Reading Literacy

Issue 3 of 4

Challengers — New Methodology Needed

Formal Proposal Filed

Stuart Willett

Retired Teacher · Current SFSD Substitute

Proposed a structured reading pilot grounded in Krashen's Input Hypothesis — treating reading itself as the curriculum. The pilot targets Grades 4–6 with a five-tier book progression from confidence-builders to challenge reads, two daily hours, and SORA digital delivery. His personal proof: teaching ESL in Taiwan, two students arrived in 6th grade speaking no English. By January they were reading Charlotte's Web and Stuart Little. By spring, motivated by the upcoming Harry Potter film, they read the novel in English — nine months from zero. His point: children who already speak English have an enormous head start. These results are achievable. He also raised a structural argument: a district that fails at literacy has a bureaucratic incentive not to solve the problem, since failure justifies the next budget request.

New Approach

Jean Childs

Former Classroom Teacher · 14-Year GED Instructor

Called literacy the most important challenge facing the district and was unsparing about the results: fewer than 50% of students read at grade level by 6th grade. She pointed to Mississippi as the most compelling proof of concept — a state that went from 49th to 6th in the nation within two years by changing its approach. She expressed genuine interest in Krashen's methodology and connected the literacy failure directly to the homeschooling surge: parents aren't filing petitions, they are pulling their children out. The 143% increase in South Dakota homeschooling over ten years is the clearest signal the board has received that something needs to change.

New Approach

Michael Stangeland

Writer · Precinct Committeeman · Published Author

Urged the district to stop reinventing the wheel and look to where dramatic improvement has already been achieved. He framed the country's 50 states as 50 laboratories: the results already exist, and the district just needs to follow them. His approach to literacy follows the same logic as his approach to the budget — identify what works elsewhere and implement it here, rather than continuing to defend an approach that is not producing adequate results for students.

Incumbents — UFly Pilot Is Working

Status Quo

Gail Swenson

Board Member · Retired 41-Year Superintendent

Defended the district's current literacy strategy centered on the UFly (University of Florida Literacy Institute) program being piloted in elementary schools. Pushed back on the suggestion that phonics has been neglected — the district has always taught phonics and cursive, she said. Acknowledged wanting the program to move faster but noted that teacher training takes time. Her overall message: the district is on the right path, the strategies are working, and the challengers are mischaracterizing a record of genuine progress. Her 41 years in education, including time supervising federal programs for homeless students and Native American education, gives her a particular sensitivity to equity dimensions that challengers don't reference.

Status Quo

Marc Murrin

Longest-Serving Board Member · 42-Year Teacher & Coach

Challenged the framing that Sioux Falls students are failing, arguing the growth model tells a more complete story than snapshot proficiency scores. He acknowledged 3rd grade reading numbers are not where anyone wants them, but argued that by 8th grade students have caught up to the state average — and by junior year SFSD students run ahead of the state in ELA (69% vs. 64%), science (60.9% vs. 49%), and mathematics (60% vs. 36%). His argument: the district is not failing its students; it starts from a harder baseline and produces strong long-term outcomes. He also pointed to parent engagement as the most critical factor the district cannot control alone.

Status Quo

DawnMarie Johnson

Board Member Since 2023 · Social Worker, MSW

Offered the most pointed rebuttal to the challengers' literacy argument, directing it specifically at Krashen's Input Hypothesis. She said she researched it and found it was developed in the 1970s and 80s as a second-language acquisition theory — not a K–12 structured literacy curriculum. She cited a 2025 Frontiers in Psychology article describing it as conceptually flawed and empirically outdated. She defended UFly, citing pilot schools reaching 69% proficiency vs. 40% in non-pilot schools. She also drew a pointed contrast: one family homeschooling is not the same as running 38 schools serving 24,000 students including 3,000 ELL students and 4,400 students with IEPs. Read Stuart's full response →

The Challenger Response — On UFly, Krashen, and the Growth Model

Johnson: "UFly shows 69% vs. 40% — the district's approach is working"

A pilot that works in some schools is not a system that works. If 69% proficiency in pilot schools is the standard of success, what explains 40% in the rest of the district? UFly is not the reason to re-elect the incumbents — it is the reason to ask why it took this long and why it hasn't scaled. The program has existed long enough to produce data. That data has not moved the district-wide number above 50%. At some point, a pilot that never becomes policy is not evidence of progress — it is evidence of institutional inertia.

Johnson: "Krashen is a 1970s second-language acquisition theory — outdated"

Krashen's Input Hypothesis originated in second-language acquisition research and has been applied successfully to first-language reading development for decades. Mississippi's reading turnaround draws on the same foundational principles — comprehensible input, high-volume reading, and building intrinsic motivation. The methodology is not outdated; it is underutilized. More importantly: the current approach has produced fewer than 50% proficiency district-wide. The bar for "new methodology" is not perfection — it is better than what we have. Read the full sourced response, with footnotes →

Murrin: "Students catch up by 8th grade — the growth model shows success"

Children who struggle to read in 4th grade are not simply on a slower trajectory. Research consistently shows that early reading difficulty compounds — it affects comprehension across every subject, reduces academic confidence, and correlates strongly with dropout rates. The Annie E. Casey Foundation found that students not reading proficiently by the end of 3rd grade fail to graduate high school at four times the rate of proficient readers. "They catch up by 8th grade" is not a literacy strategy — it is an explanation for why the district missed every performance target the legislature set.

Johnson: "One family homeschooling isn't the same as running 38 schools"

Correct — and that's not what the Krashen pilot proposes. The Reading Literacy Pilot is one school, all 4th grade classrooms, one Spring semester, with a Pilot Coordinator, voluntary teachers, Policy IJK materials review, and SORA digital delivery already in place. It is a controlled, measurable test of a specific methodology at modest cost — not a district-wide mandate. If it works, the board will have real data from real classrooms. If it needs adjustment, the small scope makes that adjustment practical. The scale of the district is an argument for a careful pilot — not an argument against ever trying something new.

Full Candidate Comparison — PDF Format The complete side-by-side comparison of all six candidates' reading literacy positions, formatted for sharing.

Download PDF

"More than half of Sioux Falls students cannot read at grade level. That is not a performance target — it is a moral failure. And it will not be fixed by the same board that oversaw it."

— The Challenger Case · League of Women Voters Forum · May 2026

Issue 3: Reading Literacy

Reading Literacy

The Challenger Response — On UFly, Krashen, and the Growth Model