Sarah Novicoff, Desiree Carver-Thomas, Linda Darling-Hammond, H. Alix Gallagher, Kevin Gee, Danielle M. Gomez, Shira Haderlein, Tara Kini, Melanie Leung-Gagné, Susanna Loeb, Susan K. Patrick, Morgan S. Polikoff, Sean Reardon, Lucrecia Santibañez, Lucy Sorensen, Tiffany S. Tan, Lisa Towne, Peter Yu
Reading shapes both educational trajectories and everyday life, influencing outcomes such as high school success, college completion, income, and the ability to navigate daily tasks. California has lagged behind the national average in reading for more than two decades. As California enters a new gubernatorial administration, this is a useful moment to assess progress over that period and consider what may be needed for further improvement.
This brief draws on Getting Down to Facts III technical reports to describe California’s recent trends in performance in English Language Arts, the promise of new legislation, and the lessons that can be learned from past initiatives. These studies provide evidence that California has meaningfully improved its reading performance, while also highlighting persistent weaknesses in instructional materials adoption, county-level support, and the preparation of teachers, paraeducators, and coaches to deliver high-quality literacy instruction.
Key Findings
1. California has meaningfully improved its reading performance, narrowing the gap between it and the rest of the nation. Over the past two decades, California has made meaningful progress in reading achievement relative to the national average. The state has also made these gains without widening income-based gaps across districts, though those gaps remain larger in California than in many other states. Students who began kindergarten learning English have improved as well, though substantial disparities remain.
2. California schools and policymakers have made reading a sustained priority over the past two decades. School leaders consistently identify English Language Arts as a top priority, and state policymakers have enacted a series of reforms aimed at improving literacy instruction. These include changes to teacher preparation and credentialing, early assessment and intervention efforts, and targeted grant programs intended to support literacy improvement in low-performing and high-need schools.
3. Current processes for instructional materials adoption do not provide districts and teachers with clear enough support. Recent experience suggests that state instructional materials guidance has often been delayed, overly broad, or incomplete. At the same time, many teachers do not view adopted materials as adequate for the students they serve and frequently supplement them, indicating that the adoption process does not consistently yield materials that teachers find usable or well matched to student needs.
4. County offices have the potential to play an important role in literacy improvement, but their capacity is uneven. Some county offices have provided high-quality professional development and instructional support that contributed to stronger literacy outcomes. But county offices differ substantially in expertise, staffing, and resources, meaning that districts do not have equal access to specialized literacy support across the state.
5. California’s educator workforce is not consistently well prepared to deliver high-quality literacy instruction. Teachers, paraeducators, and instructional coaches all play important roles in literacy improvement, yet current preparation and training systems do not consistently equip them with the specialized knowledge they need. These gaps are especially consequential in schools serving multilingual learners and other students who may need more targeted instructional support.
