with characteristics of dyslexia or difficulties in learning to decode accurately and efficiently that were or were not included in the approved assessment system.

By August 1, 2025, each school district, ISD, and PSA would have to update its selection of a valid and reliable screening, progress-monitoring, and diagnostic reading assessment system to ensure that the selected system included a reliable and valid universal screening assessment aligned with the guidance provided by the MDE, if it did not do so already. In complying with this requirement, a school district, ISD, or PSA would have to minimize the impact on instructional time by selecting approved assessment systems that included elements fulfilling multiple assessment requirements, when appropriate, or by adding approved assessment modules or combining compatible approved assessments that, when utilized together, included all the elements of a reliable and valid universal screening assessment.

The Code also requires the board of a school district or board of directors of a PSA to help ensure that more pupils will achieve a score of at least "proficient" in English language arts on the grade 3 State assessment. The bill would require a school board or board of directors of a PSA to select one progress-monitoring assessment and one diagnostic reading assessment, in addition to the valid and reliable screening assessment currently required, from the list compiled by the MDE.

Beginning in the 2025-2026 school year, screening of pupils in grades K to 3 would have to meet the requirements for dyslexia screening and support outlined by the bill. Additionally, the bill would require the board of a school district or board of directors of a PSA to report to the CEPI the approved assessments that had been selected and the threshold scores that had been set to identify pupils as exhibiting reading proficiency or reading deficiency using each assessment.

If the MDE determined that a benchmark assessment[10] or a valid and reliable screening, formative, and diagnostic reading assessment system suite selected by the board of a school district or the board of directors of a PSA included a reliable and valid universal screening assessment, that interim assessment or assessment system could be utilized to meet the required screening of pupils in kindergarten and grades 1 to 3, including transfer students.

Literacy Coaches and Other Personnel

The bill would require district-identified literacy coaches to support and provide initial and ongoing professional development to teachers in the following, in addition to current requirements:

-- Administering, scoring, and interpreting the bill's assessments with fidelity.

-- Providing differentiated instruction and intensive intervention, which would include methods to intensify instructional interventions for decoding and word recognition.

-- The use of evidence-based instructional methods and the features of evidence-based interventions for pupils displaying the characteristics of dyslexia.

-- The professional learning requirements outlined below, as appropriate.

-- The appropriate use of statewide professional learning tools and evidence-based practices that met the research requirements consistent with the science of reading.

Instead of providing professional development to teachers concerning the five major reading components (phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension), early literacy coaches would have to provide reading intervention that met the following requirements:

-- Instruction that assisted pupils in developing the ability to read at grade level.

-- Provided intensive development in evidence-based reading instruction practices.

-- Provided extensive explicit instruction consistent with structured literacy in decoding, word recognition, and language comprehension skills and processes for skillful reading.

-- Was systemic and explicit.

-- Was implemented during regular school hours in addition to regular classroom reading instruction.

In addition to current duties, a district-identified literacy coach would have to do the following:

-- Model evidence-based instruction to teachers.

-- Advise in developing schoolwide and classroom infrastructure to meet the collective and individual needs of pupils using an MTSS framework.

-- Train school staff in data analysis and using data to differentiate instruction and how to identify and address reading deficiency.

-- Work with teachers to ensure that evidence-based curriculum resources and reading interventions were implemented with fidelity

The Code requires literacy coaches to continue to increase the coaches' knowledge base in best practices in reading instruction and intervention. The bill would specify that this knowledge base would have to be supported by research requirements consistent with the science of reading.

By the 2027-2028 school year, the bill would require each school district, ISD, and PSA to provide assurance to the MDE that all literacy consultants, literacy coaches, and other personnel providing reading intervention or reading instruction to pre-K to grade 12 pupils in the school district, ISD, or PSA received professional learning regarding all the following, as applicable:

-- The characteristics of dyslexia and underlying factors that placed pupils at risk for difficulties in learning to decode accurately and efficiently.

-- Secondary consequences of dyslexia, such as problems in reading comprehension and a reduced reading experience that could impede the growth of vocabulary and background knowledge and lead to social, emotional, and behavioral difficulties.

-- Instructional adjustments for pupils with dyslexia and instructional adjustments to address the underlying factors that placed pupils at risk for difficulties in learning to decode accurately and efficiently.

-- Methods to develop schoolwide and classroom infrastructure to meet the collective and individual needs of pupils using an MTSS framework.

-- Evidence-based instructional methods and features of evidence-based interventions that were grounded in the science of reading and principles of structured literacy that were designed for pupils with characteristics of dyslexia and pupils at risk for difficulties in learning to decode accurately and efficiently.

The completion of a program of study approved by the MDE (see Senate Bill 568) would fulfill this professional development requirement.

Additional Definitions

"Diagnostic assessment" would mean an assessment intended to provide in-depth information about a pupil's specific skills in a content area for the purpose of guiding future instruction or intervention. "Diagnostic instruction" would mean continuous assessment and individualization of instruction to meet each pupil's instructional needs.

"Evidence-based" currently means based in research and with proven efficacy. Instead, under the bill, "evidence-based" would mean an activity, program, process, service, strategy, or intervention that demonstrates statistically significant effects on improving pupil outcomes or other relevant outcomes and that meets at least the following:

-- At least being based on strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study, or being based on moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study, or being based on promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlation study with statistical controls for selection bias, or demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that the activity, program, process, service, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve pupil outcomes or other relevant outcomes.

-- Includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of the activity, program, process, service, strategy, or intervention.

"Multidisciplinary team" would mean a group of individuals with expertise in assessments, literacy, working with English language learners, working with people with disabilities, and behavior efforts who develop individualized plans to support pupils with significant and persistent needs.

"Phonemic awareness" would mean the conscious awareness of the following:

-- Individual speech sounds, including consonants and vowels in spoken syllables.

-- The ability to consciously manipulate through blending, segmenting, deleting, or substituting individual speech sounds described above.

-- All levels of the speech sound system, including word boundaries, rhyme recognition, stress patterns, syllables, onset-rime units, and phonemes.

"Reliable" would mean something that is based on the consistency of a set of scores that are designed to measure the same thing. "Reliable and valid screening assessment" would mean an assessment that includes brief measures designed to identify underlying difficulties affecting a pupil's ability to learn to decode and to recognize words accurately and efficiently and that aligns with assessment guidelines concerning grade levels in which, and times of the school year when, specific universal screening assessment measures must be administered.

"Science of reading" would mean a cumulative and evolving body of evidence whose research studies follow a scientific process of inquiry and use scientific methods to help answer questions related to reading development and issues related to reading and writing derived from research from multiple fields of cognitive psychology, communication sciences, developmental psychology, education, special education, implementation science, linguistics, and neuroscience.

"Screening assessment" would mean an assessment designed to proactively identify pupils who may be at risk of developing academic, social, emotional, or behavioral challenges so that support can be provided and to provide to data to inform systems-level decisions. A screening assessment would have to include, as appropriate for grade level or age as determined by the MDE and the guidelines prescribed by the bill, elements used to identify difficulties in learning to decode and recognize words, including at least the following:

-- Phonemic awareness.

-- Rapid automized naming.

-- Letter-sound correspondence.

-- Single-word reading.

-- Nonsense-word reading.

-- Oral passage reading fluency.

A screening assessment could include, as appropriate for grade level or age as determined by the MDE, elements designed to identify comprehension difficulties, including at least the following:

-- Retelling.

-- Close reading procedure.

-- Answering questions about a reading passage.

"Standardized assessment" would mean an assessment that is administered and scored in a consistent or standard manner.

"Structured literacy" would mean systematic, direct, explicit, cumulative, and diagnostic instruction that integrates listening, speaking, reading, and writing and emphasizes the structure of language across the speech sound system, the writing system, the structure of sentences, the meaningful parts of words, the meaning of words, phrases, sentences, and text, and the processing of oral and written discourse.

Senate Bill 568 (S-1)

In addition to other requirements in the Code, as applicable, the bill would prohibit the MDE from, beginning September 30, 2027, approving a teacher preparation program or an alternative teaching program unless the program offered instruction regarding all the following:

-- The characteristics of dyslexia and underlying factors that place pupils at risk for difficulties in learning to decode accurately and efficiently.

-- The secondary consequences of dyslexia, such as problems in reading comprehension and a reduced reading experience that could impede the growth of vocabulary and background knowledge and that can lead to social, emotional, and behavioral difficulties.

-- Instructional adjustments for pupils with dyslexia and instructional adjustments for addressing underlying factors that placed pupils at risk for difficulties in learning to decode accurately and efficiently.

-- Methods for developing schoolwide and classroom infrastructure that met the collective and individual needs of pupils using an MTSS framework.

By September 30, 2027, the MDE would have to revoke the approval of a teacher preparation program or an alternative teaching program that prepared individuals to serve as pre-K to grade 12 certificated teachers unless it fulfilled the requirements above.

Beginning September 30, 2027, the MDE could not approve a teacher preparation program or an alternative teaching program that prepared individuals for certification or endorsements that involved reading instruction, language arts, or special education, as appropriate, or for school psychologist licensure, as appropriate, unless the program offered instruction regarding the topics outlined above, as well as the following:

-- Evidence-based instructional methods and features of evidence-based interventions that were grounded in the science of reading and principles of structured language and literacy that were designed to effectively meet the needs of most pupils.

By September 30, 2027, the MDE would have to revoke the approval of a teacher preparation program or an alternative teaching program that granted the endorsements above, or that prepared an individual to serve as a building-level school administrator, a district-level school administrator, or as a school psychologist if the program did not fulfill these requirements.

PREVIOUS LEGISLATION

(This section does not provide a comprehensive account of previous legislative efforts on this subject matter.)

Senate Bill 567 and Senate Bill 568 are similar to Senate Bill 380 and Senate Bill 381 from the 2021-2022 Legislative Session, respectively. Senate Bills 380 and 381 passed the Senate but received no further action.

[1] "Code emphasis" would mean direct, explicit instruction on the code system of written English at the sound, syllable, morpheme, and word level so pupils develop automaticity in accurate sound-symbol associations used for word recognition and for developing a robust sight-word vocabulary.

[2] "Predictable text" would mean text that replicates language patterns using rhythm and rhyme to teach pupils phrasing and cadence.

[3] "Leveled text" would mean text that has characteristics of predictable text and text focused on teaching high-frequency words without regard to sound-symbol associations. The term would be assigned a level based on a difficulty scale according to print features, content, themes, ideas, text structure, language, and literary elements. The term would not provide pupils opportunities to apply newly learned phonological and orthographic knowledge.

[4] Section 504 prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance, or under any program conducted by any Executive agency or by the United States Postal Service. It also requires programs to provide reasonable accommodations to individuals with disabilities, which includes the purchase of adaptive equipment.

[5] Title II requires State and local governments to grant individuals with disabilities an equal opportunity to benefit from all their programs, services, and activities. This includes public education.

[6] "Explicit" would mean direct and deliberate instruction through continuous pupil-teacher interaction that includes teacher modeling, guided practice, and independent practice.

[7] The Act protects the rights of children with disabilities who meet requirements for special education services and their families.

[8] Currently, Michigan schools test grade school students using the Michigan Student Test of Educational Progress, or M-STEP. Third graders take the M-STEP Mathematics and English-Language Arts (ELA) summative tests.

[9] "Progress monitoring" would mean an assessment used after a pupil is identified and matched with intervention support to determine if the pupil continues to need intervention, if the supports need to be modified or changed, or if supports can be faded.

[10] "Benchmark assessment" would mean an assessment intended to identify learner readiness on a later summative assessment.

[11] Dellinger, Hannah, "Dyslexia support proposals are back in the Michigan Legislature", Chalkbeat Detroit, October 18, 2023.

[12] Ponte, Olivia, "Learning to Read v. Reading to Learn: A Discussion of Third-Grade Reading Supports", Senate Fiscal Agency, State Notes, Fall 2022.

[13] "2022 Reading State Snapshot Report: Michigan Grade 4 Public Schools", The Nation's Report Card. Retrieved on 2-6-24.

[14] Hicks, Justin P., "See each Michigan school s 2023 M-STEP score", MLIVE, September 11, 2023.

SAS\S2324\s567sb

This analysis was prepared by nonpartisan Senate staff for use by the Senate in its deliberations and does not constitute an official statement of legislative intent.