This story was produced as part of ThreeSixty Journalism’s 2026 Capitol Reporting Workshop for Minnesota youth, with financial support from the Saint Paul & Minnesota Foundation.
For Hennepin County Commissioner and former Minnesota State Representative Heather Edelson, the struggle for literacy is not merely a policy debate; it is a deeply personal mission. Growing up, Edelson battled dyslexia, a learning disability that turned the simple act of reading into an exhausting, uphill climb.
“I didn’t really read well until probably late middle school,” Edelson recalled. “It was really challenging.” Her childhood experience—marked by the isolation of feeling left behind while peers moved forward—serves as the emotional and intellectual bedrock of a legislative movement that has fundamentally reshaped how Minnesota’s children are taught to read.
Today, Minnesota stands at a pivotal juncture. As the state grapples with declining literacy rates and a polarized political climate, the implementation of the Reading to Ensure Academic Development (READ) Act has become the centerpiece of an ambitious effort to modernize classroom instruction. Yet, as the law moves into its second phase, the path forward remains fraught with debate over the most effective way to help the state’s most vulnerable readers.
The Literacy Gap: A Decade of Decline
The urgency behind the READ Act is rooted in sobering data. According to statistics from Compass Education, Minnesota has seen a steady, concerning erosion in student performance. Since 2013, literacy proficiency rates for third graders—a critical milestone for future academic success—have plummeted from approximately 56% to roughly 46%.
This decline did not occur in a vacuum. Educational experts point to a variety of factors, ranging from the disruption of the COVID-19 pandemic to the long-standing debate over pedagogical approaches. For years, many schools relied on the "balanced literacy" model, which emphasized exposure to books and contextual guessing. However, cognitive science has increasingly pushed for a "structured literacy" approach, which focuses on explicit, systematic instruction in phonics and the mechanics of language.
Edelson’s entry into the Minnesota House of Representatives in 2018 provided her with the platform to challenge the status quo. She quickly identified a flaw in the state’s previous flagship policy, the "Read Well by Third Grade" law. Edelson argued that the policy was too narrow, focusing exclusively on third-grade outcomes rather than fostering a comprehensive, longitudinal approach to literacy development that begins in early childhood and persists through the middle school years.
Chronology of a Legislative Overhaul
The path to the READ Act was accelerated by a shift in the state’s political landscape. Following the 2022 midterm elections, the Democratic-Farmer-Labor (DFL) party gained full control of the state government, creating a window of opportunity to push through sweeping educational reforms.
Edelson partnered with Sen. Erin Maye Quade, DFL-Apple Valley, to craft the original READ Act. During the drafting phase, the scope of the legislation expanded beyond pure phonics. Teachers raised concerns about the lack of cultural competency in existing curricula, noting that textbooks often featured inaccurate or stereotypical depictions of African American and Native American children. The lawmakers aimed to integrate evidence-based literacy instruction while ensuring that the materials provided to students were both accurate and representative.
In 2023, Gov. Tim Walz signed the first version of the READ Act into law, backed by a $70 million appropriation designed to help schools transition to evidence-based programs and provide teachers with rigorous training in structured literacy.
However, the legislative process did not end there. Recognizing that the implementation of such a massive systemic shift required nuance, Edelson and Maye Quade engaged in an iterative process. After receiving feedback from educators across the state, they introduced "READ Act 2.0" in 2024. This updated version doubled down on teacher support, providing additional funding specifically targeted at professional development to ensure that educators were not just provided with new materials, but were also equipped with the science-based knowledge necessary to use them effectively.
Inside the Classroom: The Impact of Science-Based Literacy
The transition to the READ Act has been met with optimism by many educators who felt that previous methods left them without the right tools to support struggling readers.
Julie Cronin, a second-grade teacher in the Robbinsdale school district, has seen firsthand how structured literacy can transform a classroom. Under the new guidelines, teachers are utilizing programs like Bridge to Read and LETRS (Language Essentials for Teachers of Reading and Spelling). These programs move away from rote memorization and toward the technical mechanics of word study—teaching students how to decompose words, understand phonemic patterns, and decode unfamiliar terms with precision.
“They get it. They get the rules,” Cronin said of her students.
The sentiment is echoed in the halls of the State Capitol. Sen. Steve Cwodzinski, a DFLer from Eden Prairie and chair of the Senate Education Policy Committee, has made it a point to visit classrooms to observe the implementation of the law. His anecdotal evidence suggests a positive trajectory. “When we visit grade schools and you see the kids reading words that I didn’t know until I was in college, it’s kind of amazing, so it’s working,” Cwodzinski said.
The Pushback: Partisan Tensions and the Retention Debate
Despite the positive reception from many in the teaching community, the READ Act remains a flashpoint for debate. Republican lawmakers have expressed skepticism about the current trajectory, arguing that the law lacks sufficient accountability measures for students who continue to fall behind.
Sens. Michael Holmstrom, Jordan Rasmusson, and Julia Coleman have introduced the "READ Act Interventions bill." This proposal seeks to tighten the reins on student progress by requiring public schools to develop individualized learning plans for any student who fails to meet grade-level reading benchmarks. Most controversially, the bill would mandate that schools consider holding students back a grade if it is determined to be in the “student’s best interest.”
Holmstrom contends that the current system is failing students by promoting them through grades without the foundational skills necessary to handle the increasing complexity of schoolwork. “They’re not going to keep up if we let them,” Holmstrom said, noting that he has spoken with teachers who believe retention should be a more readily available tool in their intervention toolbox.
However, this proposal has met with fierce resistance from the DFL and many educators who view grade retention as a relic of an outdated educational philosophy.
Mackenzie Mohen-VonAhnen, a teacher at Centennial Elementary in Richfield, argues that the psychological and social costs of holding a child back far outweigh the perceived academic benefits. “That would be harmful for students, you know, like, mentally and socially,” Mohen-VonAhnen said.
Edelson, drawing on her own childhood, remains staunchly opposed to mandatory retention. She noted that she was held back in third grade, an experience she described as a formative struggle that she deliberately chose to exclude from the original READ Act. She argues that the focus should remain on high-quality instruction and early intervention rather than punitive measures that can damage a student’s confidence.
Implications for Minnesota’s Future
The disagreement over the READ Act interventions represents a broader, entrenched division within the Minnesota Legislature. As the state government remains narrowly divided, the prospects for the proposed GOP changes are currently dim. Many political analysts suggest that the bill is unlikely to gain enough traction to pass during this session.
Yet, the debate highlights the ongoing challenge of achieving educational equity. While the READ Act has successfully shifted the focus toward evidence-based instruction, the "literacy gap" is a complex, multifaceted problem that cannot be solved by a single piece of legislation.
For students like the ones Edelson once was, the stakes could not be higher. The success of the READ Act will ultimately be measured not just in dollars appropriated or the number of teacher training modules completed, but in the long-term reading proficiency of Minnesota’s youth.
As the state moves forward, the tension between structural reform and individual support will continue to define the legislative agenda. For now, Minnesota is committed to an evidence-based future, with educators, lawmakers, and families watching closely to see if this new approach can finally turn the tide on a decade of declining scores. Whether the READ Act will be remembered as the definitive solution or merely one step in a much longer journey remains to be seen, but one thing is clear: the conversation around literacy in Minnesota has been permanently, and perhaps necessarily, altered.
