Teaching Reading: Georgia
Elementary Teacher Preparation Policy
Analysis of Georgia's policies
Scientifically Based Reading Instruction—Tests and Standards: Elementary teachers in Georgia are required to pass the Georgia Assessments for the Certification of Educators (GACE) Elementary Education Assessment. This test does not address the science of reading and therefore does not amount to a stand-alone reading test.
In its standards for elementary education teacher preparation, Georgia requires teacher preparation programs to address the science of reading.
Provisional and Emergency Licensure: Because provisional and emergency licensure requirements are scored in Provisional and Emergency Licensure, only the test requirements for the state's initial license are considered as part of this goal.
Recommendations for Georgia
Ensure that the coursework required of aspiring elementary teachers is appropriately focused on the science of reading.
Although Georgia maintains standards that address all five components of the science of reading, NCTQ finds considerable evidence that nearly three quarters (74 percent) of all teacher preparation programs fail to explicitly cover all five components of scientifically-based reading instruction. Georgia should exercise its leverage in the program approval process to ensure that the coursework required of aspiring elementary teachers is appropriately focused on the science of reading, and, if not, that the state plays a more active, supportive role in remedying knowledge gaps on the part of faculty teaching these courses.
State response to our analysis
Georgia recognized the factual accuracy of this analysis. The state added that, although a separate stand-alone reading assessment is not required for Georgia certification in the field of Early Childhood Education (P-5), the state-approved GACE certification assessment for this field (ECE P-5) contains a sub-test with sub-scores that addresses the science of reading and is a blend of a compensatory model and a fully conjunctive model. In Georgia's model, Subarea I (reading/language arts) is one of three subareas in Test I of the GACE Early Childhood Education (P-5) Assessment. This subarea counts 50% of Test I. The probability of passing Test I with a low score on Subarea I, is psychometrically very low.
Additionally, Georgia noted that to help ensure the GACE assessments sufficiently measure the content area and for the grades bands covered in the area of certification, the GACE assessments were developed by diverse and representative test development, bias review, and standard setting committees each consisting of Georgia educators in the content field and those that prepare educators in the content field, in collaboration with a national testing supplier. Each content area GACE is aligned with the state's P12 content standards, the GaPSC program approval content standards, and national standards.
Updated: July 2018
Last word
Although Georgia asserts that passing the Test I of the GACE Elementary Education Assessment with low subscores in one or more of the separate content areas is psychometrically very
low, the test composition still makes this a possibility. The
first subtest includes reading
and language arts (50%), social studies (25%) and Constructed Response
(25%). The subtest integrates this topic with too many other topics related to English Language Arts, as well as at least one other core subject, to serve as a reliable measure of a candidate's knowledge of the science of reading. Unless passing scores
are required for scientifically based reading instruction content specifically, there is no assurance that the
candidate
has mastered this subject matter.
-
Georgia
Select another topic
Teacher Preparation
- Program Entry
- Teacher Shortages and Surpluses
- Program Performance Measures
- Program Reporting Requirements
- Student Teaching/Clinical Practice
Elementary Teacher Preparation
Secondary Teacher Preparation
- Middle School Content Knowledge
- Middle School Licensure Requirements
- Secondary Content Knowledge
- Secondary Licensure Requirements
Special Education Teacher Preparation
Alternate Routes
Teacher Diversity
Hiring
Teacher and Principal Evaluation
Teacher Compensation
Early Childhood Preparation
Retaining Effective Teachers
How we graded
2C: Teaching Elementary Reading
- Scientifically Based Reading Instruction: The state should require all elementary teacher candidates to pass a rigorous elementary test of scientifically based reading instruction in order to attain licensure. The design of the test should ensure that prospective teachers cannot pass without knowing the five scientifically based components of early reading instruction: phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. The state should require that all teacher preparation programs prepare elementary candidates in the science of reading instruction.
The total goal score is earned based on the following:
- Full credit: The state will earn a full point if it requires all new elementary teachers to pass a rigorous test of scientifically based reading instruction. The design of the test must ensure that all prospective teachers are competent in the five research-based components of early reading instruction: phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. A stand-alone English/Language Arts (ELA) content test must be primarily focused on scientifically based reading instruction to earn credit.
- Three quarters credit: The state will earn three-quarters of a point if it requires all new elementary teachers to pass a stand-alone reading test of scientifically based reading instruction, but the test includes content not aligned to scientifically based reading instruction or includes other content areas.
- One-half credit: The state will earn one-half of a point if it requires all new elementary teachers to pass a stand-alone reading test of scientifically based reading instruction, but the test includes content not aligned to scientifically based reading instruction, and the state also allows teachers to delay passage of content and pedagogy tests.
- One-quarter credit: The state will earn one-quarter of a point if elementary teacher preparation standards address the five components of scientifically based reading instruction, but the state does not require an adequate - or any - scientifically based reading instruction test.
Research rationale
Teaching children to read is the most important task teachers undertake. Over the past 60 years, scientists from many fields have worked to determine how people learn to read and why some struggle. This science of reading has led to breakthroughs that can dramatically reduce the number of children destined to become functionally illiterate or barely literate adults, identifying five components of effective instruction. In fact, most reading failure can be avoided by routinely applying the lessons learned from the scientific findings in the classroom. Estimates indicate that the current failure rate of 20 to 30 percent could be reduced to 2 to 10 percent.[1]
Scientific research has shown that there are five essential components of effective reading instruction: explicit and systematic instruction in phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension.[2] Many states' policies still do not reflect the strong research consensus in reading instruction that has emerged over the last few decades. Many teacher preparation programs resist teaching scientifically-based reading instruction. Reports by NCTQ on teacher preparation, beginning with What Education Schools Aren't Teaching about Reading and What Elementary Teachers Aren't Learning in 2006 and continuing through the Teacher Prep Review in 2016 have consistently found the overwhelming majority of teacher preparation programs across the country do not train teachers in the science of reading, although the most recent Teacher Prep Review did find signs of improvement.[3] Whether through standards or coursework requirements, states must direct programs to provide this critical training. But relying on programs alone is insufficient; states must only grant licenses to new elementary teachers who can demonstrate they have the knowledge and skills to teach children to read.
Most current reading tests do not offer assurance that teachers know the science of reading. A growing number of states, such as Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Virginia, require strong, stand-alone assessments entirely focused on the science of reading.[4] Other states rely on either pedagogy tests or content tests that include items on reading instruction. However, since reading instruction is addressed only in one small part of most of these tests, it is often not necessary to know the science of reading to pass.[5] States need to make sure that a teacher candidate cannot pass a test that purportedly covers reading instruction without knowing the critical material.
College- and career-readiness standards require significant shifts in literacy instruction. College- and career-readiness standards for K-12 students adopted by nearly all states require from teachers a different focus on literacy integrated into all subject areas. The standards demand that teachers are prepared to bring complex text and academic language into regular use, emphasize the use of evidence from informational and literary texts and build knowledge and vocabulary through content-rich text. While most states have not ignored teachers' need for training and professional development related to these instructional shifts, few states have attended to the parallel need to align teacher competencies and requirements for teacher preparation so that new teachers will enter the classroom ready to help students meet the expectations of these standards.[6]
[1] Walsh, K., Glaser, D., & Wilcox, D. D. (2006). What education schools aren't teaching about reading and what elementary teachers aren't learning. National Council on Teacher Quality. Retrieved from http://www.nctq.org/nctq/images/nctq_reading_study_app.pdf; Torgesen, J.K. (2005, November). Preventing reading disabilities in young children: Requirements at the classroom and school level. Presented at the Western North Carolina LD/ADD Symposium. Retrieved from http://www.fcrr.org/science/pdf/torgesen/NC-interventions.pdf
[2] National Reading Panel (US), National Institute of Child Health, & Human Development (US). (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health. Retrieved from https://www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/pubs/nrp/Documents/report.pdf; To review further indications of the affirmation of the previously-mentioned research, see: Foorman, B., Beyler, N., Borradaile, K., Coyne, M., Denton, C. A., Dimino, J., ... & Keating, B. (2016). Foundational skills to support reading for understanding in kindergarten through 3rd grade: Educator's practice guide (NCEE 2016-4008). National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance. Retrieved from https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Docs/PracticeGuide/wwc_foundationalreading_040717.pdf
[3] National Council on Teacher Quality. (2016, December). Landscapes in teacher prep: Undergraduate elementary. National Council on Teacher Quality's Teacher Prep Review. Retrieved from http://www.nctq.org/dmsView/UE_2016_Landscape_653385_656245; To review past TPR materials on teacher prep programs: Walsh, K., Glaser, D., & Wilcox, D. D. (2006). What education schools aren't teaching about reading and what elementary teachers aren't learning. National Council on Teacher Quality. Retrieved from http://www.nctq.org/nctq/images/nctq_reading_study_app.pdf
[4] For problems with many existing reading tests, see: Stotsky, S. (2006). Why American students do not learn to read very well: The unintended consequences of Title II and teacher testing. Third Education Group Review, 2(2), 1-37.; Rigden, D. (2006). Report on licensure alignment with the essential components of effective reading instruction. National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education, Reading First Teacher Education Network.
[5] National Council on Teacher Quality. (2011). Recommendations for the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Retrieved from http://www.nctq.org/p/publications/docs/nctq_eseaReauthorization.pdf
[6] Student Achievement Partners. (2015). Research supporting the Common Core ELA/literacy shifts and standards. Retrieved from https://achievethecore.org/content/upload/Research%20Supporting%20the%20ELA%20Standards%20and%20Shifts%20Final.pdf