“What should I stop doing to make room for it?”

That’s the question classroom educators like me ask every time another requirement is added to an already full school day.

Over the years, I’ve taught in several settings, most recently, last year, as a second grade teacher. My experience also includes reading intervention and curriculum development, and I have a master’s degree in education.

I believe that, after investing so heavily in teacher training, Utah’s next investment should be building teachers’ capacity to put that training into practice.

In 2022, the Utah Legislature passed SB127 — Early Literacy Outcomes Improvement. It stated that, by July 1, 2027, 70% of third graders would be reading on grade level.

As a second grade teacher, that 70% goal was hard for me to ignore. Student literacy outcomes were a constant focus. We discussed them repeatedly in professional development. We did progress monitoring weekly to measure student’s growth and had weekly discussions on their progress. We knew exactly what the expectation was.

It probably goes without saying, but educators want students to read on grade-level. We do not need to be convinced of the importance of teaching our students how to read; we see the consequences every day. We understand the widening divide between students who can read and those that cannot. We want nothing but the best for them. But agreeing on the goal is different than having the capacity to meet it.

In order to achieve 70% of third graders reading on grade-level by 2027, SB127 stated that K-3 teachers would need training in the science of reading, a collection of research that helps teachers understand how children learn to read and which teaching methods work best. By September 2023, the Utah State Board of Education reported that 10,000+ teachers had already completed, or were on their way to complete, more than 150+ hours of that training.

It’s no surprise teachers answered the call. We invested hundreds of hours in training to prepare ourselves in what research showed was the most effective methods in reading instruction.

Unfortunately, because it didn’t seem like Utah was going to meet the goal, lawmakers adjusted the goal from 2027 to 2030 with SB241. They also increased the expected percentage of third graders reading on level from 70% to 80%. Students who did not meet the necessary criteria in third grade could potentially be retained and not move on to the next grade.

As I read the bill and wondered what more could be different from the previous bill, I was surprised to see that teachers would be expected to complete even more training.

I never left any training thinking, “This won’t work.” I left thinking, “This will absolutely help my students.” But I always found myself asking the painful question: “What will I stop doing to make room for it?”

The answer was never obvious. Every part of my day already served a purpose, nearly every minute was accounted for with specials, intervention blocks and required instructional minutes. I used the district curriculum. I followed the scripted programs. I even invited district level coaches to watch me teach.

When I spent more time teaching vowel teams, something else received less attention. When I pulled a struggling reader for extra practice, another student waited another day for help.

I was being asked to look for trade-offs in my day.

I’m not the only educator wrestling with this. I asked colleagues in my school or across the district what they were doing, and the conversations all followed a familiar pattern.

We’ve compared schedules, brainstormed ideas and shared works in our classrooms. Sometimes those conversations gave me a strategy I can actually use. But we often arrived at the same conclusion: There simply isn’t enough time to do everything well.

At the beginning of my career, I worked at a charter school teaching 2nd grade. K-3 had one part-time aide for each grade level. That extra set of trained hands didn’t replace me as the teacher, it multiplied what I was able to accomplish. She would do small groups, run flashcards and repeated readings, and progress monitoring our students.

The good news is that SB241 includes funding for literacy paraprofessionals, but it stops short of ensuring that every K-3 classroom has consistent access to another trained adult. From my experience, that kind of day-to-day support would have done more to improve literacy instruction than another round of professional development. If implementation is the goal, that’s where Utah’s greatest return on investment will be: increasing classroom capacity for success.

Utah’s teachers aren’t asking for lower expectations. We share the goal of helping every child become a proficient reader. But before lawmakers require another training or another initiative, I hope they’ll ask themselves the same question teachers have been asking for years: “What should teachers stop doing to make room for it?”

After investing so heavily in teacher training, Utah’s next investment should be giving teachers the capacity to put that training into practice.

Rhiannon Longstaff has a master’s degree in education from the University of Utah. She is a teacher and public education advocate.

The Salt Lake Tribune is committed to creating a space where Utahns can share ideas, perspectives and solutions that move our state forward. We rely on your insight to do this. Find out how to share your opinion here, and email us at voices@sltrib.com.