The IREAD Assessment and the State Mandated Retention Debate

The IREAD, also known as The Indiana Reading Evaluation and Determination, has sparked controversy this past school year. The IREAD was implemented in 2012, but a new law passed in 2024 that prevents students from advancing to fourth grade if they fail the assessment, has numerous parents and educators now considering it a high-stakes assessment.

What is the IREAD:

The IREAD is a computerized assessment that measures foundational reading skills based on third grade Indiana Academic Standards. The test is untimed and takes students around two hours to complete about 40 multiple choice questions. The broad content categories assessed include: reading foundations such as distinguishing initial, medial, and ending sounds, the knowledge of long and short vowel sounds, reading vocabulary, and comprehension of both nonfiction and literature passages. The comprehension standards measured include determining main idea, text features, retell, theme, making inferences, story structure, and making predictions about text.

The Indiana Department of Education (IDOE) recommends the test be completed over the course of two school days. Results are typically available within 24 hours of test completion. Students must receive a score of 446 to pass.

When it is Administered:

This IREAD is first administered in second grade. If students do not pass, they must retake the assessment until they reach seventh grade. But there’s a catch. If students do not pass the IREAD in third grade, they will be retained if they do not qualify for the Good Cause Exemption (GCE). At this time, only students with active IEPs, students who are English learners, or those who have been previously retained twice qualify for this exemption. Students who do not pass are provided reading remediation and interventions including summer school.

Why it’s Controversial:

In 2023, state legislation mandated future Indiana educators to obtain an early literacy endorsement. Indiana Code (IC) 20-28-5-19.7 mandates current educators renewing their license to get their literacy endorsement by 2027. This is a three year window after the 2023 law’s passage. The retention policy was introduced after structured literacy laws hit the state of Indiana. If not all teachers have this new literacy endorsement, how can we guarantee they are teaching reading based on science of reading principles? Are we retaining students prior to all teachers having this literacy endorsement?

Indiana law has also mandated the use of curriculum that is aligned with the science of reading. This law states schools may not adopt curriculum that is based on the three-cueing model. But how are we determining whether teachers really are following science of reading principles? I constantly hear from parents of students I work with that their child is memorizing leveled readers and is encouraged to guess at words based on pictures. Three-queuing has been outlawed, but students are still receiving balanced literacy instruction. If educators do not have their literacy endorsement or training in structured literacy, how can we ethically retain students?

It’s Been Done Before:

Indiana is one of the states following in Florida’s and Mississippi's footsteps. Florida has had a similar retention policy in effect since 2003. Studies found that students in Florida who were retained did have initial gains in achievement, but within five years they were not doing better than their peers (Briggs, 2013). Studies have shown this temporary increase in achievement coincides with a loss of achievement over time as these retained students fall even more behind their peers (Briggs, 2013). Although students retained under this policy did have initial gains, it is important to note that Florida schools also moved their best teachers to kindergarten, first, and second grade (Briggs, 2013). Mississippi has also admitted that retention is not a part of their program to improve early literacy (Skiba et al., 2024).

The Research on Retention:

There have been numerous studies demonstrating the negative social-emotional and academic outcomes of students who are retained (Schwartz, 2022). Retention has shown to lower student’s self esteem, damage peer relationships, increase the likelihood of dropping out of school, and prolong a student’s sense of failure (Briggs, 2013). Students of color and those from low-income homes have worse outcomes and higher risks (Skiba et al., 2024). Not only is retention detrimental to students, but it costs America over $12 billion every year.

Last school year 87.3% of Indiana third graders passed the IREAD assessment (Smith, 2025). This was the largest improvement since 2013, and occurred before the retention law took effect. If this many students passed just based on Indiana’s increase in interventions and before all teachers have their literacy endorsement, then why the added stress of a retention law? With these trends, current remediation and interventions seem to be effective. Studies suggest retention in Indiana could cost the state over $105 million a year (Skiba et al., 2024). We already know that statistically, 88% of third graders who fail to read proficiently never catch up to their peers (Boyle, 2025). Wouldn’t it be more cost effective to spend this money on teacher education and additional positions to support literacy interventions and screening in the early grades?

Final Thoughts:

Retention is not only an ineffective intervention, but has negative long term effects for students and costs the state millions. Signs of reading difficulties appear early on, and 90% of these struggling readers can reach grade level if offered interventions by 1st grade (Torgesen, 1998). As Briggs (2013) suggests, “ the answer is most frequently found by examining the root of the problem- in this case, underachievement- and not by placing a bandage over the wound.” Wouldn’t it be a better solution to intervene early?

Sources:

Boyle, A. (2025). 88% never catch up: The alarming truth about third grade reading. https://readablenglish.com/blog/the-alarming-truth-about-third-grade-reading

Briggs, S. (2013). The effects of mandatory retention and its use across the globe. http://www.opencolleges.edu.au/informed/features/mandatory-retention/

Indiana General Assembly. (n.d.). https://iga.in.gov/legislative/2023/bills/house/1558/details

Schwartz, S. (2022). What does research say about grade retention? A few key studies to know.

Education Week. https://www.edweek.org/leadership/what-does-research-say-about- grade-retention-a-few-key-studies-to-know/2022/11

Skiba, R., Scheurich, J. J. “Jim,” & Murphy, H. (2024). Third grade retention: To understand its effects, look at all the Data. Indiana Capital Chronicle.

https://indianacapitalchronicle.com/2024/01/25/third-grade-retention-to-understand- its-effects-look-at-all-the-data/

Smith, C. (2025). Indiana sees historic jump in third grade reading scores; retention data still pending. Indiana Capital Chronicle. https://indianacapitalchronicle.com/2025/08/13/indiana- sees-historic-jump-in-third- grade-reading-scores-retention-data-still-pending/

The Indiana Department of Education (IDOE). (2024). IREAD-3 for educators. DOE. https://www.in.gov/doe/students/assessment/iread-3-for-educators

Torgesen, J. (1998). Catch Them Before They Fall: Identification and Assessment to Prevent Reading Failure in Young Children. https://www.aft.org/sites/default/files/torgesen.pdf