Search Results

Learning List has reviewed print materials for ­­Curriculum Associates’ Ready Florida English Language Arts program. About Ready Florida English Language Arts Ready Florida English Language Arts is a supplemental resource for grades K-8 that supports reading instruction and mastery of the Language Arts Florida Standards (LAFS). Materials are available in print format with additional digital components. Instruction addresses grade-level LAFS while developing students’ critical thinking skills and understanding of literary and informational texts. Ready Florida English Language Arts Student Instruction Books present content in units that address LAFS Anchor Standards (e.g., Craft and Structure in Literature). Units are made up of week-long lessons that focus on a particular theme (e.g., adventure) and genre (e.g., realistic fiction). Instruction is structured using the Gradual Release of Responsibility (i.e., GRR) instructional model. The first day of each lesson is an introduction that provides a student-friendly explanation of what students will learn (i.e., the standard), reading strategies, and the steps to follow to implement strategies. Subsequent days provide modeled and guided Instruction, guided practice, and independent practice. Each day includes a writing activity. At each grade level, Teacher Resource Books contain materials to assist teachers in the transition to the LAFS and in using Ready Florida materials. Resource Books provide a crosswalk document that explains how the Ready Florida program addresses the demands of the LAFS, and a table detailing the research supporting Ready Florida language arts strategies (e.g., close reading, scaffolded instruction). A pair of tables (1) identifies lesson activities and problems that require higher-level thinking as measured by Webb’s Depth of Knowledge index, and (2) presents a “Cognitive Rigor Matrix” that combines Webb’s and Bloom’s indicators of higher-level thinking and describes student behaviors that demonstrate higher-level thinking. Learn More With Learning List's Reviews Learning List  has reviewed the instructional quality and technology compatibility of Curriculum Associates'  Ready Florida English Language Arts program, as well as the program's alignment to the LAFS. Contact info@Learninglist.com  for information about a low-cost subscription to access Learning List's reviews of this program and thousands of other widely used K-12 instructional materials. About Curriculum Associates* Curriculum Associates' connected portfolio of assessments, evidence-based curricula, and professional learning provides teachers with insights and tools to better understand and support every learner. The company's products, which include i-Ready®, Ready®, and BRIGANCE®, provide teachers and administrators with flexible resources that deliver meaningful assessments and data-driven, differentiated instruction for children. Information in this section is provided by or adapted from Curriculum Associates .

If you have perceived an increase in state control over the adoption of instructional materials, you are not alone. This blog explains the reason for the shift away from districts' control over the selection and use of instructional materials. In a recent EdWeek article , education leaders who shaped the standards movement argue “that states should be doing more ‘quality control’ when it comes to instructional materials—signaling which are high-quality and incentivizing and supporting districts to use them.” Citing the findings of a 2022 RAND Corporation study , the architects of the Common Core State Standards argue that states that have implemented 1) a vetting process to identify high-quality instructional materials, and 2) professional learning to support the implementation of those materials, have seen improvement in student achievement. It seems difficult to draw that conclusion based on the findings of the RAND study which, as explained below, draws no connection between specific state policies and student achievement results. It is noteworthy that the development of the Common Core state standards and the Rand Study referenced above were funded by The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and CCSSO and EdReports also receive funding from The Gates Foundation. The High-Quality Instructional Materials and Professional Development (IMPD) Network The RAND study analyzed the work of the High-Quality Instructional Materials and Professional Development (IMPD) Network. Formed in 2017, the IMPD Network is a group of 13 states convened by the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) to promote districts' adoption and teachers' use of high-quality instructional materials (HQIM). The IMPD Network initially included 8 states: Delaware, Massachusetts, Mississippi, Nebraska, New Mexico, Rhode Island, Tennessee, and Wisconsin, which dropped out in 2022. Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Ohio, and Texas had joined by 2020. (Doan, et al. 2022, 7) Instructional Materials and Professional Development Network (IMPD) Strategies Pursuant to the CCSSO policy roadmap , the IMPD Network states implement a variety of "signals and incentives" to encourage the adoption, use, and support of HQIMs by districts and teachers. These include: (1) Signaling the quality of materials: All IMPD network states provide information about the quality of instructional materials to guide districts about the types of materials they should adopt. Recognizing that states have varying definitions of HQIM, the study focuses on standards alignment as a universal measure of quality. For purposes of this study, the term "standards-aligned curriculum materials" refers to any materials that EdReports has judged as fully meeting the expectations of college-and career-ready standards. (Doan, et al. 2022, xi) In other words, materials counted as HQIMs for purposes of this study are not necessarily aligned to state standards. Besides identifying state-sanctioned HQIMs, other signals these states are using to encourage districts to adopt HQIM include (a) posting a list of the instructional materials districts are using on the state department of education's website, and (b) posting guidance/rubrics to facilitate districts' selection of HQIM. A few of the Network states mandate district adoption of state-adopted instructional materials. (2) Incentivizing the adoption of HQIM: Most network states also tie funding, including Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relieve (ESSER) funds, state grants, and competitive funding, to the selection of HQIM . In other words, districts are not eligible for grants unless they agree to use certain state-sanctioned HQIMs. Some IMPD Network states also enter into state contracts with HQIM publishers to lower the price and make it easier for districts to purchase HQIMs. (3) Providing professional learning aligned to the HQIM: Most IMPD Network states also incentivize districts to purchase HQIMs by providing school/district staff with professional learning aligned to the HQIMs to ensure successful implementation. The states also incentivize districts to select certain professional learning vendors that meet state-adopted criteria. (4) Engaging  with educator preparation programs : IMPD Network states are beginning to work with teacher prep programs to increase focus on using HQIM within classes and clinical experiences. (Doan, et al. 2022, 8-9) Table A.1. identifies the specific signals and incentives that have been implemented in each of the 13 IMPD states. (Doan, et al. 2022, 91-93). While cloaked in terms of fostering local control (e.g., encouraging, incentivizing), the IMPD Network states' signals and incentives actually limit districts' choice of instructional materials. RAND Report's Theory of Action and Findings So have the IMPD signals and incentives worked? The RAND study set out to investigate the extent to which being in the IMPD network predicted districts' adoption and teachers' use of standards-aligned materials. The study analyzed teacher survey responses collected through the American Instructional Resources Surveys (AIRS) since 2019. (Doan, et al. 2022, 6) Comparing the responses of teachers in the 13 IMPD Network states to teachers nationally, the authors conclude that "participation in the IMPD Network was positively linked to the usage of standards-aligned materials," (Doan, et al. 2022, 86). However, they also acknowledge that there was "a high level of variation across the 13 states in the IMPD Network regarding the adoption of standards-aligned materials" in math (Doan, et al. 2022, 20) and ELA. (Doan, et al. 2022, 23). As illustrated in Figure 3.6: (1) for ELA, 41% of teachers in the original IMPD Network states and 38% of teachers in the new IMPD Network states reported that their district had adopted at least one standards-aligned material as compared with 29% of teachers in non-IMPD network states. (2) for math, 56% of teachers in the original IMPD Network states and 30% of teachers in new IMPD Network states reported that their district adopted at least one standards-aligned material as compared to 45% of teachers in non-IMPD states. (Doan, et al. 2022, 28) The data show that after three years of implementing the IMPD's signals and incentives, the number of districts that have adopted at least one standards-aligned curriculum has increased by approximately 10 percent. Report's Suggestions for State and District Policymakers The study makes the following suggestions to state and district policymakers: (1) State networks, like the IMPD Network, have great potential for shifting teaching and learning at scale . The authors acknowledge, however, "We do not know as much about the specific mechanisms by which the IMPD Network has led to shifts across participating states and whether shifts in the usage of standards-aligned materials will be sustained and have clear effects on student achievement, which could be the focus on follow-on research." (Doan, et al. 2022, 88) (2) To increase usage of and support for standards-aligned materials in the classroom, focus first on encouraging adoption of standards-aligned materials . The authors repeatedly note that districts' adoption of standards-aligned materials is a critical precursor to teachers' use of those materials: "Very few teachers reported that they used a standards-aligned material if they did not report that their school or district had adopted one." (Doan, et al. 2022, 89) (3) State requirements likely encourage more adoption of standards-aligned materials, but other levers, such as those increasing buy-in for use of standards-aligned materials among principals and teachers, might also encourage adoption and use . The study highlights the fact that states that mandated district adoption of HQIMs saw an increase in teachers' use of those materials. However, a few other states, such as Louisiana, Delaware and Nebraska, also saw increases in teachers' use of standards-aligned materials without mandates. The authors conclude that "absent mandates, much consensus-building, long-term work is necessary to encourage a high rate of usage of standards-aligned materials." (4) Encouraging buy-in among principals and teachers regarding the importance of using standards-aligned materials—rather than simply requiring use—could be an effective strategy for encouraging more use of those materials . Suggested principal-focused strategies include (a) professional development to help school leaders promote the implementation of HQIM in their schools, and (b) state-created tools for teacher observations that include consideration of whether teachers use HQIM in their lessons. (Doan, et al. 2022, 89) (5) Efforts to improve teachers’ understanding of what is standards-aligned and what is not could encourage greater usage of standards-aligned materials . One strategy to improve teacher buy-in and perceived adequacy of their materials was the use of curriculum ambassadors or lead teachers who serve as advocates for the material and support their colleagues in implementing HQIM. (Doan, et al. 2022, 89-90) (6) School systems leaders must lean into supports for standards-aligned materials to ensure uptake in usage . The report states, "As indicated by our findings, states likely play a large role in the adoption of standards-aligned materials. . . . chool systems themselves likely play the greatest role when it comes to the provision of supports, which, in turn, are connected to higher usage of standards-aligned materials. " (Doan, et al. 2022, 90) Our Analysis In the wake of the 2008 recession, many states loosened the reigns on districts' selection of instructional materials. Several states abandoned their state adoption process completely; others made the state adoption lists advisory rather than obligatory. Over the last few years, the pendulum has started to swing back and the RAND study explains why. Thirteen states in the CCSSO-led IMPD have implemented policies to wrest control over the selection and use of instructional materials away from districts and teachers with the goal of increasing the quality of materials used in the classrooms. How many more states will join the IMPD Network? Time will tell. The EdWeek article and RAND study cited above certainly aim to encourage participation. Policymakers and educators agree that using standards-aligned, high-quality materials fuels student achievement. They disagree over who should decide which materials are high quality. The architects of the Common Core and the CCSSO believe states should make that determination. However, local control over the selection and use of instructional materials is a long-held and deeply-rooted belief. To facilitate the achievement of the communal goal while also respecting local control, Learning List provides a range of resources, including online professional development courses , state-specific instructional material alignment reviews , and online Selection Toolkit , that empower districts and educators to select materials that are aligned to their state standards and provide the instruction and supports their students need. * Doan, Sy, Julia H. Kaufman, Ashley Woo, Andrea Prado Tuma, Melissa Kay Diliberti, and Sabrina Lee. 2022, " How States Are Creating Conditions for Use of High-Quality Instructional Materials in K–12 Classrooms: Findings from the 2021 American Instructional Resources Survey ." https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA134-13.html .

Caveat Emptor … a Latin phrase meaning, “Buyer Beware.” For centuries buyers have been held to a standard of due diligence; do your homework before you buy or suffer the consequences. Purchasing instructional materials is the single largest annual purchase a school district typically makes. To put it in context: school districts spend more on instructional materials annually than you paid for your house. A purchase that large certainly merits careful due diligence. Before we purchase a house, we engage a realtor and spend weeks even months visiting multiple houses on the market. We compare the features of each house against our mental list of "must haves" and select the house that exhibits the largest number of our "must-haves." Do districts exercise the same level of diligence before purchasing instructional materials? Traditionally, reviewing instructional materials before the district makes its selection decisions is a task delegated to overworked educators. Teachers review the available materials at vendor fairs, in their “spare” time at school and at home, and during interminable selection committee meetings. The same process is relied upon despite the fact that instructional materials have become increasingly complex and difficult to review. So, when it comes to buying new materials, how does your district avoid making a (multi) million-dollar mistake? Here are a few common mistakes districts make when purchasing instructional materials and some suggested solutions. Mistake #1: Rushing to Select Instructional Materials Many districts believe sooner is better when it comes to making a selection decision. Their goal is to complete their instructional materials selection process by early February or March. Some do this to ensure that the materials reach classrooms before school starts. However, most core materials are now available digitally, eliminating the need for a long delivery timeline. Other districts believe that state law requires school boards to approve materials by March or early April. In Texas, for example, districts must submit requisitions to purchase state-adopted materials to the Texas Education Agency by June 1st of the proclamation year. While publishers may impose a deadline for orders, most states do not require districts to purchase materials by a date certain. It is not wise to rush your selection and review process. Most new-to-market materials are not completed until a few months before they are to be delivered. Publishers start selling the concept of a material long before the material is finally published. Similarly, in "adoption" states, publishers submit the content of their new materials for state and public review, while the product features and functionality are still being built. Districts that rely on the publishers' claims or rely on the publicly available digital samples are relying on publishers' promises of what the product will look like, do, and contain. While publishers may intend to develop all of the functionality promised, 11th-hour production impediments may prevent the final product from containing all of those features. Bottom line : since most core instructional materials are available digitally, districts generally do not need to order materials as early as they used to. It is prudent to wait to make selection decisions until you have reviewed the available published products. Doing so will likely result in less disappointment and fewer purchased materials that go unused. Mistake #2: Believing Publisher's Alignment Claims First, why is alignment so important? Teachers expect that the district-provided core materials are aligned to 100% of the state's standards. If those materials are not 100% aligned, teachers may not teach all the knowledge/skills required by the standards. If students are not taught what the standards require them to know and be able to do, they are less likely to succeed academically. Teachers, as well as campuses and districts, are evaluated based on their students’ performance. In sales presentations, publishers generally claim that their materials are "aligned to the ." After all, if they did not make such claims, districts would not purchase their materials. Having reviewed thousands of PreK-12 instructional materials, Learning List can state with certainty, that most materials are not as well aligned to the state standards as publishers claim. Bottom line : the alignment of your district's instructional materials will inevitably impact students' scores, which in turn will impact teacher evaluations and campus and district ratings. Therefore, it is crucial to know the alignment percentage of materials your district is considering purchasing. If your district decides to have teachers review the alignment of the materials being considered for adoption, it is important to have more than one teacher check the alignment of each material for each grade level. Why? Determining alignment is an inherently subjective endeavor. Having a few teachers working together to check the material's alignment reduces the subjectivity of alignment determinations. This whitepaper discusses common alignment challenges and strategies for overcoming them. If the district lacks the time or capacity to perform alignment reviews internally, Learning List's low-cost subscription instructional materials review service provides access to independent alignment reviews of thousands of the most widely used PreK-12 instructional materials conducted by highly experienced, trained educators . Mistake #3: Assuming Alignment is Consistent Across Grade Levels It is easy to assume that the alignment percentage of a material for one grade level is reflective of the material's alignment at all grade levels. Learning List's alignment reviews tell another story. There are many reasons why the alignment of a material may vary significantly from grade level to grade level. A different author may have written the material's content and/or a different person may have constructed the publisher's correlation at each grade level. The material's content may not progress in rigor at the same pace as the standards do. The material may not address a certain strand or domain that is emphasized more in one grade level than others. Bottom line : to prepare students effectively to master the standards, teachers must know which standards the material is aligned to in each grade level so that they can adjust their instructional strategies accordingly. Do not assume that the alignment percentage at one grade level is representative of the product’s alignment at all grade levels, or even at all grade levels within a single grade span. If your district is going to purchase multi-grade level material, check the alignment of the material at each grade level . Districts spend millions of dollars each year on new instructional materials. Basing purchasing decisions on incomplete materials will inevitably lead to disappointment and frustration. If you are considering new-to-market materials, prolong the review process to ensure that your district has reviewed the published edition that teachers will be using. One of the biggest predictors of a material's impact on student learning is its alignment to state standards. Before purchasing a new material, be sure to have an independent verification of the material's alignment to your state standards for each grade level you will be purchasing. Your teachers, students, and taxpayers deserve it.

While states and districts have engaged in numerous strategies to address Covid-related learning losses, the strategy getting the most attention and investment is high-dose tutoring. According to a February 2023 report published by the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO), states have spent $700 million of ESSER reserve funds to expand tutoring opportunities, including $470 million on large-scale, high-dose tutoring programs. This blog endeavors to provide tips, based on lessons learned from tutoring programs across the country, to help districts implement successful high-dose tutoring programs. The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) regularly surveys a national sample of public schools about the impact of Covid-19. The December 2022 NCES Pulse survey included questions about the types of tutoring schools are offering: Thirty-seven percent (37%) of the public schools reported providing high-dose tutoring Fifty-nine percent (59%) offer standard tutoring Twenty-two percent (22%) provide self-paced tutoring . High-dose tutoring is one-on-one or small-group tutoring that takes place at least three times a week for at least 30 minutes per session. Tutors are educators or well-trained tutors and the tutor follows an evidence-based, core curriculum program. Standard tutoring is less intensive tutoring that takes place one-on-one, or in small or large groups. Tutoring is offered less than three times per week and tutors are educators who may or may not have received training in specific tutoring practices. Self-paced tutoring is tutoring where students work at their own pace, typically online. They receive guided instruction and move on to new material after mastering the content. Are all three types of tutoring programs equally effective? J-PAL's Tutoring Evidence Review analyzed the evidence from 96 randomized evaluations of tutoring programs and provides the following insights into what type of tutoring programs work best and for whom: Tutoring programs led by teachers or paraprofessional tutors are generally more effective than programs that used nonprofessional (volunteer) or parent tutors. Paraprofessional tutors include, among others, school staff members, undergraduate students in education, and service fellows. The effects of tutoring programs tend to be strongest among students in earlier grades, though a smaller set of programs at the secondary level were also found to be effective at improving learning outcomes. While the overall effects for math and reading tutoring programs are similar, reading tutoring tends to be relatively more effective for students in preschool through first grade, while math tutoring tends to be more effective for students in second through fifth grade. Tutoring programs conducted during school tend to have larger impacts than those conducted after school. During EdWeek's recent Essentials on Tutoring forum , Susan Loeb, professor and director of the education policy initiative at Stanford's Graduate School of Education, and Scott Muri, superintendent of Ector County ISD provided further, similar guidance about the attributes of successful tutoring programs: They target students' individual needs They are "intensive" meaning that they occur over a long period of time, daily or every other day for an entire school year They happen as part of the school day, either before during, or immediately after school when it's easiest to reach and engage students They use professional, trained tutors Tutors have access to student data showing where the students' needs exist Tutors rely on the district's curriculum so that the tutoring is aligned with the material students are expected to learn Contracts for tutoring services were "outcomes-based"; their continuation hinged on students' progress. As mentioned, high-dose tutoring is effective when aligned with the district's curriculum. This blog provides tips about using the district's existing materials to deliver standards-aligned tutoring. Providing high-dose tutoring is challenging for many reasons, including cost, scheduling, and staffing. If your district is (considering) partnering with a vendor to deliver tutoring service, Bart Epstein , a former executive at Tutor.com, provides this advice, "No school district should be paying for tutoring if kids aren't showing up." Sources: Barshay, Jill. 2022. “PROOF POINTS: Early Data on ‘High-Dosage’ Tutoring Shows Schools Are Sometimes Finding It Tough to Deliver Even Low Doses.” The Hechinger Report. August 1, 2022. https://hechingerreport.org/proof-points-early-data-on-high-dosage-tutoring-shows-schools-are-sometimes-finding-it-tough-to-deliver-even-low-doses/. ‌Heubeck, Elizabeth. 2023. “Talking High-Dosage Tutoring: A Researcher and Schools Chief Share Strategies.”  Education Week , February 21, 2023, sec. Student Achievement. https://www.edweek.org/leadership/talking-high-dosage-tutoring-a-researcher-and-schools-chief-share-strategies/2023/02. “2022 School Pulse Panel.” n.d. Ies.ed.gov. https://ies.ed.gov/schoolsurvey/spp/. “Road to Recovery: How States Are Using Federal Relief Funding to Scale High-Impact Tutoring |.” n.d. Accessed March 3, 2023. https://learning.ccsso.org/road-to-recovery-how-states-are-using-federal-relief-funding-to-scale-high-impact-tutoring. ‌‌“The Transformative Potential of Tutoring for Pre K-12 Learning Outcomes: Lessons from Randomized Evaluations.” n.d. Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab (J-PAL). Accessed March 3, 2023. https://www.povertyactionlab.org/publication/transformative-potential-tutoring-pre-k-12-learning-outcomes-lessons-randomized.

A recent  EdWeek  article titled,  Why Printed Books Are Better Than Screens for Learning to Read addresses the debate over print vs digital materials for young learners in an interview with Maryann Wolf, the director of the Center for Dyslexia, Diverse Learners, and Social Justice at UCLA Graduate School of Education and Information Studies. Wolf begins by saying that the answer is not binary. "There are advantages and disadvantages for each type of medium , depending on the purpose or intention." "For young children ,  physical books are best, audio is second best and tablet is a clear third."  While tablets are often more engaging, they promote "passive engagement."  Students learn to be distracted instead of learning to focus. "So between zero and five, the evidence has become quite clear that children's use of the screen is helping to develop the opposite of what we want in focusing attention."  Wolf points out that while print is more advantageous for learning, digital materials are useful tools for diagnostic screening and for skills practice, particularly for students with dyslexia or students who have limited background knowledge of a subject.  While students may perceive that they are better readers online because they can read faster, Wolf points out that students can read faster online because screens make it easy to scroll and skim. However, students need to learn deep reading skills using print first and then need to be taught to use those same skills when reading online.  Wolf concludes, "Books are really one of the greatest tools for the mind and should never be lost until we are assured that the same processes that were advantaged there are not being diminished by the other mediums."  An article in the Hechinger Report titled, “A Textbook Dilemma: Digital or Paper?” discusses Patricia Alexander’s review of research on this topic. Ms. Alexander is an educational psychologist and a literacy scholar at the University of Maryland. Despite numerous (878) potentially relevant studies on the topic, Ms. Alexander pointed out that “only 36 directly compared reading in digital and in print and measured learning in a reliable way.” Despite the need for further research on this topic, Ms. Alexander found that numerous studies affirm the finding that: “if you are reading something lengthy – more than 500 words or more than a page of the book or screen – your comprehension will likely take a hit if you’re using a digital device.” This pertained to college students as well as students in elementary, middle, and high school.     The research highlights several reasons why: Reading online is more physically and mentally demanding (e.g., “the nuisance of scrolling and the tiresome glare and flicker of the screen") than reading a textbook. Online readers may not concentrate as well, distracted by social media alerts, the temptation to browse the internet, etc. Reading a printed book leaves spatial impressions in your mind (i.e., where something was on a page) that may not occur with the same frequency online. Ms. Alexander also addressed whether “note taking on paper offers measurable advantages for learning?” For example, whether highlighting and underlining online versus on paper affected comprehension more positively. She concluded, “Those kinds of motor responses have never been of highest value in terms of text processing strategies.” Rather, “the studying strategy with ‘the greatest power,’ …. involves deeply questioning the text — asking yourself if you agree with the author, and why or why not.” The point of the research is not to identify a winner; print and digital materials are here to stay. As Ms. Alexander put it, “The core question when is a reader best served by a particular medium? And what kind of readers? What age? What kind of text are we talking about? All of those elements matter a great deal.” For more research on this topic, see " Don't throw away your printed books: A meta-analysis on the effects of reading media on reading comprehension ." This blog from 2019 discusses a review of the research on this same topic. That research pertained to the best medium for students from kindergarten through college. The research is not trying to discern a winner in the debate. Rather, the core question the research is trying to answer is when does a particular medium best serve a reader?

If you care about instructional materials, you need to know about legislation that is sailing through the Texas legislature: House Bill 1605 (Buckley) and its identical companion Senate Bill 2565 (Creighton). The legislation would implement significant changes in how instructional materials are selected and used in Texas classrooms. Why should you care? California, Texas, New York, and Florida have long been bellwether states in the K-12 publishing market. Additionally, Texas is a member of the High-Quality Instructional Materials and Professional Development (HQIMPD) network , a 13-state network led bythe Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) in Washington, DC, which advocates for greater state control over the adoption and use of high-quality instructional materials (i.e., the Louisiana Believes model). For both of these reasons, these bills are likely to have national reverberations. The legislation would implement many of the state-control reforms advocated by CCSSO through the HQIMPD network, as summarized below. The State identifies high-quality instructional materials (HQIMs) for districts to adopt The legislation shifts authority over the state instructional materials review process from the elected State Board of Education (SBOE) to the governor-appointed commissioner of education. The commissioner would be required to design a new state instructional materials review process under his control, select the materials that will be reviewed each year, and maintain a public website to house those reviews. The legislation authorizes the SBOE to approve the commissioner's new review process and to approve or reject each reviewed material. Additionally, the legislation requires the commissioner to purchase Open Education Resources (OERs) for specified subjects and grade levels and authorizes him to purchase other instructional materials and technology for all districts to use. To provide public information about the quality of the materials districts are using, publishers of state-approved materials would be required to provide an instructional materials portal where parents could access those materials. Districts would be required to make all teaching materials available for parent review beginning one month before and extending one month after the school year. Parents would also be able to request an external review of the instructional resources their children's teachers are using. Districts would be required to annually report information about all of their instructional materials to the Texas Education Agency. The State incentivizes districts to adopt HQIMs The SBOE would maintain a list of state-approved and rejected materials. It is likely that a limited number of materials will be deemed high-quality and approved for each subject area and grade band, as has been the result in Louisiana. For example, for science, Louisiana has only two state-approved Tier 1 elementary and middle school materials and one additional state-approved material for sixth grade. Furthermore, although the legislation states that districts cannot be required to use commissioner-selected OERs, the bill's $843 M fiscal note would be paid for out of the state Instructional Materials and Technology fund, leaving little in that fund to disperse to districts for local purchases of instructional materials. The legislation allocates a one-time , $40 per student allotment in the Foundation School Program for purchases of state-approved materials across all subjects as well as an annual $20 per student allotment to cover OER printing costs. By depleting districts' funding for instructional materials, the legislation will, in fact, force districts to use the commissioner's OERs. The State incentivizes teachers to use high-quality instructional materials The legislation prohibits school districts from requiring teachers to develop unit/lesson plans, create resources or select instructional materials unless those duties are specified in the teacher's contract. It also extends liability protections to teachers who use SBOE-approved materials as designed . Thus, in order to take advantage of that immunity, teachers would have to follow the material's scope and sequence and lesson plans without supplementation. The State provides professional learning aligned to HQIMs The bills authorize the Texas Education Agency (TEA) to provide support for districts' adoption, selection, and use of instructional materials. TEA is also required to create an OER support program to assist districts and charter schools in using OERs and creating class schedules that allow sufficient time for teacher planning and preparation within the workday. The State engages educator preparation programs The legislation requires pre-service teachers to demonstrate a thorough understanding and competence in using the state-approved OERs in order to earn a teaching certificate. This summary reflects the committee substitutes of HB 1605 and SB 2565. As explained, the legislation would significantly expand the commissioner of education's control while restricting the SBOE's authority over the selection of instructional materials for Texas public schools. It would empower parents to review teachers' materials. It would diminish school districts' capacity to locally select instructional materials and limit teachers' autonomy to select resources for their lessons. It would also reshape the K-12 market for publishers. Similar bills are likely to appear in other HQIMPD states.

As we discussed in our prior blog, a critical step in building a culture of alignment  is selecting standards-aligned, high-quality instructional materials (HQIM) to support teaching and learning. When districts and campuses commit to HQIM, classrooms transform. As David Steiner explains, “the research is increasingly clear that quality curriculum matters to student achievement… [with] a larger cumulative impact on student achievement than many common school improvement interventions—and at a lower cost” (Steiner, 2018). Here are four practical strategies superintendents, principals, and instructional coaches can use to build a lasting, shared vision for adopting and implementing HQIM. 1. Start with a Clear “Why” Grounded in the Instructional Core Anchor your vision for using HQIM in what Richard Elmore called “the instructional core”—the essential interaction between teacher, student, and content that creates the basis of learning  (Blanding, 2009). When schools choose standards-aligned instructional materials and support teachers in using them effectively, student achievement rises. Articulate the commitment to using HQIM in everyday practices—walkthroughs, PLCs, and faculty meetings. Keep the focus on the student learning experience, emphasizing mastery of grade-level standards and measurable student growth. Key takeaway:  Learning is only as strong as the design of the learning experience. Shifts in teacher practice drive student achievement. 2. Relate Student Data to the Standards to Show the Need for HQIM A shared vision is easier to adopt when the need is visible and urgent. The New Teacher Project’s The Opportunity Myth  revealed that “students spent more than 500 hours per school year on assignments that weren’t appropriate for their grade… the equivalent of six months of wasted class time in each core subject” (The New Teacher Project, 2018). By studying student achievement data and comparing current assignments to grade-level standards, leaders can highlight the urgency for HQIM. This creates buy-in and helps educators see the value of high-quality, aligned materials. Try this this month: Collect 6–8 recent assignments from each grade level or course. Rate them for alignment and rigor. Share results with staff to spark conversation about what “good” looks like. 👉 Need support? Learning List’s new Alignment Tool  allows you to instantly check the alignment and rigor of any lesson in seconds. 3. Build Collective Efficacy Through Co-Creation, Not Compliance Implementation succeeds when educators believe, together, that their work matters. John Hattie calls this collective teacher efficacy —“the collective belief of teachers in their ability to positively affect students” (Hattie, 2018). It’s one of the strongest influences on student learning. Instead of mandating compliance, co-create the vision. Form educator advisory groups to review materials, pilot units, and set campus-wide “non-negotiables” for PLCs, instruction, and assessment. When teachers help shape the plan, they are more committed to carrying it out. Try this this month: In PLCs, have teachers examine one upcoming unit from a current or prospective resource. Discuss: Is it aligned to standards? Does it anticipate misconceptions? Does it provide differentiation guidance? 👉  Learning List’s Editorial Reviews of approximately 4,000 K-12 instructional materials provide independent evaluations of the material’s instructional quality, including rigor, coherence, supports for all learners, and teacher resources. 4. Communicate Your Rationale for Selecting Materials with Confidence Curriculum adoption is not just a purchase. It’s a long-term investment. Once a decision is made, communicate your rationale clearly. Explain how the program meets students’ needs and supports standards mastery. Engage your advisory group as ambassadors to help build support among teachers and even among the community.  Try this this month: Publish a one-page summary titled: “Why We Are Recommending These Materials,”  or “Why We Adopted These Materials.”  Share it with your school board, faculty, and parents. Outline your review process and the reasons behind your selection decision. 👉  Learning List’s Selection Toolkit  provides customizable templates—needs assessments, rubrics, and board-ready presentations—to help you lead a successful adoption and build support for the selected materials. In the End… Adopting a shared vision for HQIM is not about filling in lesson plan templates or posting objectives on the board. It’s about ensuring that every student has access to rigorous, standards-aligned learning experiences that prepare them to meet – and master- the expectations of their grade level.  That requires daily habits such as: Selecting grade-level-appropriate, standards-aligned tasks. Planning instruction collaboratively with HQIM as the foundation. Measuring progress consistently against the standards. When educators and leaders commit to this vision, they create classrooms where all students have the opportunity to master the standards and succeed.  👉 Ready to strengthen your curriculum adoption process? Visit www.learninglist.com  to learn how we can partner with you.

Is your district looking for new elementary math materials to support the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS)? Take a look at Learning List’s review of Great Minds’ Eureka Math TEKS Edition. Great Minds’ Eureka Math TEKS Edition  is a comprehensive mathematics program designed to support K-5 TEKS-based mathematics instruction.  The materials are available in print and digital formats.  The program’s intent is to spark curiosity and build confidence about mathematics. The materials focus student learning on the story of math and the connections across key concepts. Lessons are consistently designed to support conceptual and procedural understanding. Students complete their work in one of three student editions, each intended for a different purpose: Learn, Practice, Succeed.  The teacher materials include explicit lessons designed to provide the teacher with step-by-step, scripted teacher language and expected student responses. In addition to the teacher editions, the program also provides a variety of resources to support the development of teacher content knowledge and pedagogy, such as instructional videos and slides.  Read Learning List’s full editorial review to learn more about how the assessments are used to inform instruction, as well as the resources provided for differentiation. Learning List has also conducted a standard-by-standard alignment analysis of this material’s alignment to the TEKS, as well as a review of its technology compatibility and support for remote learning. These reviews not only inform selection decisions, they facilitate instructional alignment and curriculum mapping, too. To learn more about this product and thousands more PreK-12 instructional materials, contact Learning List  for subscription information.  About Great Minds * Great Minds is a nonprofit organization that works with “teachers and scholars to create exemplary instructional materials.”  Great Minds mission is to “make the world a more knowledge-rich place.” The company strives to provide a best-in-class curriculum and brings “joyful rigor to learning.” *Information in this section is provided by or adapted from Great Minds .

Learning List recently reviewed Teachers' Curriculum Institute’s (TCI) History Alive!  and Geography Alive!   programs for middle school. These comprehensive curricula are designed to support inquiry-based social studies instruction for grades 6–8. Middle School Courses History Alive!  includes four distinct courses for middle school: The Ancient World The World Through 1750 The United States Through Industrialism The United States Through Modern Times In addition,   Geography Alive! Regions and People   introduces students to the world’s regions through engaging, inquiry-based units. All five courses are available in both print and digital formats, making them flexible for diverse classroom needs. I nstructional Approach TCI’s social studies programs are grounded in  inquiry-based learning. Each   History Alive!   unit is organized around  Compelling Questions and includes a general content summary, while   Geography Alive!   focuses on regional studies. All units culminate in an inquiry-based project. Across the materials, units are comprised of consistently formatted lessons that: are guided by Essential Questions require students to study primary source documents, read critically, and draw conclusions conclude with activities where students synthesize their learning to create a product This structure encourages critical thinking, collaboration, and problem-solving skills. Teacher & Student Supports The digital platform provides access to both teacher and student materials, including  Spanish translations to support English learners.   Teachers benefit from a dashboard  with step-by-step lesson plans, student progress monitoring , and a  rich set of resources to support instruction and implementation. Why Learning List Reviewed These Materials Last year, Learning List reviewed TCI’s elementary program,   Social Studies Alive! , which emphasizes cross-curricular connections . In contrast, the middle school courses place a stronger emphasis on  primary sources and  critical analysis. Subscribers can access our full editorial reviews to explore the rigor of these materials and the instructional supports that help educators meet the diverse needs of their students. About Learning List Learning List offers a range of curriculum support services, including a unique, low-cost subscription service that provides independent reviews of approximately 4,000 K–12 instructional materials . Subscribing districts can also submit materials for review at no extra charge. Contact us  to learn more about how our reviews help schools adopt and implement high-quality instructional materials (HQIM)  with confidence. About Teachers' Curriculum Institute  (TCI)* Teachers’ Curriculum Institute (TCI) is made up of classroom teachers and curriculum specialists committed to providing the best learning experience for students. TCI understands the complexities of the classroom and the importance of supporting differentiated teaching and learning needs. The organization believes it can make a difference in the lives of teachers and, by extension, their students. *This information is provided by TCI .

As administrators, instructional coaches, and teachers work to enhance teaching and learning, one of the most critical levers is ensuring that high‑quality instructional materials are implemented with fidelity in ways that meet the learning needs of students. Here are five evidence‑based strategies to guide your coaching practice and leadership. 1. Engage in Side‑by‑Side Coaching with In‑the‑Moment Feedback Effective, collaborative coaching cycles are more impactful than one-time professional development. Research from the Institute of Education Sciences highlights side‑by‑side coaching, where the coach and teacher collaborate directly as a powerful practice. “Side‑by‑side coaching…provides an opportunity for coaches and teachers to learn together by reflecting on the teacher’s instruction and co‑developing approaches to solve problems,” and includes in‑the‑moment feedback for real-time adjustment ( IES, 2021 ). Standing side-by-side with teachers, during planning and in the classroom, provides leaders with the opportunity to impact instruction before and as it happens. This approach ensures that instructional materials are used dynamically, adapting appropriately to align with student needs.  2. Make Instructional Coaching Student-Centered  Grounding coaching in student achievement means setting goals that are driven by student learning and focused on standards-based learning targets (Sweeney, 2017). Coaching based on student data and correlating student needs to lessons and resources in high-quality instructional materials is an important step toward supporting student achievement. Learning List’s Alignment Report can help by pointing the teachers and the instructional coach to the exact point in the material where each learning standard is fully aligned.  3. Foster Reflective Conversations, Goal‑Setting, and Teacher Voice This  recent blog about coaching strategies underscores the importance of reflective conversations, collaborative goal‑setting, peer observations, and action‑driven professional learning communities (PLCs) to build trust and sustain growth ( HMH, 2025/2023 ). When teachers feel like they are co-owners of the process and are being heard, they are more likely to adapt and consistently implement instructional materials. Effective instructional coaches can support teachers in owning their planning process by facilitating conversations that stay focused on student learning, selecting the most relevant, best-aligned instructional materials, and assessing learning based on high-quality instruction.  4. Leverage Observation Data to Inform Support Observation remains a foundational tool in identifying teaching dynamics and shaping coaching plans. As noted in the “10 Types of Coaching Strategies,” early observations help set goals; subsequent observations track progress and areas for improvement ( School Status, 2024 ). Additionally, RAND research underscores the importance of classroom observation and instructional feedback as critical levers for teacher improvement ( RAND Corporation, 2018 ). Use small‑scale classroom data to inform coaching targets and follow‑up by keeping the conversation focused on student learning. Observation helps instructional coaches determine the fidelity of implementation of the instructional materials, as well as the level of impact and overall fit for students.  5. Build Coaching Capacity Building capacity in instructional coaches will build capacity in teachers. If administrators expect instructional coaches to effectively guide instructional design, instructional coaches need the time and the training to understand their role, the teachers’ role, and the resources and materials that teachers use. Only then can they effectively support teachers in implementation. Edutopia emphasizes that administrators must intentionally plan for coaches' professional development, which may include aligning roles, defining clear expectations, and providing training in change management, difficult conversations, data use, and culturally responsive pedagogy ( Edutopia, 2024 ). Instructional coaches will grow professionally in an environment with a strong coaching culture where they are part of PLCs, have opportunities to connect with experienced peers, and are equipped to support teacher implementation of materials and instructional strategies. Closing Thoughts For administrators and instructional coaches, ensuring teachers not only receive high‑quality instructional materials but also use them effectively requires intentional design, relational trust, and structures that support iterative learning. Embedding strategies like real‑time coaching, reflective dialogue, data‑informed observation and intentional training for coaches fosters a professional learning culture where teachers feel empowered, materials are used with fidelity, and student learning accelerates.

Introduction As teachers, we know that high-quality instructional materials (HQIM) can provide powerful instructional support. They can save planning time, keep lessons aligned to standards, and provide a clear path to help students grow. But with so many curriculum resources available, it is easy to feel overwhelmed.  The good news: a few intentional planning strategies can help you get the most out of your district’s core HQIM while still making space for your own creativity and responsiveness.  Here are five evidence-based planning tips you can use right away. 1. Start with the standards and essential questions in the material.   When lesson planning, begin by looking closely at the standards, goals, and essential questions in your core material. They are designed to drive instruction and connect to assessments, so they provide a solid foundation for your lesson.  Then verify that the material is truly aligned to those standards. Ask yourself:  What does the standard require students to know?   What level of rigor is required?  That determination will help you identify where your material is aligned to the standards you intend to cover and where adjustments are needed to fill gaps. Tip : Learning List’s Alignment reports provide page-specific evidence of whether a material is aligned to the content , context,  and cognitive rigor  of each standard, saving you hours of work.  2. Decide what is non-negotiable and what is flexible Sometimes we feel pressure to “cover” everything in our core material’s lessons, but you can still implement a material with fidelity even if you do not use every part of it. One study puts it this way: “Implementation is not simply a matter of delivering a program as written but of ensuring that core features are preserved while adapting to local contexts.” ( ERIC )   When planning, decide which pieces you will keep as written (e.g., anchor texts, key discussion questions, assessments) and where you can be flexible (e.g., examples, timing, or group structures). Identifying the “must-do” parts and the “teacher-choice” parts of the material’s lessons enables you to keep your lesson focused and meet the needs of your students without losing your own style.  Tip : Use your material to support alignment to standards, provide consistency in instruction across classrooms, and make your life easier, but adapt those lessons as necessary to meet your students’ needs.  3.  Plan scaffolds and supports ahead of time Every class has a range of learners. Core HQIM usually suggest scaffolds. Planning how you will use them ahead of time will ensure that you are ready to support struggling students or extend learning for advanced ones whenever the need arises. For example, you might:  Add guiding questions for a challenging text Model the first few problems before independent practice  Think through where students might get stuck and plan your “if/then” moves (e.g., If students struggle, then pause for guided practice; if not, move on). This blog post  suggests that to deepen learning, “assign tasks that require students to provide an explanation or meaningfully organize the material.” ( Great Minds , November 29, 2022 )  Tip : Use Learning List’s Editorial Review as a starting point for understanding how your material supports all  learners.  4.  Use the built-in assessments to check for understanding Your materials probably include quick checks for understanding, formative assessments, and unit tests designed to measure standards-based learning. Using them as designed saves you planning time and ensures you are measuring what the lesson intends students to learn.  Tip : If you adapt an assessment, make sure that the alignment to the standards is not lost. Instead of reinventing the wheel, use the provided assessments, making small tweaks only if the change better measures student learning. 5. Reflect and adjust after the lesson Strong implementation of HQIM requires continuous improvement. Taking a few minutes after class to jot down what worked, what did not, and where students struggled will help you get even more out of your materials the next time.  As CORE Education notes, strong implementation of materials is not a one-time effort but requires “intentional launch and continuous feedback cycles.” ( CORE Education )  Tip : After each lesson, ask yourself:  Which parts of today’s lesson really engaged students?  Which parts felt rushed or unclear?  These quick notes can shape your lesson planning moving forward and help you maximize the effectiveness of your instructional materials.  Final Thoughts Using core instructional materials does not mean teaching on autopilot. It means leveraging your HQIM for standards alignment, efficiency, and equity, while adding your professional judgment and creativity where it matters most. By grounding your lessons in the standards, anticipating supports, using built-in assessments, reflecting regularly, and balancing fidelity with flexibility, you will get the most out of your materials and your students will, too.

Why a Culture of Standards Alignment Matters As schools launch into a new academic year, leaders face a familiar challenge: ensuring that every student has consistent opportunities to learn and succeed. Because student achievement is measured by mastery of state standards in all 50 states, providing standards-aligned instruction is the most reliable strategy to ensure mastery of grade-level knowledge and skills. While promoting the use of standards-aligned materials has become a key policy lever for academic improvement, adopting standards-aligned materials is not enough. Long-term improvement requires a culture of alignment – a systemwide commitment to making the state standards the foundation of all instructional decisions. Fostering a culture of alignment demands a systemic focus on the standards in all aspects of the instructional program: Professional development builds teacher capacity around the standards. Curriculum clearly defines mastery expectations. Assessments align with the standards. Classroom instruction and observation consistently reference the standards. When district leaders, principals, teachers, and staff share this commitment, schools enjoy a unified approach to student success. Evidence from Research Two recent studies reinforce the need for campuses and district leaders to develop a culture of alignment to improve students’ academic achievement. Focusing solely on adopting standards-aligned materials is simply not sufficient. RAND Findings A recent RAND Corporation study, Teachers’ Use of Instructional Materials from 2019-2024 , found that the use of standards-aligned instructional materials has increased over the past five years. During the 2023-24 school year, approximately 44% of English Language Arts (ELA) teachers and 55% of math teachers reported using at least one standards-aligned instructional material. (RAND, pg. 2) However, many teachers still "mix and match" resources, often relying on self-created with commercially created materials. (RAND pg. 20). Significantly, teachers were less likely to cobble materials when district policies and principal support emphasized consistent use of standards-aligned curricula (RAND pgs. 36-37). McKinsey Insights Research from McKinsey’s Spark & Sustain global study (2024) found that only 1 in 5 systemwide improvement efforts worldwide succeed (McKinsey, Spark & Sustain, 2024, pg. 8). However, systems that use all seven “how” levers for improvement (coherence, prioritization, evidence, leadership, structures, teacher capacity, and persistence) are six times more likely to achieve learning gains (McKinsey, 2024, pgs. 14–16). While the RAND study reveals that more teachers are using standards-aligned materials, the McKinsey study suggests that significant academic improvement requires a consistent, systemic focus on the standards to improve student achievement. What Does a Culture of Standards Alignment Look Like? In our whitepaper, Navigating to Successful Student Outcomes with Standards-Aligned Instruction , we outlined the steps leaders can take to foster a culture of alignment. These include: Clarify the interconnected roles of standards, curriculum, and instructional materials. Standards set the expectations, curriculum maps the journey, and materials support teachers in delivering instruction. Adopt and communicate a written curriculum. Ensure that the curriculum defines clear expectations for mastery of each standard, identifies aligned resources, and includes formative and summative assessments. Invest in professional learning. Focus professional learning on helping teachers deeply understand the standards and how to use their district materials effectively to help students master the standards. Leverage Professional Learning Communities (PLCs). Structure teacher collaboration around analyzing student performance and aligning instruction to achieve standards mastery. Focus classroom observations on alignment. Ensure that administrators and coaches regularly reference standards and provide standards-aligned feedback during classroom walkthroughs. Use data to inform instruction. Analyze assessment results regularly to refine curriculum, guide instruction, interventions, and enrichment, and inform the selection of new instructional materials. When standards serve as the non-negotiable foundation of instruction, educators create consistent opportunities for all students to succeed. Four Practical Steps for Leaders District and campus leaders can start building a culture of alignment with these four steps: 1. Set a Clear, Shared Vision Clearly communicate that student mastery of state standards is the district’s central academic goal. Reinforce this vision in meetings, professional development (PD) sessions, and classroom walkthroughs. 2. Deepen Teacher Understanding of Standards Provide training that helps educators understand what mastery of a standard looks like in student work—not just in the wording of the standards themselves. Use their instructional materials to provide standards-aligned examples and real-world applications. 3. Make PLCs Standards-Centered Center collaboration efforts around the specific standards being taught, how mastery will be assessed, and what instructional adjustments are needed. Use data and student work to identify gaps and adapt instruction accordingly. 4. Align All System Levers Curriculum, materials, assessments, professional development, and coaching must all point toward the same goal – student mastery of standards. Leaders must create an interconnected system that holds all parts accountable to the same set of expectations. The Bottom Line When a district or campus builds a culture of standards alignment, every adult is focused on the same goal, and every student has consistent opportunities to succeed. Using standards-aligned materials is a necessary component, but reliance on materials alone is an insufficient strategy to prepare all students to master the standards. By embedding standards alignment across leadership, collaboration, instruction, and support, districts truly set the table for a successful school year. Subscribe to our mailing list for more research-backed strategies and insights from our reviews.