← Back to Library

What's really behind the "Southern surge"?

Most headlines about the recent 'Southern Surge' in reading scores are selling a dangerous oversimplification: that the secret to literacy is simply 'more phonics' and 'more testing.' Natalie Wexler dismantles this narrative, arguing that while decoding skills are necessary, they are insufficient without the deep academic knowledge that allows students to actually understand what they read. For busy leaders and educators trying to replicate success, this distinction isn't just academic—it's the difference between a sustainable reform and a fleeting statistical bump that vanishes by middle school.

The Knowledge Gap in the Narrative

Wexler begins by acknowledging the genuine achievement in states like Mississippi, Louisiana, Tennessee, and Alabama, where fourth-grade reading scores have climbed dramatically. Education advocate Karen Vaites, who coined the term 'Southern Surge,' highlighted that when adjusted for demographics, Mississippi and Louisiana now rank first and second in the nation. Yet, Wexler observes that the media coverage has stripped away the nuance of how these gains were achieved.

What's really behind the "Southern surge"?

She writes, 'If people take that coverage at face value—and use misleading information to try to replicate the formula for success—we're likely to see continued widespread failure.' This warning is critical because it suggests that the current 'phonics-only' bandwagon could actively harm students in the long run. The author points out that while phonics reforms boost early elementary scores, 'those gains fade out by middle school' because comprehension increasingly relies on background knowledge rather than just the ability to sound out words.

The coverage has largely ignored the fact that typical reading comprehension instruction often focuses on abstract, non-transferable skills like 'making inferences' rather than building the vocabulary and context needed to grasp complex texts. Wexler notes that 'comprehension depends far less on abstract skill than on knowledge.' This is a profound shift in perspective that challenges the standard education reform playbook. Critics might argue that focusing on knowledge is too slow to show immediate test results, but Wexler counters that without it, schools are merely training students to pass a specific test format rather than to read.

Phonics-focused reforms can boost state test scores in the elementary grades, but those gains fade out by middle school.

The Louisiana Model vs. The Phonics Myth

A major part of Wexler's analysis involves dissecting the specific strategies of the four states. She argues that the 'science of reading' has been wrongly reduced to a 'phonics-focused methodology' by journalists and even state officials. While Mississippi and Alabama have leaned heavily on foundational skills, Louisiana and Tennessee have taken a more comprehensive approach.

Wexler details that Louisiana has spent over a decade 'educating its teacher workforce about the crucial role of knowledge in comprehension' and developing a rating system that nudges districts to adopt curricula that build both skills and knowledge. She writes, 'Enabling students to become proficient readers requires far more than providing the 'basics.' Reading comprehension is a product of everything students are able to learn, including in subjects like social studies, science, and the arts.' This framing is effective because it connects literacy to the broader curriculum, suggesting that cutting science and history to make room for reading drills is counterproductive.

The author highlights a specific danger in the current discourse: 'The theory is that spending more time on reading will boost reading scores, but in fact those schools are shooting themselves in the foot.' By narrowing the curriculum to focus only on test-like reading passages, schools deprive lower-income students of the very background knowledge they need to succeed, while wealthier students acquire it at home. This creates a system where accountability measures 'magnify existing social inequities' rather than closing the gap.

The Accountability Trap

The second pillar of the 'Southern Surge' narrative is the idea that high-stakes testing and strict accountability are the primary drivers of success. Commentators like Matt Yglesias have argued that holding schools accountable for the lowest-scoring students forces them to adopt methods that work. Wexler challenges this, noting that while test-based accountability may have helped math scores, 'it's not at all clear that NCLB boosted reading scores.'

She argues that when schools are pressured to raise scores on reading comprehension tests that are essentially 'knowledge tests in disguise,' they distort instruction. 'Schools that are under pressure to raise reading scores pattern their instruction on the test format,' Wexler writes, leading to a curriculum of 'brief texts or excerpts followed by reading comprehension questions that focus on the skills that appear to be measured by the tests.' This approach fails because 'those skills aren't transferable.'

Wexler acknowledges that accountability is not inherently bad, but the current system is flawed because 'our system tests students on what they have not been taught.' If a student lacks the background knowledge to understand a passage, no amount of practice in 'finding the main idea' will help. This insight cuts through the political noise, suggesting that the solution isn't more testing, but better alignment between what is taught and what is tested.

If you don't have enough background knowledge to understand a test passage at least at a superficial level, no amount of practice in 'finding the main idea' will help you.

Bottom Line

Natalie Wexler's most compelling contribution is her insistence that literacy is not a standalone skill but a byproduct of a rich, knowledge-building curriculum. Her strongest argument is that the 'phonics-only' and 'test-driven' narratives are not just incomplete, but potentially destructive to long-term equity. The biggest vulnerability in the current reform movement is its refusal to acknowledge that decoding is only the first step; without the knowledge to decode meaning, the 'Southern Surge' risks becoming a short-lived spike rather than a lasting transformation.

Sources

What's really behind the "Southern surge"?

by Natalie Wexler · Natalie Wexler · Read full article

Education advocate Karen Vaites appears to have coined the term “Southern Surge” to describe recent improvements in reading scores in four Southern states: Mississippi, Louisiana, Tennessee, and Alabama. Shortly after scores on national reading tests for fourth and eighth graders came out early this year, she wrote a couple of pieces pointing out that these states had shown remarkable progress.

Mississippi used to be reliably at or near the bottom when compared to other states on the National Assessment of Educational Progress, or NAEP. Now it’s soared to ninth in the nation for fourth grade reading.

Between 2019 and 2024, Louisiana moved up from 50th place in that category to 16th, leading the nation in reading growth for the second consecutive cycle.

Tennessee, according to Vaites, “topped the country for growth of its eighth graders,” and Alabama was one of only two states to show growth in fourth grade since 2019.

When adjusted for demographics, these states look even better. Seen through that lens, Mississippi and Louisiana are currently in the first and second spots in fourth-grade reading. In 2019, Alabama was 49th for low-income fourth-graders; now it’s tied for 31st. “We need a LOT more coverage of these success stories,” Vaites urged.

She seems to be getting her wish—sort of. While Vaites’s pieces were thorough and nuanced, the coverage that has ensued has vastly oversimplified the situation, reducing the success stories to “more phonics” and “more test-based accountability.” If people take that coverage at face value—and use misleading information to try to replicate the formula for success—we’re likely to see continued widespread failure.

Parts of Vaites’s message appear to have come through—the part about teacher training being important, the part about curriculum being important too, and maybe even the part about the importance of grounding teacher training in a specific curriculum. But other crucial points have gotten lost.

Phonics Only Gets You So Far.

Let’s start with the “more phonics” oversimplification. Phonics instruction is important, but it only gets you so far.

Phonics-focused reforms can boost state test scores in the elementary grades, but those gains fade out by middle school. That’s largely because as grade levels go up, reading proficiency increasingly depends not just on the ability to decipher, or decode, individual words but also on the ability to understand complex text. The fade-out suggests that something is missing from comprehension instruction.

It’s been widely ...