Embedded Files
Memphis-Shelby County Schools (MSCS)
Is This the Recipe For Improving Literacy in MSCS?
Mississippi made national headlines by improving literacy outcomes through the statewide implementation of Multi-Sensory Structured Literacy—what Tennessee refers to as dyslexia-specific instruction and intervention—paired with robust teacher training. In contrast, according to Chalkbeat reporter Bri Hatch, Memphis-Shelby County Schools plan to improve TCAP scores by investing the “bare minimum” funding level and training just one staff member, or at least one, per school.
Watch the news reports and read the articles linked below. Then decide for yourself: Does the Memphis plan measure up?
Literacy for All
The right to read is a nonpartisan issue that touches every demographic across Memphis and Shelby County. None of us are immune to the consequences of illiteracy and low literacy, nor the profound harm it inflicts on individuals, families, and entire communities.
To find out more about what Mississippi did read this article:
To find out more about what MSCS will do, read this article:
Note: A "dyslexia diagnosis" is not required to determine eligibility for services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The statement highlighted in red in this article does not accurately reflect the position. Learners may qualify for services under IDEA when a school-based evaluation identifies a Specific Learning Disability (SLD), such as dyslexia, provided that other eligibility criteria are met.
Concerns, Questions & Commentary
The MSCS approach raises urgent questions about accountability, and the district’s commitment to meaningful change.
According to the Tennessee Department of Education (TDOE):
Approximately 1 in 5 school-age children demonstrate some of the characteristics of dyslexia – some of these students have a formal diagnosis but most do not. Regardless of whether a diagnosis has been made, educators should be aware of these characteristics in order to intervene appropriately and provide the necessary supports.
Based on the 1-in-5 estimate, MSCS currently serves approximately 20,000 learners—across all demographics—who exhibit characteristics of dyslexia.
Questions & Commentary
What internationally, nationally, or state-recognized, independently verifiable dyslexia-specific qualifications or expertise do the district’s decision-makers and School Board Commissioners possess?
If the answer is none—or if such qualifications are limited—then the following question must be asked:
What expert-led professional development—focused on dyslexia, dyslexia-specific interventions, and meeting the needs of learners with dyslexia and characteristics of dyslexia with fidelity—did the district’s decision-makers and Board Commissioners receive before approving the expenditure of nearly $540,000 on its latest intervention plan?
Commentary
The district’s decision-makers and Board Commissioners were given opportunities to receive just such professional development—at no cost to them or MSCS—from independent experts (i.e., clinical professors) who specialize in dyslexia.
With the exception of one School Board Commissioner, they all either declined or showed no interest in such a professional development opportunity. Consequently, that particular learning opportunity was lost to all.
Salespeople are not independent experts.
If MSCS’s decision-makers and Board Commissioners routinely fail to consult independent experts so that they can make informed decisions about how to meet the needs of their learners, that could explain why the district may be falling short in its most basic duty:
To provide all children significant opportunity to receive a fair, equitable, and high-quality education, and to close educational achievement gaps. — Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)
Without better oversight and greater transparency, there is no way of knowing.
However, we do know that over 75% of MSCS learners failed to meet grade-level expectations in reading and math, based on the district’s 2025 TCAP scores.
Low literacy is not just a reading, writing and spelling problem, it affects math, and science too.
These outcomes may be reflective of precisely what one would expect from ill-informed decision-making.
Will the district’s implementation of the intervention plan ensure that the intervention is delivered with integrity and fidelity—that is, by teachers who are properly trained to deliver the intervention exactly as the curriculum's authors intend for it to be delivered to students?
Commentary
The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), its Tiers of Evidence framework, and state guidance emphasize the importance of ensuring that educational interventions are implemented correctly—as intended by the author—to ensure they are effective in improving student outcomes.
Does the MSCS decision to invest the “bare minimum” funding level reflect a genuine commitment to granting students with dyslexia and characteristics of dyslexia meaningful access to education—or is this merely an exercise in procedural compliance?
Commentary
Checking boxes to purport state compliance may increase funding for school districts, but procedural compliance alone does not translate into improved literacy outcomes for students.
Students with characteristics of dyslexia—and dyslexia —need teachers who are properly trained to deliver dyslexia-specific instruction and intervention with fidelity. Specially trained educators make the difference.
Moreover, as Mississippi demonstrates, all students benefit when instruction is grounded in multisensory structured literacy and delivered by professionals equipped to implement it with integrity and fidelity.
Read the 2025 Tennessee case, William A. v. Clarksville-Montgomery County School System, to understand the impact that a properly trained instructor can make.
Given the district’s decision to reject expert-led professional development, it is disappointing—but not surprising—that this is the solution they chose: a plan that invests the "bare minimum", reduces teacher training, and restricts access to coaching.
MSCS Director of Curriculum Amy Maples said the district is investing the “bare minimum” funding level for Reading Horizons’ program, which company leaders said cuts out additional training and coaching sessions for school staff.
This does not seem like the recipe for a Memphis Miracle.
When will all MSCS students with characteristics of dyslexia—including those who have never been formally identified or diagnosed with dyslexia—have the opportunity to receive dyslexia-specific instruction and intervention delivered with integrity and fidelity, as required by the Say Dyslexia Law (2016)?
Hopefully the answers to these questions—and more—will be forthcoming soon.
If the basic learning needs of the majority of MSCS students are not met, it does not matter who sits in the seat of Superintendent, or who occupies a seat on the School Board.
Lessons Learned from Mississippi
When we teach in ways that allow dyslexic learners to access literacy, we build strong foundational literacy skills that benefit all students. Dyslexia-specific instruction is not a compromise—it is a catalyst. If we get it right for dyslexic learners, we will get it right for most all learners.
— Dyslexic Minds 901
Report abuse