The most populous state in the nation is revamping how it credentials teachers to teach reading, replacing a test that has served as a controversial gatekeeper for teacher-candidates for more than 25 years.
This shift in California comes as dozens of states are attempting to align their teacher-preparation programs to the research behind how kids learn to read. The debate around this decision in the Golden State is a microcosm of the issues arising from this process across the country.
In 2021, California passed a law that ends the 69传媒 Instruction Competence Assessment, or RICA in summer 2025鈥攁 test that has been as a strong evaluation of future teachers鈥� knowledge of the 鈥渟cience of reading,鈥� but as an outdated, biased hurdle that keeps otherwise qualified candidates out of the classroom.
The test will be replaced with a performance assessment, which a group of universities are gearing up to pilot this spring.
The law also requires that preparation programs align their coursework to by summer 2024. The standards mandate the teaching of evidence-based approaches to foundational reading skills and incorporate the California Dyslexia Guidelines, a for identifying and teaching dyslexic students developed by the state鈥檚 department of education in 2017.
Unlike the RICA, which most candidates take as a standardized test, the new assessment will ask teachers to demonstrate teaching early reading in classrooms, a process that will 鈥渟erve to strengthen and deepen a prospective teacher鈥檚 knowledge and skill,鈥� Mary Vixie Sandy, executive director of the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing, said in an emailed statement.
But some dyslexia advocates have raised concerns about whether the state鈥檚 new approach will ensure all candidates are prepared to teach reading鈥攁nd how university instructors will be held accountable for meeting the new literacy standards.
Though about half of all states have required that programs follow evidence-based methods or that students pass a certification test aligned to the science of reading, imposing these mandates on universities challenges long-held traditions of academic freedom. They鈥檙e also notoriously difficult to enforce.
Still, there鈥檚 growing momentum within the field, said Kelly Butler, a senior adviser to 69传媒 Universe, a site that offers free resources for reading teachers. Butler formerly led the Barksdale 69传媒 Institute, a nonprofit that worked to improve the quality of reading education in Mississippi.
鈥淢ore and more states are recognizing that things need to change within teacher preparation. There is a growing awareness and willingness to do work around that,鈥� she said. 鈥淚 would like to get to a place where teacher-preparation programs are owning this themselves, and leading this parade, rather than being dragged to the table.鈥�
A certification test is 鈥榦ne little juncture鈥� in the pipeline
The RICA was born out of a previous push to align reading instruction with evidence-based practice, more than two decades ago.
In the 1990s, California , a backlash to the rise of whole language in the state in the 1970s and 80s鈥攁n approach that emphasizes immersing students in books, with little direct instruction.
Starting in 1998, elementary and some middle school teacher candidates were expected to pass the RICA, a standardized test that assesses detailed knowledge in phonemic awareness and phonics instruction, as well as vocabulary, fluency, comprehension, and background knowledge. California was the first state to require that elementary teachers pass a standalone test in reading instruction.
In the intervening decades, the RICA has been the target of sustained criticism from different camps.
While the test does include crucial knowledge for future teachers of reading, it can also become a roadblock for students with disabilities, said Marga Madhuri, a professor in the University of La Verne鈥檚 LaFetra College of Education in La Verne, Calif., and the chair of the college鈥檚 dyslexia teacher training program. She remembered one candidate who himself had dyslexia, and had to take the test eight times before he passed and was accredited to teach 8th grade science.
University faculty and K-12 educators have also . Between 2017 and 2022, 78 percent of white test-takers , compared to 48 percent of African American and 53 percent of Latino test-takers. (Over time, 91 percent of white candidates pass after multiple attempts, compared to 68 percent of African American and 74 percent of Latino candidates.)
Others argue that the problem lies not with the test itself, but with teacher-preparation programs that don鈥檛 adequately prepare students to master its content.
鈥淔rom what I can see in the past, the [California Commission on Teacher Credentialing] hasn鈥檛 done a thorough job of holding teacher-preparation programs accountable,鈥� said Lori DePole, the co-state director of Decoding Dyslexia California. 鈥淪o it鈥檚 really hard to know what the reasoning is behind low pass rates.鈥�
The new test is similar in format to other performance-based assessments already given in California, said Christiane Wood, an associate professor of literacy education at California State University San Marcos, one of the pilot sites this spring. These portfolio assessments ask candidates to plan lessons, videotape teaching, and reflect on practice.
The new format will ensure that students have deep knowledge of early literacy skills, and that they can apply that knowledge in their classrooms, said Erika Daniels, a professor of literacy education at the same university.
But DePole worries that the CTC may not set the bar high enough for passing this exam. Universities may not fully integrate the state鈥檚 new literacy standards, preventing candidates from accessing the information that they would need to do well on a credentialing test, she fears.
Like other states, California periodically assesses whether programs meet these standards, but historically, most states haven鈥檛 taken strong steps to correct lapses.
鈥淵ou can have the greatest standards out there, but if you鈥檙e not adequately enforcing them, and you鈥檙e not also helping to support institutes of higher education where perhaps the faculty aren鈥檛 up to date on science of reading, that鈥檚 the missing link,鈥� she said.
A credentialing test is only 鈥渙ne little juncture鈥� in the teacher-preparation pipeline, said Butler. To ensure that candidates are prepared to teach reading, programs need to focus on aligning instruction, too, she added.
Universities take different approaches to new standards
Some instructors say that their programs already meet these new standards鈥攁 requirement to participate in the new assessment pilot program.
鈥淲hen we dug into it, we saw that we were already doing everything that they were asking us to implement in our literacy courses,鈥� said Wood. (The university鈥檚 graduate program in reading received an F rating in 2023 from the National Council on Teacher Quality, which reviews programs for alignment to evidence-based practices. NCTQ鈥檚 methodology has received criticism.)
Wood sees the performance-based assessment as an opportunity to incorporate other methods of teaching beginning reading skills.
鈥淸The RICA] only really assesses one method of how to teach literacy: explicit, scaffolded instruction,鈥� she said. 鈥淭he gradual release of responsibility鈥攖hat鈥檚 the only approach the RICA takes.鈥�
The new assessment will demonstrate what candidates know about teaching foundational skills 鈥渋n not just one way, in other ways,鈥� Wood said, noting that it would allow for the integration of vocabulary instruction and best practices for teaching English learners.
Research has long demonstrated that systematic, explicit instruction is the most effective way to help children learn how to read words. But some university professors have pushed back against what they see as a one-size-fits-all approach.
At other institutions, instructors are in the process of overhauling their courses.
A few years before the new standards were released, the LaFetra College of Education at the University of La Verne started to rethink how it approached teaching about dyslexia. The school brought in national experts and retooled its courses, said Madhuri.
鈥淲e thought it was going to be a brush-up on our skills, but it was a crash course,鈥� she said. Faculty have continued revisions in light of the new literacy standards.
Still, she鈥檚 heard from colleagues at other universities who have told her they鈥檙e planning to tweak written course materials, but continue teaching as they have before. And she worries that it may be difficult for many colleges to fit the deep dive on early literacy practices that the standards require into one or two semesters.
Madhuri would like to see the new performance-based assessment align closely with the standards, which she thinks are rigorous and supportive of evidence-based practice.
鈥淭here will be no tears shed now that the RICA is gone,鈥� she said.
