According to statewide test scores, half of Minnesota students can't read at their grade level. Three years ago, the state legislature took that as a lesson and overhauled the standards of how kids are taught to read.
The result was Minnesota’s Reading to Ensure Academic Development (READ) Act. Aligning with the objectives of now over 40 states, its goal is to ensure every student in the state reads at or above his or her grade level…every year from kindergarten onward.
The program, which is administered by the Minnesota Department of Education and replaces the earlier Read Well by Third Grade law with broader goals and requirements, brings several meaningful, long-term benefits for students, educators, schools and families, said the school’s Title 1 reading intervention teacher Chris Seeman.
“While implementing READ Act requirements has and will continue to take time and effort from all staff involved, our school has developed stronger implementation of structured literacy, shared instructional vocabulary and more consistent data-driven practices.”
Balanced literacy vs structured literacy
The READ Act’s approach “structured literacy,’ a learning method rooted in “the science of reading,” a body of research that shows students have to both decode text and understand text to read.
For years, literacy emphasized a “balanced literacy” approach, where kids are taught to use contextual clues and sometimes images to determine word meaning. “Look at the picture. Think about the story.” Phonics included were more random, not systematic. But that method left more children guessing than actually learning how to read.
On the flip side, the science of reading supports the strategy of “structured literacy,” sounding the word out using the letters. Thus, this method focuses on explicit instruction on phonics and teaching students to decode different parts of words to make sense of them.
Students are more rapidly developing stronger foundations in reading skills through early, explicit instruction in phonics and language structure, which helps them learn to read accurately and fluently.
Screenings are a key component
As a result of the required universal screenings, which include phonemic awareness (the ability to notice, think about and work with the individual sounds in spoken words), phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension, the program tracks progress and identifies reading difficulties earlier. Students in grades K through six are screened three times per year while middle and high school students are screened at least once a year.
“More equitable outcomes occur as students who may have previously been overlooked are more likely to receive timely support,” Seeman said. “That results in improved confidence and engagement because when students experience success in reading, their motivation and participation across all subjects increases as well.”
From school to home
As much reading practice is done on the home front, engaging families is also important, Seeman said.
“They have a better understanding of expectations and instructional practices and are more actively supporting their child’s literacy growth at home. Families receive more understandable information about their child's reading development. Strong literacy skills support success in all content areas, graduation rates, and future career readiness, which benefits our community as a whole.”
Program requires time, effort, funding
Seeman said that the READ Act benefits teachers and the school as a whole.
For teachers, clear instructional guidance, professional development, and better instructional alignment allows for sharing language and practices across grade levels and improves consistency and collaboration, she said. For schools, data-driven decision making occurs to guide instruction, intervention and resource allocation allowing us to be better equipped to provide targeted, tiered supports leading to measurable growth in student literacy skills.
But making the shift to structured literacy and meeting the mandates of the READ Act requires dedicating time and effort and funding too, she said.
Each year, school districts must submit a Local Literacy Plan that describes how literacy screening and intervention are provided, lists curriculum and intervention materials, shows professional development efforts, articulates how multilingual and special education needs are met, and describes use of state literacy funds. This plan is available for viewing on the Cleveland Public School website. (See plan)
By the 2026–27 school year, schools must use evidence-based reading curricula and intervention that align with research-based literacy instruction. If a student is not at grade-level reading, schools must provide continuous support as documented by personal learning plans until the student demonstrates they meet grade level requirements.
Instructors: All teachers and instructional staff responsible for reading instruction and support must receive approved professional development in evidence-based reading instruction. This training is required state-wide and must cover phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, comprehension, culturally responsive practices and working with multilingual learners.
Cleveland’s elementary and special education teachers completed CAREIALL, and preschool teachers completed LETRS for early childhood during the 2024-2025 school year. Secondary English teachers will complete CAREIALL-Secondary within the next year, and the school’s paraprofessionals have or will complete the Paraprofessional Structured Literacy Training to meet these requirements.
“Cleveland is lucky to have the best teachers around, and I am excited to see how far our students can go as we continue to monitor and adjust instruction to meet their needs,” Seeman said.
Administrators: Administrators must lead development and reporting of local literacy plans, ensure literacy screening and intervention fidelity, monitor professional development completion for teachers and support staff, budget for literacy tools, specialists, and training, and communicate progress with parents and the district. This adds accountability and reporting work, which can strain already tight budgets and workloads of administrators and staff in smaller districts like Cleveland.
“Districts, including ours, are facing several challenges,” Seeman said. “These include the need for additional teacher training, which increases staff time and workload. Shifting to evidence-based curricula can also be costly and time-consuming. Using multiple screening and progress-monitoring systems requires significant time and funding to develop, administer and maintain in order to ensure consistent and effective implementation.”
Districts must also balance providing interventions with regular classroom instruction while meeting the needs of diverse learners. Seeman said. In addition, delays in the state’s approval of instructional materials have created uncertainty. As a result, districts have been required to move forward with implementation without full guidance and then make adjustments as state decisions are finalized.”
The READ Act includes funding streams such as the state’s Literacy Incentive Aid to offset some of the cost of required training and instructional materials as well as hiring specialists and approved screeners. However, costs to implement the requirements of the READ Act for districts, including Cleveland, are higher than allotted funds. Cleveland, like most schools, must shift local funds and be creative and responsible in its choices and options to support our students and staff, Seeman said.
And, besides not being a quick fix, READ Act results aren’t immediate, Seeman said.
“Since Cleveland is in its first year of implementing the READ Act for grades K-12, we will continue to gather and analyze data and adjust responses throughout the year before having official data ready to report in June. It is also important to note that when implementing multi-layered systematic changes, it will likely take extended time to see the full effects.”
Above: First-grade students read together.