Writing in the July 16 issue of right-of-center Weekly Standard, Charlote Allen can't understand all the fuss about conflicts of interest in Reading First. Nor does she have all her facts straight (if Reid Lyon had developed Voyager's reading programs, that would have been a scandal). She does peg the priority the media places on national education policy (Reading First has recently been the subject of a major government scandal of sorts (for the few who know or care about it outside the Washington Beltway and the world of education insiders)). It is a useful article for those who care to learn more about the reading wars.

It is also relevant to the edbizbuzz posting on Department of Education Practice Guides, and the entire question of regulating school improvement products, services and programs. Until NCLB, we had no federal regulation, although we did have politically-driven state textbook adoption processes. We could conceivably decide to hold districts accountable for AYP and leave it entirely up to educators to decide what works for them.  We could base market entry on providers unreviewed claims of  relationships to academic literature - including the new Practice Guides. We could set a basic standard of efficacy and indicators of corporate commitment to continuous improvement. Each approach has advantages and drawbacks. What we should not do is leave it the muddle that Allen endorses implicitly.