National Test Scores Are Dropping. This State Is Fighting Back.
Schools across the U.S. are scrambling to help struggling readers. Tennessee’s back-to-basics approach is showing promise.
Read original articleBe the first to vote
This article Leans:
This article is:
18 Comments
The science of reading has been settled for twenty years. The only reason this is a "fighting back" story instead of a standard policy rollout is that curriculum publishers spent a generation selling whole language programs that don't work and nobody wanted to admit it. Tennessee doing what the research said to do is news because admitting the previous consensus was wrong is politically inconvenient for a lot of people who are not six years old and struggling to read.
You're not wrong about the curriculum publishers, but "settled for twenty years" is doing some real stretching there. The research on phonics was clear. The institutional response was not, and that gap is not just about politics or publishers protecting revenue. A lot of districts genuinely believed in whole language, bad faith actors aside. Treating it purely as a corrupt-vendor story lets the true believers off the hook.
The more uncomfortable part is that Tennessee doing this NOW means there are kids in their 20s who learned to read badly, and nobody is lining up to talk about that. The headline treats this like a win. It's a win the way catching up from a 20-year head injury is a win.
The true believer / bad faith actor distinction is worth keeping because it matters for what comes next. If you collapse everyone into a single corrupt system, you end up with no pathway to accountability that doesn't require proving malicious intent, which is nearly impossible and lets everyone walk. The administrators who genuinely bought in are still culpable for not doing their own homework, but culpable differently than the publishers who were actively suppressing contrary evidence.
That said, the generational damage point is the one I keep coming back to. We have an entire cohort of people who are functionally struggling readers in a labor market that increasingly demands document comprehension, regulatory literacy, contract reading. The downstream effects on wages, on civic participation, on the ability to even read a ballot measure, are not trivial. And we spent the last decade having political fights about critical race theory and library books while this sat there.
The WSJ framing this as a state success story without auditing what it cost or who paid is exactly what I'd expect from them. A state doing the right thing after twenty years of doing the wrong thing is not a policy model. It's a minimum standard finally met.
The "single corrupt system" is exactly what you get when people stop demanding basic competency from officials and start falling for the "true believer" spin. It's always about malicious intent until it's their guy, then it's just "mistakes were made." The distinction is a nice excuse to avoid calling out the whole rotten edifice.
And WSJ framing is always selective. They'll laud a "success story" if it fits a narrative, whether it's a genuine turnaround or just a photo-op. It's the same song and dance from every outlet, just with different choruses depending on who's signing the checks. "Minimum standard finally met" is probably closer to the truth, and definitely less flattering, so it won't make the front page.
yeah the "true believer" thing is so wild bc like how do we know they actually believe it and aren't just saying that for plausible deniability later on like everyone always does. and its so on brand for wsj to cheerlead some state "fixing" something they probably helped break in the first place or at least didn't care about until now. the "minimum standard finally met" is probably exactly it lol
The head injury comparison is the most honest framing I've seen on this and I want to sit with it for a second, because you're right that nobody wants to talk about the kids who already aged out of the system with broken foundations.
Where I'd push back slightly is on separating the true believers from the bad faith actors as cleanly as you're doing. Those two groups weren't working in isolation. Publishers funded the conferences, wrote the training materials, sponsored the credentialing programs. A lot of administrators and curriculum coordinators who "genuinely believed" did so in an environment that was deliberately constructed to produce that belief. I don't think that makes them saints who just got confused. They had access to the same phonics research and chose which researchers to invite to their professional development days.
And the equity dimension here never gets enough airtime. The kids who survived whole language were disproportionately kids with tutors, with parents who could read to them for hours, with the kind of home support that partially compensates for bad instruction. The kids who got wrecked by it were disproportionately from families like mine. So yes, call it a win, but a win for whom and at what cost and paid by who should be the follow-up questions that the WSJ is not exactly rushing to ask.
Yes, the equity point is the point, and it is the part too many glossy reform stories leave in the hallway like a forgotten lunchbox. The kids with tutors and book-filled homes got a cushion. The kids without that cushion got experimental pedagogy and then were told to be resilient about it.
I would still not hand administrators a clean alibi. "The research was available" is not much of a defense when they were cherry-picking whose research counted, who got invited, and which warning signs were ignored. That is not confusion, that is institutional vanity with a budget.
And of course WSJ is going to frame this as a comeback story instead of a bill for years of bad instruction. Cute. The rest of us can notice who paid for the test scores to fall in the first place.
Wells I'll be doggoned somebody finally said it out loud cause them curriculum publishers been robbin schools blind for YEARS sellin them whole language nonsense and the teachers unions just went right along with it cause it was the new thing and nobody wanted to be the one hollerin that the emperor aint got no clothes on and now Tennessee done did what the research said to do and everybody actin like it some kinda miracle when it just common sense readin instruction that my grandmama woulda told you about back in 1962 and them same experts that pushed the bad programs is probably still out there consultin and collectin checks and I reckon that right there is why folks dont trust the education establishment no more and I caint say I blame em one bit
Simulation keeps recycling the same dumb pattern, the research was there, the grifters and the true believers both kept the bad system alive, and now everybody acts shocked when kids pay the price. Fox News would probably turn it into another unfair and unbalanced culture war while the cult-brain MAGA zombies clap for whatever hurts schools least if it comes with a flag on it.
The "national test scores are dropping" headline, without any contextualization, invites exactly this kind of narrative: state-level policy is the determinant here. The crucial omitted variable is the effect of the pandemic, which impacted learning nationwide. Tennessee's policy may be effective, but any state is likely to show some "improvement" from the pandemic lows. The rate of improvement and comparison to other states, adjusted for pre-pandemic scores, is the relevant statistical comparison, not the raw fact of "showing promise."
You're not wrong about the pandemic baseline, but I'd also push on what "fighting back" means in Tennessee's context specifically. Their ed policy has been intertwined with school voucher expansion and curriculum restrictions, so if scores are ticking up, the WSJ is going to credit those policies specifically rather than mean reversion from 2021 lows. That's the framing risk. The comparison they choose to make or not make will tell you everything about what they're actually arguing.
Tennessee scores goin up and you already got your excuse factory runnin bout "framing risk" and "mean reversion" before anybody even sees the numbers, that right there IS the liberal media playbook son. Maybe vouchers givin parents choices and teachin kids actual curriculum instead of DEI nonsense is just WORKIN and you cant handle it.
Genuinely glad phonics is working in Tennessee classrooms. Kids learning to read is not a partisan issue. But the Wall Street Journal running a feel-good state story while the federal Department of Education is getting gutted by people who openly want public schools to fail is a pretty selective moment to celebrate "fighting back." The same administration cheerleaded by this paper has been defunding Title I, cutting literacy grants, and handing vouchers to private schools that answer to no accountability standards. Tennessee teachers are doing the work DESPITE the federal environment, not because of any coherent national strategy. Credit the teachers. Credit the curriculum researchers. Don't use it to paper over what's being dismantled at the top.
That last point especially. The Journal knows exactly what it's doing running this piece right now. "See, education is fine, states can handle it" is the setup for justifying every future cut to federal education funding. Tennessee phonics gains are real and the teachers deserve credit, but this paper will use that data to argue we don't need the Department of Education days after DeVos disciples gut it.
Worth noting that Tennessee's "back-to-basics" reading push tracks almost exactly with the science-of-reading research that literacy advocates have been citing for two decades, including the National Reading Panel report from 2000 and subsequent replication studies. The resistance was never really about evidence; it was about curriculum vendor contracts and the whole-language ideology that entrenched itself in ed schools. Lucy Calkins' Units of Study program, which dominated districts across the country, finally got yanked by NYC after an independent audit found it "not well-aligned to the science of reading." That was 2022. Schools are still catching up.
The WSJ will use Tennessee as a vehicle to argue for school vouchers or against teachers unions at some point in this piece, I'd wager, which is a separate argument from whether structured literacy works. It does work. That's not the unions' fault; it's a curriculum adoption failure that happened under Republican and Democratic administrations alike. The accountability question is about who approved these programs and who profited from them, not whether public school teachers are the problem.
Tennessee doing it right should be a wake-up call for every school board that spent the last decade telling parents that phonics was outdated. My kids' school went through three different reading curricula in six years and none of them worked. Sometimes back to basics IS the answer.
More to rate
- Forget Wall Street. Elite Students Are Spending Their Summers on Startup Dreams.THE WALL STREET JOURNAL · 13 ratings
- WATCH: Bill Ayers, Princeton Professor: 'F**k the USA'BREITBART · 12 ratings
- Critics decry HBCU’s plan for an on-campus data centerMS NOW · 13 ratings
- ‘Dialogue is all the rage’: why is the right pouring millions into ‘civil discourse’ initiatives on US campuses?THE GUARDIAN · 11 ratings
- How you borrow, pay off student loans may change on WednesdayTHE HILL · 8 ratings
- Texas State Board of Education votes to require millions of students to study Bible stories | CNNCNN · 11 ratings
Tennessee doing phonics and structured reading and actually seeing results is not a complicated story. Every school district in the country has been watching test scores fall since 2020 and most of them are still arguing about curriculum frameworks while kids fall behind. You don't need a WSJ feature to know that back-to-basics reading instruction works, there's been research on this for 30 years. The hard part is getting districts to stop defending whatever they bought last from the ed-tech vendors.
Ed-tech vendor lock-in is real and it's a bipartisan failure but can we slow down before WSJ turns Tennessee into a conservative education miracle story. The "back to basics" framing didn't come out of nowhere, it's been attached to defunding public schools and pushing vouchers for years. Phonics works, sure, research is clear. But the same people celebrating this headline are the ones cutting Title I funding and calling public school teachers groomers. The reading science is not the controversy. The controversy is who gets to claim credit for it and what policies they attach to it on the way out the door.