Analyst Brief September 14, 2026

H.R. 7890 — Science of Reading Act of 2026, as amended

Current Status

Reported by Committee

Executive Summary

H.R. 7890, the 'Science of Reading Act of 2026,' amends the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) to shift federal literacy funding away from debunked reading methods and toward evidence-based phonics instruction. Specifically, it prohibits the use of the 'three-cueing model'—which relies on context and pictures for word recognition—in comprehensive literacy instruction. By prioritizing Comprehensive Literacy State Development Grants for programs aligned with the 'science of reading,' the bill aims to address stagnant national reading scores and ensure federal dollars support proven instructional methods without establishing a direct federal curriculum mandate.

Bill Data

Primary Sponsor

Rep. Houchin

Bill Number

H.R. 7890

Session

119th

Co-Sponsors

Rep. MannionRep. KileyRep. Foxx
View on Congress.gov ↗

Arguments For

  • Argument 1: Addresses a critical national issue (declining reading proficiency) by tying federal funding to scientifically backed instructional methods, capitalizing on a growing state-level movement to ban 'balanced literacy' approaches.
  • Argument 2: Provides political cover by explicitly prohibiting federal curriculum mandates, appealing to conservative principles of local control while still steering federal dollars effectively toward evidence-based practices.

Likely Supporters

Dyslexia advocacy groups (e.g., Decoding Dyslexia)Education reform organizationsParents' rights groups

Arguments Against

  • Argument 1: Opponents will argue this is federal overreach into local classroom instruction, effectively blacklisting specific teaching methods and dictating pedagogy from Washington despite the rule of construction.
  • Argument 2: Implementation risk: States and districts heavily invested in balanced literacy curricula will face significant transition costs and administrative burdens to overhaul their programs to maintain grant eligibility.

Likely Opponents

Teachers' unions (NEA, AFT)Balanced literacy curriculum publishersLocal control advocates

📋 Key Provisions

  • Excludes the 'three-cueing model' (using context, pictures, or syntax for word recognition) from the statutory definition of comprehensive literacy instruction.
  • Defines the 'science of reading' as an interdisciplinary body of evidence-based research emphasizing phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary, fluency, comprehension, and writing.
  • Requires State applications for Comprehensive Literacy State Development Grants to detail how their literacy plans align with the science of reading.
  • Prioritizes federal literacy grants and subgrants (from birth through grade 12) for programs that are aligned with the science of reading.
  • Includes a rule of construction clarifying that the Act does not authorize federal control over specific state or local curricula, nor does it alter IDEA or ADA protections.
search Verification Guide BETA expand_more

Don't trust AI? Don't worry, neither do I. Verify the claims yourself.

Claim Analysis Page 3, Line 17

Excludes the three-cueing model from comprehensive literacy instruction.

Verify Text

"does not include the use of a three-cueing model."

Claim Analysis Page 3, Line 24

Defines the science of reading to include phonemic awareness and phonics.

Verify Text

"identifies instruction in phonemic awareness, phonics"

Claim Analysis Page 4, Line 13

Defines the three-cueing model as using context or pictures for word recognition.

Verify Text

"uses meaning drawn from context, pic-"

Claim Analysis Page 6, Line 20

Prohibits the federal government from mandating specific curricula.

Verify Text

"authorize any officer or employee of the Fed-"