茄子视频

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

A lawsuit filed in Massachusetts state court accuses famous literacy specialists Lucy Calkins, Irene Fountas, and Gay Su Pinnell and their publisher Heinemann of pushing reading curriculums they knew didn鈥檛 work.

Adopting a consumer protection approach, the lawsuit charges the curriculum authors with 鈥渄eceptive and fraudulent marketing.鈥� The filing alleges they willfully ignored decades of research into more effective practices and used shoddy studies to prop up their own work, then charged school districts for updates when they were forced to admit their materials were not effective.

鈥淭hink about that: If your car is broken, and it鈥檚 the fault of the manufacturer, the manufacturer recalls the part and fixes it,鈥� said attorney Ben Elga, the lead attorney for the plaintiffs. 鈥淭hey do not charge you for their failure. It鈥檚 outrageous.鈥�

The lawsuit also names Heinemann parent company HMH, previously known as Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, and Teachers College at Columbia University.

The plaintiffs, who are seeking class action status and inviting other families to join the lawsuit, are two Massachusetts families whose children struggled to learn to read. One of the parent plaintiffs, Karrie Conley, said in the lawsuit that due to her school district using Calkins鈥� Units of Study curriculum, she had to spend more on private school tuition and reading tutors for two of her children than she spent to send her older child to college.

鈥淣othing is more painful than trying to help them, but not knowing how,鈥� she said in a Wednesday press conference announcing the lawsuit. 鈥淪o many times I鈥檝e asked myself, How did it get like this? I trusted that when I was sending my children off to school, they were getting instruction that had been tested and proven effective. I trusted that these so-called experts were actually experts.鈥�

The lawsuit comes as many states are overhauling their approach to reading instruction to better align with decades of research into how children learn. What鈥檚 known as calls for explicit phonics instruction that helps students connect letters and sounds, as well as texts that help students build the background knowledge to understand what they read.

Calkins鈥� Units of Study curriculum and Fountas and Pinnell鈥檚 Leveled Literacy Intervention and other materials instead relied on exposure to books and promoted discredited methods such as three-cueing, in which students use the first letter of a word and various context clues, including pictures, to guess what a word might be.

These curriculums were widely used in American schools, with Calkins in particular achieving near legendary status among teachers. Critics say these instructional methods are largely to blame for American students鈥� low rates of reading proficiency. Journalist Emily Hanford鈥檚 and her podcast helped push these pedagogical debates into the public eye.

Calkins later and changed Units of Study to include more phonics instruction. But . Units of Study was once the , but the nation鈥檚 largest school system . Last year, Teachers College .

Fountas and Pinnell, meanwhile, have .

A lawsuit represents one perspective on a complaint. Representatives of Heinemann, Teachers College, and Calkins, Fountas, and Pinnell could not be reached for comment Wednesday. Heinemann has .

Dozens of states have adopted new curriculum standards that , but others, including Massachusetts, have not.

Elga, the lead attorney and founding executive director of , has a background in consumer protection and antitrust cases. He said he believes this is the first time that a consumer protection approach has been used to advance an education policy agenda.

鈥淐onsumer law is very broad, so there are a lot of cases that challenge products that don鈥檛 do what they say they should do or are marketed in a deceptive way,鈥� he said. 鈥淭his is the first case we鈥檙e aware of applying those laws to this type of product.鈥�

The lawsuit is seeking unspecified damages and injunctive relief, including that the defendants provide an early literacy curriculum that reflects the science of reading at no charge.

Families have previously sued states and school districts over rock-bottom literacy rates, alleging that government entities have failed in their obligation to meet students鈥� basic educational needs. These and that sent millions of dollars to districts with low reading levels but without mandates on how to teach reading.

Elga said he sees school districts as victims alongside students.

鈥淚t鈥檚 our contention that one of the major problems here is that the school districts have been the victims of this faulty marketing,鈥� he said. 鈥淪o we wanted to bring a case that challenged the people who were actually distributing these types of materials.鈥�

This story was originally published by Chalkbeat. Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news site covering educational change in public schools. Sign up for their newsletters at .

Did you use this article in your work?

We鈥檇 love to hear how The 74鈥檚 reporting is helping educators, researchers, and policymakers.