As I have said repeatedly, I do not believe that any legislature should mandate teaching methods. They get swept along by fads, they are not experts, they have no business telling teachers how to teach.
Legislating “how to teach” makes as little sense as legislating how to perform open heart surgery.
Yet, some are hoping that Congress makes it a national law to teach the “science of reading.”
The Hill published the following article:
For decades, Congress has largely waited for the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act before making sweeping changes to federal education policy. That restraint now appears to be fading.
Quietly, but consequentially, Congress is stepping into one of the most contentious debates in American education: how we teach children to read.
Since 1965, Congress has provided funding without controlling curriculum. But over time, that line has begun to blur. With the Every Student Succeeds Actmarking a notable shift, federal dollars are increasingly positioned to influence not just what schools prioritize but also how they teach — and now, how they teach children to read.
Until now, the Science of Reading has been advanced primarily by states and local school leaders willing to navigate the long-running “reading wars” on their own, with support from national organizations such as ExcelinEd and The Reading League. But that is beginning to change. In recent weeks, Congress has taken steps to assert federal influence over reading instruction, an unexpected move at a time when the Trump administration is simultaneously calling for a return of education authority to the states. The contradiction is hard to ignore: decentralize education, except when it comes to how children learn to read.
States, for their part, have not been standing still. Across the country, state education agencies have leveraged their authority to push districts toward Science of Reading aligned practices. Mississippi stands as the clearest example. Once near the bottom of national rankings, the state has drawn national attention for the “Mississippi Miracle” making dramatic gains in reading through literacy policy on the National Assessment of Educational Progress by anchoring its literacy strategy in the Science of Reading.
States like Mississippi may no longer be acting alone. Rep. Erin Houchin (R-Ind.) is proposing that the federal government step in, not just as a funder, but as a signal-setter.
But this raises a fundamental question: Is this the beginning of the end of the reading wars?
The Science of Reading is not a new idea; it is the product of decades of research on how children actually learn to read. At its core, it emphasizes explicit, systematic phonics instruction over approaches that ask students to guess at words based on context or visual cues. Yet for years, this seemingly straightforward question of how to teach children to read has been anything but settled.
The so-called “reading wars” have played out in academic journals and conference rooms, with scholars such as Mark Siedenberg, Lucy Calkins and David Kilpatrick shaping the debate, while local school leaders have been left to translate dense research into real classroom practice.
Now, Congress is stepping in to settle the debate once and for all.
The House Committee on Education and the Workforce recently unanimously passed the Science of Reading Act. The bill filed by Houchin, would, for the first time, establish a federal definition of evidence-based literacy instruction grounded in the Science of Reading. Just as notably, it would draw a clear line in the sand by prohibiting the use of the three-cueing model in federally supported literacy programs.
And while the bill stops short of a federal mandate, its intent is unmistakable. By prioritizing funding for states and districts that align with research-based practices, Congress is using the power it knows best, money, to drive change. The message is clear: local control remains intact, but the expectation is alignment. In other words, districts can choose their path, but the federal government is making it increasingly clear which path it believes works.
Congress, for its part, is attempting to put its foot on base as it relates to how kids should learn to read. In February, the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies convened a hearing on “The Science of Reading,” placing the issue squarely on the federal agenda for appropriators, the ones who direct federal spending.
For educators and leaders working on the front lines of literacy, this moment represents a notable and encouraging shift. The growing federal embrace of the Science of Reading signals long-awaited national alignment around what works in reading instruction. More importantly, it underscores the urgency of ensuring that every child, regardless of zip code, has access to high-quality, evidence-based literacy experiences.
Still, as with many proposals in Washington, unanimous passage in committee does not guarantee a full vote on the floor, and certainly does not guarantee full passage by both chambers. In fact, there has been no companion bill filed in the Senate. So, the bill must navigate both chambers of Congress. Yet early signals suggest something increasingly rare in Washington, D.C. these days: bipartisan support.
Should that support hold, the implications would be far-reaching. For the first time, federal literacy funding would be explicitly aligned with the Science of Reading, reshaping not only policy but also classroom practice across the nation.
Phelton C. Moss is an Assistant Professor of Educational Leadership and Policy at Virginia Commonwealth University and leads federal advocacy for the National School Boards Association. He is also a former teacher, school principal and congressional staffer.
Diane Ravitch's blog 