Oklahoma’s 2026 literacy bills represent one of the most serious legislative pushes for early reading improvement in recent memory. Lawmakers across chambers have introduced proposals addressing screening, intervention, coaching, summer programs, and—in some cases—third-grade promotion standards. That is encouraging.

But after studying these bills closely, I believe the real question facing Oklahoma is not whether we pass “a literacy bill.” It is whether we build a coherent literacy system.

For more than a decade, literacy reform across the country has followed a familiar pattern. States adopt the “Science of Reading,” mandate new screeners, require interventions, and sometimes add promotion gates. Initial energy is high. But over time, results plateau—or vary dramatically district to district. Why?

Because legislation is only as effective as the implementation architecture it forces into existence.
Mississippi is frequently cited in Oklahoma’s current debate. Its fourth-grade NAEP gains are real and significant: rising from 49th nationally in 2013 to 29th in 2019 and now 9th in 2024. But Mississippi’s success did not come from a single lever. It came from sequencing reform: first aligning instruction to evidence, then building coaching and training capacity statewide, and only afterward attaching stronger promotion consequences.

Even then, gains at later grades have not automatically compounded. That reality reminds us that early decoding reform, while essential, is not self-sustaining without broader system coherence.
The lesson for Oklahoma is not “copy Mississippi.” The lesson is structural: durable literacy change requires alignment across curriculum, teacher preparation, coaching, assessment, and intervention tiers—sequenced in the right order.

Several of Oklahoma’s 2026 proposals contain strong components. Some address instructional clarity. Others focus on adult capacity. Some emphasize intervention discipline. The opportunity now is integration: ensuring these elements lock together into one coherent structure rather than passing in parallel.

Before voting on any literacy bill, legislators and education leaders should ask a short set of practical questions:

• Does this bill define aligned instruction clearly enough to guide procurement and classroom practice?
• Does it constrain curriculum quality—or simply encourage improvement?
• Does it align teacher preparation with what we expect teachers to deliver?
• Does it build coaching as job-embedded support rather than episodic training?
• Does it connect assessment to actionable intervention?
• Does it sequence accountability after capacity?

Oklahoma does not lack urgency. It needs implementation coherence.

In a longer analysis, I examine the 2026 literacy bills through this execution lens and explore how

Oklahoma can move beyond mandates toward durable, statewide literacy alignment.

If we get the structure right, reading outcomes can change.

If we do not, we will repeat the cycle of good intentions followed by uneven results.

The full analysis is available here.

About the author: Dr. Rebecca Pellam, EdD, is founder of Diamond P Academic Consulting and a literacy researcher. With classroom and reading-specialist experience in Oklahoma and Texas, and as the mother of a daughter with dyslexia, she works to build coherent, evidence-based literacy systems that actually work for teachers and students.