HB 307 revises Georgia’s early literacy laws to create a more prescriptive statewide framework for identifying and supporting K-3 students who are significantly at risk of not reading at grade level or who show characteristics of dyslexia. The bill renames and expands the Georgia Early Literacy and Dyslexia Act, defines key terms such as dyslexia, structured literacy, science of reading, three-cueing, universal reading screener, and tiered reading intervention plan, and requires the State Board of Education and Department of Education to adopt rules, approve high-quality instructional materials, and maintain approved screening tools. It also requires annual screening of K-3 students, written parent notification, individualized intervention/support plans, teacher training in science of reading and structured literacy, and annual reporting on implementation and outcomes.
The bill also bars public schools from using or promoting the three-cueing model in foundational reading instruction for kindergarten through third grade and prohibits instructional materials or interventions that rely on that model. It requires schools to certify their instructional materials as high-quality, report dyslexia-related identification data, and provide parent-facing information and home strategies. The bill further establishes a Georgia Literacy Coach Coordinating Committee within the Office of Student Achievement, expands the Georgia Council on Literacy to include adult literacy, extends the council’s sunset date to 2030, and makes related compensation and reimbursement changes. It repeals an existing dyslexia screening/pilot provision and makes conforming changes across the education code.
In practical terms, HB 307 would significantly affect state education policy, local school systems, and public schools by imposing statewide screening, intervention, training, and reporting requirements for early literacy. It also affects the Department of Education, the State Board of Education, the Office of Student Achievement, the Georgia Council on Literacy, teachers, parents, and students in kindergarten through third grade, especially students with reading difficulties or dyslexia-related characteristics. The bill expressly states that it does not alter federal IDEA or Section 504 protections and is not subject to certain school-system waivers.
The overall sentiment reflected in the voting history is strongly supportive and bipartisan: the bill passed the House 166-0, passed the Senate substitute 55-0, and the House then agreed to the Senate substitute 167-0. No committee transcript excerpts were provided, but the unanimous votes suggest broad agreement on the need to strengthen early literacy intervention and dyslexia-related supports. The bill’s structure also indicates a policy preference for evidence-based reading instruction and standardized screening across the state.
The main points of contention embedded in the text are policy rather than partisan: the bill explicitly rejects the three-cueing model and visual-memory-based word-reading instruction, which may be controversial among educators or districts that have used those approaches. It also imposes new mandates on schools and local systems, including screening, reporting, teacher training, and parent notification, which could raise implementation and funding concerns. The bill anticipates that issue by requiring schools that claim insufficient funding to notify the department and describe efforts to secure other funding sources.
HB 307 amends Title 20 of the Georgia Code to create a more detailed statewide early literacy and dyslexia framework. It changes the duties of the State Board of Education, Department of Education, local school systems, and public schools by requiring approved high-quality instructional materials, universal reading screeners, tiered intervention plans, parent notifications, teacher training, and annual reporting. It also repeals Code Section 20-2-159.6, revises the Georgia Council on Literacy statutes, adds the Georgia Literacy Coach Coordinating Committee, extends the council’s repeal date to 2030, and adds the council to the state expense-reimbursement statute.
The bill appears to have broad, bipartisan support and little recorded opposition. It passed the House and Senate unanimously, including unanimous House agreement to the Senate substitute. The available record suggests consensus around improving early reading outcomes, using the science of reading, and expanding support for students with dyslexia or reading deficiencies.
The principal policy dispute is the bill’s rejection of the three-cueing model and related visual-memory approaches, which it bars from K-3 foundational reading instruction and from qualifying as high-quality instructional materials. Another likely area of concern is implementation burden: the bill adds statewide screening, reporting, training, and intervention mandates that may require resources, staffing, and local system adjustments. The bill addresses funding concerns by requiring schools that lack sufficient funding to notify the department and document efforts to obtain alternative funding, indicating that resource availability is a recognized issue.