AN ACT TO AUTHORIZE THE MISSISSIPPI DYSLEXIA INSTITUTE TO ESTABLISH A STRUCTURED LITERACY PILOT PROGRAM; TO PROVIDE REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY; TO ESTABLISH AN EVIDENCE-BASED ALTERNATIVE TO GRADE RETENTION ALIGNED WITH MISSISSIPPI'S THIRD GRADE READING GATE STATUTES; TO IMPROVE IDENTIFICATION AND REMEDIATION OF DYSLEXIA; TO ESTABLISH PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS; TO REQUIRE ACCOUNTABILITY AND REPORTING; TO DEVELOP AN ORTON-GILLINGHAM STRUCTURED LITERACY PROGRAM WITH A TEACHER TRAINING COMPONENT; AND FOR RELATED PURPOSES.
Summary
HB1705 authorizes the Mississippi Dyslexia Institute to create and administer a three-year Structured Literacy Pilot Program, with a possible three-year extension if the Legislature approves. The bill is aimed at students with low reading performance or clinically identified dyslexia, including students who would otherwise be retained under Mississippi’s Third Grade Reading Gate. It allows participation in the pilot to count as a good-faith reading intervention for compliance with existing reading-gate remediation requirements.
The bill defines structured literacy as explicit, systematic, cumulative, diagnostic, and prescriptive instruction aligned with Orton-Gillingham principles. It also directs the Institute to develop a Mississippi-created Orton-Gillingham structured literacy program that includes teacher training and is designed for statewide replication. The pilot is limited to 80 students statewide and may include partnerships with low-performing public school districts with high retention rates in grades K-4.
Impact
HB1705 would create a new statutory pilot program within the Mississippi Dyslexia Institute and carve out an evidence-based alternative to grade retention under the Third Grade Reading Gate statutes. It would not repeal the reading-gate law, but it would treat participation in the pilot as an approved remediation option, potentially affecting how schools and districts satisfy existing promotion and intervention requirements for struggling readers. The bill also authorizes reduced regulatory barriers for the pilot, requires annual reporting to the Legislature, and ties funding to the per-pupil cost of retention, which could influence future appropriations and statewide dyslexia intervention policy.
Sentiment
The bill’s framing is strongly supportive of structured literacy and dyslexia-specific intervention, and the text reflects a clear policy preference for remediation over retention. Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, there is no direct evidence of opposition or support from legislators in the available context. Based on the bill language alone, the measure appears designed to appeal to education reform and literacy advocates by emphasizing evidence-based instruction, accountability, and cost savings.
Contention
The main points of potential contention are the bill’s use of a clinical model for identifying dyslexia, the requirement that a multidisciplinary team include a Certified Academic Language Therapist, and the provision allowing the pilot to serve as an alternative to retention under the Third Grade Reading Gate. Some stakeholders may question whether the pilot’s small scale, limited to 80 students, is sufficient to justify statutory change, while others may be concerned about reduced regulatory barriers in instructional delivery, staffing, materials, technology, and facilities. Another likely issue is whether the Mississippi Dyslexia Institute should be given this role instead of local districts or the state education agency, and whether the proposed funding structure and projected savings are realistic.