Michigan House Bill HB4058

Michigan 2023-2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/1/23
• Refer: 2/1/23

Caption

Education: elementary; requirements related to the retention of certain grade 3 pupils; modify. Amends sec. 1280f of 1976 PA 451 (MCL 380.1280f).

Impact

The implications of HB 4058 on state law are significant, particularly concerning the enforcement of literacy standards in early education. By making proficiency in reading a criterion for advancing students from grade 3 to grade 4, it establishes essential metrics for performance assessments that can lead to grade retention for those who fail to meet the required benchmarks. This change aims to elevate overall literacy levels in the state, but it also places additional pressure on school districts to ensure that comprehensive reading interventions are effectively implemented.

Summary

House Bill 4058 amends the revised school code to enhance the reading proficiency requirements for students by ensuring that pupils achieve at least a proficient score in English language arts by grade three. The bill mandates the Michigan Department of Education to approve multiple screening, formative, and diagnostic assessment systems to be utilized by school districts and public school academies, aiming for a systematic approach to monitor and improve reading growth. Furthermore, it encourages the development and recommendation of an early literacy coaching model designed to support teachers in delivering effective instruction and addressing reading deficiencies among students.

Contention

Despite its intended benefits, the bill faces potential contention. Stakeholders, including educators and advocacy groups, express concerns regarding the strict retention policies that could adversely affect students struggling with reading. Critics argue that such measures may disproportionally impact disadvantaged populations or those with learning difficulties, suggesting that the focus should instead be on providing substantial support and resources to improve reading skills, rather than enforcing retention as a punishment for underperformance. This debate highlights the delicate balance between accountability in education and the need for supportive intervention strategies.