Leana  Malinowsky has been an elementary educator teaching since 2008. She is a Certified Structured Literacy Dyslexia Specialist (C-SLDS) through CERI. Ms. Malinowsky is the 2023 Middlesex County NJ Teacher of the Year, and is a member of the JerseyCAN Fellowship 2024-2025.

Current scores for New Jersey students in reading show that 33% of fourth graders scored at or below the basic level in reading. The responsibility mainly falls on school districts, leaders, and teachers to implement effective practices in literacy instruction. But the question is, who is responsible for preparing teachers to have the knowledge and skills needed to successfully teach literacy in the classroom? Educator preparation programs have a responsibility to teacher candidates, families, schools, and students to prepare future educators for literacy instruction and are the key to teacher readiness. Now is the time for them to improve their programming for teacher success. 

A 2023 study from the National Council of Teacher Quality (NCTQ), reported that only 25% of teacher preparation programs adequately cover all five core components of scientifically based reading instruction. In New Jersey, 50% of educator preparation programs address none of the five components of literacy (phonological/phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, comprehension) only 10% address three. Beginning in September 2025, to become a teacher for elementary students, teacher candidates must complete at least 12 credits in foundational skills. This is a moment in time for educator preparation programs to structure their programs to include courses on the five components and focus on evidence-based strategies to ensure every future teacher is prepared to effectively teach students how to read. 

I have been a teacher in the New Jersey public school system for 17 years.  Upon reflection, I could have been better prepared when I first started. A strong educator preparation program in literacy could have improved my ability to meet the needs of my students, deliver effective practices from the start, and increase my confidence in teaching reading. Many of my colleagues have shared similar points of view, including one with 32 years of teaching experience; “The fact that I can teach reading with some degree of confidence today has little to do with what I learned in my formal teacher training program, and a lot to do with steps I took later in my career to become a more effective teacher.” 

The training we received resulted in students not reading well (and independently,) and feeling frustrated by not having adequate training on how to teach reading. Living these results and having the need to make a positive change has been my inspiration to invest in my own professional learning. I earned my Structured Literacy Dyslexia Specialist (CSLDS) certification, which included in-depth training and various other workshops which have improved my ability to teach reading in the classroom. It also heightened my awareness of what I was lacking, allowing me to focus on those specific skills. My story is no different from many other educators who have also chosen to pursue the knowledge and training on their own, knowing educator preparation programs should have properly prepared us all from the start. Pre-service teachers need this training within their program, not as a supplemental, self-driven option. 

Educator preparation programs offer opportunities for teacher candidates to access research and understand the processes by which the brain learns to read. Future teachers should look for a program that includes courses teaching structured literacy: instruction that is explicit and direct, using a scope and sequence, as well as seeing samples of programs that school districts are using. Teacher candidates need to have professors who are well-trained in best practices and know how to teach these foundational skills, which is often not the case. Two schools, Ohio State University and Lesley University in Boston, admit to teaching literacy based on the theories of Fountas and Pinnell, which have been proven ineffective. Instead of focusing on philosophy, educator preparation programs need to refocus their work on what standards their candidates must meet for licensure, based on scientific research. 

The good news is that model programs do exist that NJ schools can look at when redesigning their programs, focusing on the new requirements.  For example, Mount Saint Joseph University in Cincinnati, Ohio has taken steps forward to develop a process to train higher education staff on best literacy practices. Creating a safe space for faculty to learn is emphasized, so the focus can remain on improving programming for future teachers. Other programs, such as University of  Tennessee- Martin, have made it a point to partner with districts who are selecting curriculum that align with updated state standards for literacy, so future educators have access to these programs before they enter the classroom, and they get to learn beside current practicing educators through class visits and discussions. Current practicing educators who have received training should be part of this process of disseminating knowledge. Who better to train future educators than those already in the field? If these programs can take this leap of faith, others can too.

Higher education leaders are charged with making changes that affect reading outcomes, which is why it’s important for them to develop and improve programs that will ensure all candidates attending their institution feel secure in their training. There’s no room for error when it comes to teacher training. The future of literacy depends on the present actions of educator preparation programs and the pathway they create for teachers to be successful teachers of literacy in the classroom.