Compromise is often seen as the hallmark of progress—a way to bring people together and move forward. But what happens when compromise results in settling for standards that are lower than what is desirable? One definition of compromise is “to accept standards that are lower than is desirable,” and in the case of the Georgia State Board of Education’s decision on universal reading screeners, this definition hits uncomfortably close to home.
On the surface, the board’s decision to approve a universal reading screener list that includes iReady may seem like a win for collaboration. After all, four of the five screeners approved were rigorously vetted and endorsed by the Sandra Dunagan Deal Center for Early Language and Literacy, a leading authority on evidence-based literacy practices. However, the inclusion of iReady—a tool that scored 13 points below the other four—raises important questions about whether compromise served the best interests of Georgia’s students.
The Context
The Georgia State Board of Education (SBOE) voted to approve a list of five universal reading screeners. Among them were the four recommended by literacy experts at the Sandra Dunagan Deal Center for Early Language and Literacy, all of which met the highest standards for evidence-based reading assessment. Yet iReady, a tool that scored significantly lower after a thorough vetting process, was also included.
The Problem with Settling
The inclusion of iReady sets a troubling precedent. It sends a message that lower standards are acceptable in the name of compromise. When it comes to tools that will shape the literacy outcomes of Georgia’s children, there is no room for “close enough.” Universal reading screeners are not just diagnostic tools; they are the foundation of effective early intervention for struggling readers, particularly those with dyslexia. Approving subpar tools for screening our students puts schools at risk of misidentifying students or failing to provide the actionable insights teachers need.
Board Members Who Stood Up for Change
Amidst the compromises and challenges, it’s important to recognize the efforts of board members Helen Rice, Lisa Kinnemore, Jason Downey, and Kenneth Mason. These leaders demonstrated courage and commitment by standing up for higher standards and advocating for tools that align with evidence-based literacy practices. Their dedication serves as a beacon of hope for parents, educators, and advocates who seek better outcomes for Georgia’s students.
Why Advocacy Must Continue
While today’s decision is a step forward in some ways, it also serves as a reminder that the fight for evidence-based literacy practices is far from over. The efforts of advocates highlight the importance of ongoing engagement with policymakers and local school boards.
Parents, educators, and advocates must continue to push for the adoption of tools that truly meet the needs of all students. This includes holding decision-makers accountable and ensuring that future compromises do not come at the expense of quality and equity.
The Bigger Picture
Compromise can be a valuable tool for progress, but it must be wielded with care—especially when it comes to the education of our children. The inclusion of a subpar tool like iReady in Georgia’s list of approved universal screeners underscores the importance of vigilance, advocacy, and a steadfast commitment to high standards.
As we move forward, let’s remember: compromise should never mean settling for less when the stakes are as high as the future of our students.