HB 1832
In CommitteeHouse
Student performance
Improving student performance and success.
This status may be delayed. See Action History below for the latest updates.
How does a bill become law?
- Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
- Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
- Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
- Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
- Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
- Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
AI Analysis
The bill establishes new funding, accountability, and instructional requirements to improve student performance in reading and math, especially for students not meeting grade-level standards. It creates incentives for educator performance, mandates structured literacy instruction aligned with the science of reading, and tightens third-grade reading promotion policies.
- Establishes a new $250-per-eligible-student funding formula for school districts to support students not meeting academic standards in math and English language arts, calculated based on prior-year assessment performance.
- Creates achievement-based bonuses of up to $12,000 per full-time equivalent staff for educators in districts that meet specific assessment growth thresholds (e.g., 3% growth in 2025–26, 8% in 2027–28, or 80% proficiency by 2029–30).
- Launches the READ (Reading to Ensure Academic Development) grant program, awarding up to 125 grants of up to $75,000 per year for four years to elementary schools with high percentages of struggling readers, to fund reading coaches.
- Requires all school districts to implement a structured literacy program by 2027–28 that includes the five pillars of reading (phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, comprehension), prohibits the three-cueing (MSV) method, and mandates teacher training on evidence-based literacy instruction.
- Strengthens third-grade reading promotion requirements: students must meet grade-level standards, pass an alternative assessment, or demonstrate proficiency via a portfolio to advance to fourth grade, with good-cause exemptions for English learners and students with disabilities.
- Updates teacher endorsement and renewal standards to include structured literacy training, and requires mentor educators and teacher preparation programs to align with new literacy standards by 2027–28.
Who is affected
- School districts — School districts receive new funding to support students not meeting academic standards, and must use it for supplemental supports like reading coaches and interventions.
- Educators (teachers, instructional staff, and support staff) — Educators in districts that meet specific performance growth targets may receive bonuses up to $12,000 per full-time equivalent staff for improving student outcomes.
- Elementary schools — Elementary schools, especially those with high percentages of struggling readers, can apply for grants to hire reading coaches and implement structured literacy programs.
- K–4 students — Students in grades K–4, especially those struggling with reading or math, will receive more targeted, evidence-based instruction and interventions, and third graders must meet certain reading benchmarks to be promoted to fourth grade.
- Teachers and teacher preparation programs — Teachers seeking or renewing reading/literacy endorsements must complete new training on structured literacy, and mentor educators and teacher preparation programs must align with updated standards.
Pro/Con Analysis
Stronger case for benefits
Potential Benefits (5)
The bill establishes $250 per eligible student in supplemental supports — targeted specifically to students not meeting academic standards — and funds it through the learning assistance program, ensuring that resources flow to the students most in need of academic intervention.
EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 2(1)The READ grant program provides up to $75,000/year for four years to elementary schools with high percentages of struggling readers, with priority for schools serving the most vulnerable students — enabling hiring of reading coaches and evidence-based interventions that directly benefit K–4 students in high-need schools.
EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 4The ban on the three-cueing (MSV) method and requirement for structured literacy aligned with the science of reading ensures all students receive explicit, systematic phonics instruction — a proven approach that particularly benefits students with dyslexia and other reading disabilities.
EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 9(4)Mandatory structured literacy training for teachers seeking or renewing literacy endorsements — and for mentor educators and teacher prep programs — raises instructional quality across the board, especially for new and frontline educators serving K–4 students.
EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 10 & Sec. 11The bill strengthens mentor educator qualifications by requiring literacy training for mentors with literacy-related assignments — improving the quality of induction support for new teachers and promoting retention of effective educators in high-need schools.
EducationLean peopleRef: Sec. 19(1)(a)
Potential Concerns (5)
The bill prohibits collective bargaining over educator bonus distribution, overriding existing labor rights under chapter 41.59 RCW and undermining district-level negotiation processes. This weakens teacher union authority and sets a precedent for bypassing negotiated compensation structures, potentially eroding trust and morale among staff.
Business & EmploymentIndustryRef: Sec. 3(2)(c)The $12,000 per FTE bonus cap is structured so that only districts achieving significant assessment growth (e.g., 8% in 2027–28 or 80% proficiency by 2029–30) qualify for bonuses — a threshold that disproportionately benefits high-performing, wealthier districts. Districts serving high-poverty or high-need student populations are less likely to meet these targets, entrenching inequity in bonus access.
Business & EmploymentIndustryRef: Sec. 3(2)(b)The bill ties educator bonuses to standardized test growth thresholds, which may incentivize teaching to the test, narrowing curriculum, and potentially encouraging strategic student placement (e.g., encouraging high-need students to defer testing) to improve district-level metrics — behaviors that undermine authentic learning and long-term student well-being.
Public SafetyIndustryRef: Sec. 3(1)The $250-per-eligible-student funding formula is calculated using prior-year assessment data and total enrollment — not need-based enrollment (e.g., free/reduced-price meal status). This means districts with high concentrations of struggling students may receive insufficient supplemental funding relative to actual need, especially if prior-year performance was poor.
FinancialIndustryRef: Sec. 2(1)(a)-(b)The READ grant priority formula gives highest priority to schools with the highest percentages of students scoring basic or below basic on third-grade ELA — but excludes certain English learners (unless in the program ≥3 years) and some students with disabilities from the calculation. This may misrepresent true need and divert resources away from schools with high populations of newly arrived ELs or students with complex learning profiles.
EducationLean industryRef: Sec. 4(3)(a)
Who Is Most Affected
High-need school districts may receive supplemental funding, but may struggle to meet the high growth thresholds required for educator bonuses. READ grants offer targeted support, but the bonus mechanism may disproportionately benefit higher-performing districts, potentially widening resource gaps.
Teachers in districts meeting growth targets may earn up to $12,000 bonuses, but those in struggling districts may see no financial incentive. The ban on collective bargaining over bonuses undermines union negotiation rights and may reduce teacher autonomy in compensation decisions.
K–4 students, especially those struggling with reading, benefit from structured literacy, reading coaches, and retention policies tied to proficiency — but may face retention without adequate support if districts lack capacity to implement interventions effectively.
Reading coaches and literacy specialists gain new funding and professional development opportunities, but the focus on test-based accountability may increase pressure and narrow instructional focus.
Charter and state-tribal schools are explicitly included in the bill’s requirements and funding, expanding access to structured literacy and supplemental supports — but may face new administrative burdens in compliance and reporting.