Key Takeaways
- The State Board of Education has approved 31 early literacy programs that align with the state’s shift toward the science of reading, with an emphasis on phonics.
- School districts will be eligible for $200 million allocated by the state to train teachers in effective methods of teaching reading.
- Proponents of early literacy reforms have pushed for a shorter list of high-quality providers.
As a key part of the state’s early literacy reform agenda, Gov. Gavin Newsom included $200 million in last year’s state budget to fund training elementary school teachers in new reading strategies. On Wednesday, the State Board of Education approved 31 training programs that school districts can now use.
California Literacy List Draws Criticism Over Quantity, Quality of Programs
September 8, 2026
This list of providers is about twice as long as some reading reform advocates recommend. And that will include a few programs that have proven to be minimally effective, advocates said.
But board members eliminated a half-dozen lower-ranked programs. They asked the Department of Education to provide detailed, easily accessible information on each of the 31 programs to help districts select those that best meet their needs.
“I know (districts) are overwhelmed and as much guidance as we can provide them would be helpful,” said board member Haydee Rodriguez, a high school teacher who has designed adult literacy programs in Imperial County.
The Sept. 30 deadline set by the Legislature last year to approve the list prevented the board from recommending substantial revisions that would have required an unscheduled follow-up meeting.
Longtime observers said it was the first time in memory that the State Council had recommended professional development programs. The list reflects the state’s recognition, based on large-scale improvements made in Mississippi and other states, that a weak link in teacher training could undermine early literacy reforms.
That’s why the Department of Education approved a short list of providers for the Early Literacy Test for reading problems, such as dyslexia, and the Commission on Teacher Credentialing, at the direction of the Legislature, revised the reading standards for reading instruction that all college credentialing programs must follow.
The next step will occur later this year, when the State Board approves a new list of textbooks and reading materials aligned with the English language arts and English language development standards for English learners. The State Council must decide whether to repeat what it did with the adoption of math textbooks in November 2025, approving 64 different textbooks aligned with the new math framework. The alternative is to be more selective and highlight only textbooks that emphasize phonics and the essential components of evidence-based reading science.
Districts can still receive state funding from the $200 million set aside for professional development if they select a program that is not among the 31 approved this week. However, they must verify that the program aligns with criteria aligned with the science of reading.
How the programs were ranked
The California Department of Education hired the nonprofit education research organization WestEd to conduct an in-depth review of applications from 37 eligible preschool literacy training providers. A panel of 29 teachers and experts measured 18 criteria, including access and suitability for English learners, on a three-point scale: strong, moderate or minimal. The maximum score was 54 points.
Scores for the 31 approved programs ranged from 30 to 53 points. The two highest-ranked providers were the California Association for Bilingual Education (CABE) and SchoolKit, LLC, with 17 of the 18 criteria scoring highly. The CABE had been one of the most fervent opponents of comprehensive early literacy legislation out of fear that this will minimize the needs of English learners.
The lowest-ranked program on the approved list came from the large national education technology company Amplify Education. Other well-known California-based training providers made the top twelve on the list. One of them is Getting Reading Right, developed by the Los Angeles County Office of Education; it has provided an introduction to the science of reading, with an emphasis on phonics, auditory language skills, and reading comprehension, to more than 12,000 TK-5 teachers since 2020. The three other providers are the Sacramento County Office of Education, the Reading League, and CORE Learning.
The promise of a user-friendly and transparent interface website
Early literacy advocacy groups that pushed for legislation promoting the science of reading favored a shorter list of top-rated programs.
“The one-on-one approach doesn’t help (districts) distinguish high quality or prioritize where to invest,” said Yolie Flores, CEO of Families in Schools. “Our educators, and ultimately our students, including ELs, deserve a roster that prioritizes the highest quality learning that will meet their needs.” »
Molly Maloney of Oakland-based GO Public Schools said, “The rubric scores show that some programs have minimal evidence in critical areas. The state-approved list should provide districts with a meaningful quality signal that they can trust.”
Critics could not agree on how many providers should be on the list. One idea was to group programs by levels; one advocate suggested that the top 19 be ranked. The nonprofits EdVoice, Children Now and other groups recommended 17 programs with the highest ratings or those that could demonstrate strong evidence of improving learning.
Demonstration of effectiveness was an optional factor and not one of the 18 criteria because some programs were too new to submit data or evaluations. For this reason, board member and former Los Angeles Unified chief academic officer Alison Yoshimoto-Towery urged the board to provide clarity to districts.
“I believe we are listing what is most consistent with the criteria, not most consistent with student outcomes. And (districts) need to understand that,” she said.
Board chair Linda Darling-Hammond cautioned board members “to resist the temptation to micromanage the list because we’ve heard people say, ‘Take the list down here. Take the ones that have this criteria and take the ones that have that criteria.’ »
The review process was thorough and transparent, she said. All materials from the assessments will be available online to the public, she said, allowing users to compare programs like a Consumer Report, with summaries of the assessments and detailed documents for those who want to dig deeper.
Marshall Tuck, CEO of EdVoice, while advocating for a shorter list, said he was encouraged by the board’s discussion and its directive to the ministry. “The goal is to share expertise with districts, so the guidance needs to be very strong. »
This story was originally published by EdSource.
