The state should ensure that special education teachers know the science of reading instruction and are fully prepared for the instructional shifts related to literacy associated with college-and career-readiness standards. This goal was consistent between 2015 and 2017.
Scientifically Based Reading Instruction—Tests and Standards: Subtest I of the Minnesota Teacher Licensure Examinations (MTLE) Special Education Core Skills test addresses scientifically based reading instruction. However, Minnesota's preparation standards require special education candidates to be able to demonstrate knowledge of the principles of scientifically based reading instruction.
Informational Texts: Minnesota's Special Education Core Skills test addresses the use of informational texts by requiring teachers to be able to apply "knowledge of research-based, explicit instruction in print and digital informational/expository texts, and response and analysis skills for informational/expository texts (e.g., analyzing a text's internal consistency or logic, summarizing a text's main ideas)." Teacher preparation standards require special education candidates to be able to possess the "knowledge of reading comprehension processes necessary to comprehend different types of informational materials and content-area texts; and the structures and features of expository (informational) texts and effective reading strategies to address different text structures and purposes for reading." However, although the framework addresses informational texts, it does not address how to also incorporate increasingly complex texts into instruction.
Literacy Skills: Minnesota has no requirements for the preparation of elementary or secondary special education teachers that address the incorporation of literacy skills in the core content areas.
Struggling Readers: With regard to struggling readers, the reading instruction portion of Minnesota's licensing test requires teachers to be able to apply "knowledge of strategies (e.g., differentiated instruction, interventions) for addressing the assessed needs of individual students in vocabulary, academic language, comprehension and comprehension strategies." In addition, Minnesota's teacher preparation standards require "Comprehensive, scientifically based reading instruction [that] also includes and integrates instructional strategies for continuously assessing, evaluating, and communicating the student's reading progress and needs in order to design and implement ongoing interventions so that students of all ages and proficiency levels can read and comprehend text, write, and apply higher level thinking skills," as well as ensuring that special education teachers have the "formal and informal tools to...design and implement appropriate classroom interventions for struggling readers."
Minnesota Statutes 122A.09; .18 Minnesota Rule 8710.2000; .3200; .5000; .5500 Special Education Test Requirement http://www.mtle.nesinc.com/TestView.aspx?f=HTML_FRAG/MN186_SG_SUB2.html
Ensure that new special education teachers are prepared to incorporate informational text of increasing complexity into classroom instruction.
Either through testing frameworks or teacher standards, NCTQ encourages Minnesota to strengthen its teacher preparation requirements and ensure that all special education candidates—including those teaching under early childhood and secondary licenses—have the ability to adequately incorporate complex informational text into classroom instruction.
Ensure that new special education teachers are prepared to incorporate literacy skills as an integral part of every subject.
To ensure that special education students are capable of accessing varied information about the world around them, Minnesota should also—either through testing frameworks or teacher standards—include literacy skills and using text to build content knowledge in history/social studies, science, technical subjects and the arts.
Minnesota declined to respond to NCTQ's analyses.
4B: Teaching Special Education Reading
Teaching children to read is the most important task teachers at the elementary level undertake. Over the past 60 years, scientists from many fields have worked to determine how people learn to read and why some struggle. This science of reading has led to breakthroughs that can dramatically reduce the number of children destined to become functionally illiterate or barely literate adults. By routinely applying in the classroom the lessons learned from the scientific findings, most reading failure can be avoided. Estimates indicate that the current failure rate of 20 to 30 percent could be reduced to 2 to 10 percent.
Scientific research has shown that there are five essential components of effective reading instruction: explicit and systematic instruction in phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. Many states' policies still do not reflect the strong research consensus in reading instruction that has emerged over the last few decades. Many teacher preparation programs resist teaching scientifically-based reading instruction. Reports by NCTQ on teacher preparation, beginning with What Education Schools Aren't Teaching about Reading and What Elementary Teachers Aren't Learning in 2006 and continuing through the Teacher Prep Review in 2016, have consistently found the overwhelming majority of teacher preparation programs across the country do not train teachers in the science of reading. Whether through standards or coursework requirements, states must direct programs to provide this critical training. But relying on programs alone is insufficient; states must only grant licenses to new special education teachers who can demonstrate they have the knowledge and skills to teach children to read.
Effective early reading instruction is especially important for teachers of special education students. By far, the largest classification of students receiving special education services are those with learning disabilities. Based on data from the U.S. Department of Education, it is estimated that reading disabilities account for about 80 percent of learning disabilities. While early childhood and elementary teachers must know the reading science to prevent reading difficulties, special education teachers, and especially elementary special education teachers, must know how to support students who have already fallen behind and struggle with reading and literacy skills. States should require no less from special education teachers in terms of preparation to teach reading than they require from general education teachers.
College- and career-readiness standards require significant shifts in literacy instruction. College- and career-readiness standards for K-12 students adopted by nearly all states require from teachers a different focus on literacy integrated into all subject areas. The standards demand that teachers are prepared to bring complex text and academic language into regular use, emphasize the use of evidence from informational and literary texts, and build knowledge and vocabulary through content-rich texts. While most states have not ignored teachers' need for training and professional development related to these instructional shifts, states also need to attend to the parallel need to align teacher competencies and requirements for teacher preparation so that new teachers will enter the classroom ready to help students meet the expectations of these standards. For special education teachers, preparation and training must focus on managing these instructional shifts while also helping students who may have serious reading deficiencies.