EdReports ela 6-8

Indicator 2b Core/Anchor texts have the appropriate level of complexity for the grade
according to documented quantitative analysis, qualitative analysis, and
relationship to their associated student task.
Scoring:
4 points
Materials meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
2 points
Materials DO NOT meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
0 points
Materials DO NOT meet ANY of
the requirements of this indicator.
● Accurate text complexity analysis and a rationale for educational purpose and placement in the grade
level accompany core/Anchor texts and a series of texts connected to them.
● According to quantitative and qualitative analysis and their relationship to the associated student task,
core/anchor texts have the appropriate level of complexity for the grade.
About this indicator:
What is the purpose of this Indicator?
This indicator examines the quantitative and qualitative complexity of core/anchor texts throughout the program.
It also assesses how each text’s complexity works with the associated reader and task demands to create an
appropriate grade level experience for students. In order to maintain quality and rigor, texts must meet the
appropriate level of text complexity for each grade level according to quantitative and qualitative analysis. This
indicator identifies whether the texts are the correct “ingredients” for the grade level.
To identify text complexity, we use a three-step process. First, identify that the quantitative measure of the text
falls within the grade band. Second, identify the qualitative features of the text. Third, identify the associated
tasks and reader considerations. The composite of these three evaluations makes up the determination of text
complexity. Complexity levels of texts do not need to progress in a stair step fashion for each new anchor/core
text. While the texts selected should fall within the Lexile grade band, the order in which texts appear should not
solely be determined by the Lexile level of the text.
In order to meet full expectations of this indicator, the materials must also include a rationale for each text’s
placement in the materials. This expectation is to ensure that core/anchor texts have been intentionally selected
based on their content and complexity.

Research or Standards connection:
Appendix A of the Common Core Standards argues that while reading demands in higher education and the
workforce have remained high or increased, K–12 texts have become less complex over the past fifty years. This
mismatch leaves students unprepared for post-graduation challenges. Research shows that students exposed to
less demanding texts struggle more with complex material later, affecting their college and career success. This
issue is exacerbated by the heavy reliance on simplified texts and extensive scaffolding in K–12 education,
which fails to promote independent reading of challenging materials. Addressing this gap by increasing text
complexity in schools is crucial for better preparing students for future demands.
The Standards establish a three-part model for assessing text complexity, crucial for ensuring students engage
with appropriately challenging materials as they progress through school. This
model integrates:
1. Qualitative Dimensions: These are aspects of text complexity that
require human judgment, including levels of meaning, text structure,
language use, and knowledge demands.
2. Quantitative Dimensions: These involve measurable factors like word
length, sentence structure, and text cohesion, typically assessed using
computer tools.
3. Reader and Task Considerations: This factor considers the reader’s
background, motivation, and the specific demands of the task or
assignment, which may affect how well a student can handle a text.
The model suggests that a combination of these elements should guide text selection and complexity
assessment. Qualitative measures involve human analysis of text features, while quantitative measures offer
objective data. Together with an understanding of reader needs and task requirements, these elements help
ensure that texts are both challenging and suitable for students’ development.
In Text Complexity: Stretching Readers with Texts and Tasks, Fisher and Frey argue for the critical role of
complex texts in education. The book contends that exposing students to challenging reading materials is
essential for developing their analytical and critical thinking skills. Fisher and Frey argue that without engaging
with texts that push their cognitive boundaries, students miss out on opportunities to deepen their
understanding and enhance their interpretative abilities. The authors emphasize that complex texts are not
merely a tool for academic rigor but a necessary component of a robust educational framework. They present a
clear argument for integrating texts that demand higher-order thinking, while also providing strategies for
supporting students through these challenges. By advocating for thoughtful text selection and task design,
Fisher and Frey make a case that complex texts, coupled with effective scaffolding, are fundamental to fostering
students' intellectual growth and preparing them for higher academic and real-world demands.
In the article, “Toward a Theoretical Model of Text Complexity for the Early Grades: Learning from the Past,
Anticipating the Future,” Mesmer, Cunningham, and Hiebert (2012) develop a framework for understanding text
complexity in early grades, focusing on several key aspects of text complexity: word-level features, syntax-level
features, and discourse-level features. They also identify gaps in current research and pose questions for future
studies to further refine the understanding of text complexity at these levels. The authors discuss how
collections of texts should be designed for early readers, emphasizing their longitudinal use throughout the
early stages of literacy development. They also introduce a theoretical framework that integrates existing
research to form a cohesive model of early grade text complexity and outline a strategy for developing this
framework into a comprehensive model that can guide practice and research.

In the article, “Advancing our Students’ Language and Literacy: The Challenge of Complex Texts,” Marilyn Jager
Adams (2010-2011) argues that to enhance students' reading comprehension and vocabulary development,
educators should employ a combination of direct vocabulary instruction and extensive reading. Direct instruction
helps with specific word learning, while extensive reading builds vocabulary through context. Cognitive research
highlights the importance of prior domain knowledge and suggests that simplifying texts can hinder advanced
comprehension. A well-sequenced curriculum, starting with simpler texts and progressing to more complex
materials, helps build background knowledge and vocabulary incrementally. Supporting these efforts with a
well-structured core curriculum ensures that students receive rigorous and relevant instruction, preparing them
for advanced academic challenges and real-world literacy demands.
Resources:
● Qualitative Rubric Literary
● Qualitative Rubric Informational
● Supplemental Information for Appendix A: New Research for Text Complexity
Indicator 2b Guiding Question:
Are the anchor texts at the appropriate level of rigor/text complexity for each grade level, and is a text
complexity analysis and rationale for the text’s inclusion in the materials provided?
Evidence Collection
In the instructional materials being reviewed:
● Review the Text Analysis information to identify the quantitative and qualitative information provided for
all core/anchor texts in the program.
● Consider the appropriateness of each text’s complexity for the grade level based on the quantitative and
qualitative analysis. Use the new College and Career Readiness quantitative ranges to guide your
thinking.

● Look for the Reader and Task considerations for each text provided in the materials, and how the text
supports students’ ability to access complex texts.
● Consider the rationale provided in the materials for the selection of each text.
Cluster Meeting
Preparing for the cluster meeting:
● Is there an analysis of anchor/core texts, paired selections, and text sets for the year-long grade-level
materials?
● Does the analysis use the appropriate metrics (i.e., quantitative, qualitative, and reader/task
consideration) for the grade level?
● Does the analysis/rationale provided coherently and comprehensively explain how texts were chosen for
the grade level and students?
● Are the anchor texts at the appropriate level of rigor/text complexity for each grade level?
● Are the quantitative measures of anchor texts within the appropriate grade level band?
● Are there any texts (and associated tasks) that are above or below the grade level without appropriate
scaffolding or appropriate purpose?
During the cluster meeting:
● Discuss whether most texts are at the appropriate level of complexity for the grade level.
● Discuss how the analysis/rationale provided coherently and comprehensively explains how texts were
chosen for the grade level and students.
● Discuss the quantitative and qualitative analysis of the texts in relation to the associated student tasks.
● Look for and discuss whether the indicator was met fully, partially, or did not meet any scoring bullet in
the scoring section.
● Agree on the final rating.

Gateway 2: Comprehension Through Texts,
Questions, and Tasks
Criterion 2.1 Materials include content-rich, engaging texts that meet the text complexity
criteria for the grade level. Texts and text sets cohesively work together to
build knowledge of specific topics and/or content themes.

--- v2.0 source 1: Indicator 2c ---

Indicator 2c Materials provide appropriate scaffolds for core/anchor texts that ensure all
students can access the text and make meaning. Scaffolds align with the
text’s qualitative analysis.
Scoring:
2 points
Materials meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
1 point
Materials DO NOT meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
0 points
Materials DO NOT meet ANY of
the requirements of this indicator.
● Scaffolds align with the qualitative complexity of the program’s texts to support students in making
meaning of each text.
● Materials include scaffolds for before, during, and after engaging with a complex text.
● Materials include teacher guidance on how to enact each scaffold based on student needs.
About this indicator:
What is the purpose of this Indicator?
This indicator examines the scaffolds materials provide for each core/anchor text. In order to access and make
meaning of challenging texts, students need various supports. By offering scaffolds, all students, including those
with diverse learning needs, language backgrounds, or varying reading proficiencies, are given the opportunity
to successfully interact with grade-level texts. While the previous indicators looked at whether materials include
engaging, complex texts that are appropriate for the grade level, this indicator examines the supports provided
for students to unpack and make meaning of these complex texts, and that these scaffolds align to each text’s
complexity level. Ensuring that scaffolds align with the qualitative features of the text (such as language
complexity, themes, and narrative structure) ensures that support is targeted effectively. This means students are
not only understanding the basics but also engaging with deeper meanings and higher-order thinking skills
associated with the text. This indicator also looks at the specific teacher guidance included in materials so that
these scaffolds can be enacted appropriately. Overall, this indicator emphasizes the importance of tailored
instructional support to ensure that all students can effectively access and make meaning of the core/anchor
texts in the materials.
Research or Standards connection:
According to Appendix A of the CCSS, students' ability to read complex texts does not develop uniformly or
linearly. While Reading Standard 10 outlines expected grade-by-grade progressions in reading complexity,
individual student growth may vary. Opportunities to read both challenging and accessible texts are essential for

development, and student interest and experience should influence text selection. Educators should balance
using texts of varying difficulty, providing additional support for students reading significantly above or below
their grade level. Those above grade level may need advanced challenges, while struggling readers require
targeted help to achieve grade-appropriate complexity. Scaffolding is crucial, especially as students transition
between grade bands, but the goal is to gradually reduce support to foster independent, proficient reading by
the end of each grade band (CCSS Appendix A, p. 5). It has been found that “students’ ability to read complex
text does not always develop in a linear fashion....Even many students on course for college and career
readiness are likely to need scaffolding as they master higher levels of text complexity” (CCSS Appendix A, p. 8).
In “The Science of Reading Comprehension Instruction,” Duke, Ward, and Pearson (2021) argue that decades of
research on reading comprehension reveal several key insights. Effective comprehension instruction should
start early and include teaching word-reading and bridging skills such as phonological awareness, semantic
flexibility, and fluency. Strong fluency alone does not ensure comprehension, so instruction must also cover text
structures and features. Comprehension varies depending on the reading purpose and type, and strategy
instruction can enhance it. Vocabulary and knowledge building are crucial, and engagement with texts through
volume reading, discussions, and writing supports comprehension. Additionally, fostering reading motivation
improves comprehension. A visual model of these principles underscores the layered approach necessary for
impactful comprehension instruction.
In “Beyond Comprehension,” Willingham (2023) explains that research highlights that teaching comprehension
strategies effectively enhances students' understanding of texts by helping them connect ideas and recognize
text importance. These strategies are beneficial for achieving basic comprehension but do not show additional
gains with further practice. To achieve deeper understanding, students need extensive practice in advanced
reading skills, such as analyzing arguments, understanding nuanced text elements, and applying
discipline-specific skills. Overall, while comprehension strategies are a crucial component of reading instruction,
a focus on deeper reading practices is essential for developing more sophisticated comprehension abilities.
In “Scaffolding the Academic Language of Complex Text: An Intervention for Late Secondary Students, Reynolds
(2021) argues that late secondary students preparing for university and careers often struggle with academic
texts. A study with 152 U.S. Grade 11 students tested an intervention involving scaffolded instruction for complex
texts. Participants were either given support with paraphrasing and academic language or received standard
instruction. Results showed that the intervention led to a small but significant improvement in standardized
reading comprehension scores (d = 0.16). Scaffolding types impacted outcomes differently: rereading scaffolds
were associated with lower scores, while syntax and structure scaffolds were linked to higher scores. These
findings suggest that targeted scaffolding can enhance comprehension, especially by addressing complex
syntax and text structure, offering a model for future interventions.
Resources:
● CCSS Appendix A
Indicator 2c Guiding Question:
Do materials provide appropriate scaffolds and teacher guidance to enact them for each core/anchor text?
Evidence Collection
In the instructional materials being reviewed:
● Review the scaffolds provided for each core/anchor text in each unit.
● Consider whether the scaffolds align to the qualitative complexity of the text.

● Consider when each scaffold is enacted (before, during, after reading).
● Look at the teacher guidance provided on how to implement each scaffold. Consider if the guidance is
sufficient to successfully support teachers.
● Consider whether the scaffolds are evidence-based.
Cluster Meeting
Preparing for the cluster meeting:
● What scaffolds for making meaning of each core/anchor text are present in the materials?
● Do the scaffolds align with the qualitative complexity of each text?
● Are scaffolds enacted at different parts of the “making meaning” process (before, during, and after
reading)?
● Is there teacher guidance on how to implement each scaffold?
● Is the teacher guidance provided sufficient to successfully implement the scaffolds in the materials or do
teachers need to pull from outside of the materials?
During the cluster meeting:
● Discuss the scaffolds provided in the materials to help students access core/anchor texts.
● Discuss if the scaffolds align to the qualitative complexity of each core/anchor text.
● Discuss if scaffolds are enacted at different parts of the “making meaning” process (before, during, and
after reading).
● Discuss the teacher guidance available for implementing each scaffold.
● Discuss whether the teacher guidance provided is sufficient to successfully implement the scaffolds in the
materials.
● Look for and discuss whether the indicator was met fully, partially, or did not meet any scoring bullet in
the scoring section.
● Agree on the final rating.

Gateway 2: Comprehension Through Texts,
Questions, and Tasks
Criterion 2.1 Materials include content-rich, engaging texts that meet the text complexity
criteria for the grade level. Texts and text sets cohesively work together to
build knowledge of specific topics and/or content themes.

--- v2.0 source 2: Indicator 2b ---

Indicator 2b Core/Anchor texts have the appropriate level of complexity for the grade
according to documented quantitative analysis, qualitative analysis, and
relationship to their associated student task.
Scoring:
4 points
Materials meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
2 points
Materials DO NOT meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
0 points
Materials DO NOT meet ANY of
the requirements of this indicator.
● Accurate text complexity analysis and a rationale for educational purpose and placement in the grade
level accompany core/Anchor texts and a series of texts connected to them.
● According to quantitative and qualitative analysis and their relationship to the associated student task,
core/anchor texts have the appropriate level of complexity for the grade.
About this indicator:
What is the purpose of this Indicator?
This indicator examines the quantitative and qualitative complexity of core/anchor texts throughout the program.
It also assesses how each text’s complexity works with the associated reader and task demands to create an
appropriate grade level experience for students. In order to maintain quality and rigor, texts must meet the
appropriate level of text complexity for each grade level according to quantitative and qualitative analysis. This
indicator identifies whether the texts are the correct “ingredients” for the grade level.
To identify text complexity, we use a three-step process. First, identify that the quantitative measure of the text
falls within the grade band. Second, identify the qualitative features of the text. Third, identify the associated
tasks and reader considerations. The composite of these three evaluations makes up the determination of text
complexity. Complexity levels of texts do not need to progress in a stair step fashion for each new anchor/core
text. While the texts selected should fall within the Lexile grade band, the order in which texts appear should not
solely be determined by the Lexile level of the text.
In order to meet full expectations of this indicator, the materials must also include a rationale for each text’s
placement in the materials. This expectation is to ensure that core/anchor texts have been intentionally selected
based on their content and complexity.

Research or Standards connection:
Appendix A of the Common Core Standards argues that while reading demands in higher education and the
workforce have remained high or increased, K–12 texts have become less complex over the past fifty years. This
mismatch leaves students unprepared for post-graduation challenges. Research shows that students exposed to
less demanding texts struggle more with complex material later, affecting their college and career success. This
issue is exacerbated by the heavy reliance on simplified texts and extensive scaffolding in K–12 education,
which fails to promote independent reading of challenging materials. Addressing this gap by increasing text
complexity in schools is crucial for better preparing students for future demands.
The Standards establish a three-part model for assessing text complexity, crucial for ensuring students engage
with appropriately challenging materials as they progress through school. This
model integrates:
1. Qualitative Dimensions: These are aspects of text complexity that
require human judgment, including levels of meaning, text structure,
language use, and knowledge demands.
2. Quantitative Dimensions: These involve measurable factors like word
length, sentence structure, and text cohesion, typically assessed using
computer tools.
3. Reader and Task Considerations: This factor considers the reader’s
background, motivation, and the specific demands of the task or
assignment, which may affect how well a student can handle a text.
The model suggests that a combination of these elements should guide text selection and complexity
assessment. Qualitative measures involve human analysis of text features, while quantitative measures offer
objective data. Together with an understanding of reader needs and task requirements, these elements help
ensure that texts are both challenging and suitable for students’ development.
In Text Complexity: Stretching Readers with Texts and Tasks, Fisher and Frey argue for the critical role of
complex texts in education. The book contends that exposing students to challenging reading materials is
essential for developing their analytical and critical thinking skills. Fisher and Frey argue that without engaging
with texts that push their cognitive boundaries, students miss out on opportunities to deepen their
understanding and enhance their interpretative abilities. The authors emphasize that complex texts are not
merely a tool for academic rigor but a necessary component of a robust educational framework. They present a
clear argument for integrating texts that demand higher-order thinking, while also providing strategies for
supporting students through these challenges. By advocating for thoughtful text selection and task design,
Fisher and Frey make a case that complex texts, coupled with effective scaffolding, are fundamental to fostering
students' intellectual growth and preparing them for higher academic and real-world demands.
In the article, “Toward a Theoretical Model of Text Complexity for the Early Grades: Learning from the Past,
Anticipating the Future,” Mesmer, Cunningham, and Hiebert (2012) develop a framework for understanding text
complexity in early grades, focusing on several key aspects of text complexity: word-level features, syntax-level
features, and discourse-level features. They also identify gaps in current research and pose questions for future
studies to further refine the understanding of text complexity at these levels. The authors discuss how
collections of texts should be designed for early readers, emphasizing their longitudinal use throughout the
early stages of literacy development. They also introduce a theoretical framework that integrates existing
research to form a cohesive model of early grade text complexity and outline a strategy for developing this
framework into a comprehensive model that can guide practice and research.

In the article, “Advancing our Students’ Language and Literacy: The Challenge of Complex Texts,” Marilyn Jager
Adams (2010-2011) argues that to enhance students' reading comprehension and vocabulary development,
educators should employ a combination of direct vocabulary instruction and extensive reading. Direct instruction
helps with specific word learning, while extensive reading builds vocabulary through context. Cognitive research
highlights the importance of prior domain knowledge and suggests that simplifying texts can hinder advanced
comprehension. A well-sequenced curriculum, starting with simpler texts and progressing to more complex
materials, helps build background knowledge and vocabulary incrementally. Supporting these efforts with a
well-structured core curriculum ensures that students receive rigorous and relevant instruction, preparing them
for advanced academic challenges and real-world literacy demands.
Resources:
● Qualitative Rubric Literary
● Qualitative Rubric Informational
● Supplemental Information for Appendix A: New Research for Text Complexity
Indicator 2b Guiding Question:
Are the anchor texts at the appropriate level of rigor/text complexity for each grade level, and is a text
complexity analysis and rationale for the text’s inclusion in the materials provided?
Evidence Collection
In the instructional materials being reviewed:
● Review the Text Analysis information to identify the quantitative and qualitative information provided for
all core/anchor texts in the program.
● Consider the appropriateness of each text’s complexity for the grade level based on the quantitative and
qualitative analysis. Use the new College and Career Readiness quantitative ranges to guide your
thinking.

● Look for the Reader and Task considerations for each text provided in the materials, and how the text
supports students’ ability to access complex texts.
● Consider the rationale provided in the materials for the selection of each text.
Cluster Meeting
Preparing for the cluster meeting:
● Is there an analysis of anchor/core texts, paired selections, and text sets for the year-long grade-level
materials?
● Does the analysis use the appropriate metrics (i.e., quantitative, qualitative, and reader/task
consideration) for the grade level?
● Does the analysis/rationale provided coherently and comprehensively explain how texts were chosen for
the grade level and students?
● Are the anchor texts at the appropriate level of rigor/text complexity for each grade level?
● Are the quantitative measures of anchor texts within the appropriate grade level band?
● Are there any texts (and associated tasks) that are above or below the grade level without appropriate
scaffolding or appropriate purpose?
During the cluster meeting:
● Discuss whether most texts are at the appropriate level of complexity for the grade level.
● Discuss how the analysis/rationale provided coherently and comprehensively explains how texts were
chosen for the grade level and students.
● Discuss the quantitative and qualitative analysis of the texts in relation to the associated student tasks.
● Look for and discuss whether the indicator was met fully, partially, or did not meet any scoring bullet in
the scoring section.
● Agree on the final rating.

Gateway 2: Comprehension Through Texts,
Questions, and Tasks
Criterion 2.1 Materials include content-rich, engaging texts that meet the text complexity
criteria for the grade level. Texts and text sets cohesively work together to
build knowledge of specific topics and/or content themes.

Indicator 2a Materials provide opportunities for students to engage in a range and volume
of reading through content-rich and engaging texts.
Narrative Only Criteria (this information will be included in the narrative report but will not affect scoring):
● Materials reflect the balance of informational and literary texts required by the grade-level standards
(55/45 in 6-8, 70/30 in 9-12), including various subgenres.
● Materials include a range of full texts and excerpts (including long-form and short-form texts),
depending on the materials’ stated purpose.
● Materials include sufficient teacher guidance (including monitoring and feedback) and student
accountability structures for independent reading (e.g., independent reading procedures, proposed
schedule, tracking system for independent reading).
Scoring:
4 points
Materials meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
2 points
Materials DO NOT meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
0 points
Materials DO NOT meet ANY of
the requirements of this indicator.
● Materials include core/anchor texts that are well-crafted, content-rich, and engaging for students at their
grade level.
About this indicator:
What is the purpose of this Indicator?
This indicator considers the types of texts students read throughout a program, including the balance of literary
and informational texts and their various subgenres. This indicator also considers the volume of reading
throughout the program, including the accountability structures for independent reading. The purpose of this
indicator is to ensure that materials offer students a diverse and substantial amount of reading experiences
using texts that are both content-rich and engaging.
Quality texts are rich in language, engaging, grade-level appropriate, and relevant. They encompass timeless,
universal themes and may integrate other content areas. Quality texts can be examined multiple times for
multiple purposes. They are used to expand big ideas, build academic vocabulary, and facilitate access to future
texts. Ideally, texts are engaging while providing students with opportunities to gain and broaden their
knowledge base. Quality texts also impact student perspectives on a variety of topics at various levels of

depth/meaning that lead to the development of a well-rounded individual and facilitate access to future texts
(e.g., well-crafted, content-rich, stretches thinking or grows knowledge, engages students of the intended age,
avoids stereotypes as well as one-dimensional characters).
Beyond wide reading on a topic, reading volume is critical to students’ knowledge base and vocabulary.
Students need to practice building their perseverance to be able to navigate complex texts and those of varying
lengths. Instructional materials must include opportunities for students to read across a range and volume of text
to achieve grade-level reading independence. This indicator identifies those opportunities existing for students
at each grade level to read a variety of genres and topics. Those opportunities provide a large quantity of texts
for students to read. To help students engage in a volume of reading, instructional materials should provide a
format (e.g., reading log, journal) for teachers, students, and parents/guardians to keep track of the reading
activities students do.
Research or Standards connection:
According to “Common Core’s Key Shifts in English Language Arts,”“In K-5, fulfilling the standards requires a
50-50 balance between informational and literary reading. Informational reading includes content-rich nonfiction
in history/social studies, sciences, technical studies, and the arts. The K-5 standards strongly recommend that
texts—both within and across grades—be selected to support students in systematically developing knowledge
about the world. In grades 6-12, there is much greater attention on the specific category of literary nonfiction,
which is a shift from traditional standards. To be clear, the standards pay substantial attention to literature
throughout K-12, as it constitutes half of the reading in K-5 and is the core of the work of 6-12 ELA teachers. Also
in grades 6-12, the standards for literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects ensure that
students can independently build knowledge in these disciplines through reading and writing.”
In the article "The Challenge of Challenging Text," Fisher, Frey, and Shanahan (2012) discuss the importance of
engaging with complex texts to develop robust reading skills, comparing the process to weightlifting. Just as
lifting weights builds muscle, reading challenging texts builds reading proficiency. The article argues that, like
physical exercise, engaging with increasingly difficult texts is essential for developing strong reading skills.
Unlike past approaches, which often aimed to simplify texts for students, current educational standards
advocate for gradually increasing text complexity to build students' reading stamina and capability. Factors that
affect text complexity are vocabulary, sentence structure, coherence, organization, and background knowledge.
Materials can “select texts worthy of instruction and align their instructional efforts to ensure that all students
read complex, interesting, and important texts.”
In the “Engaging the Adolescent Learner,” April 2012 issue, Fisher and Frey (2012) begin by asking, “What Makes
Texts Worthy?” The issue states that “for classroom use, worthy texts are those that allow readers to reflect on
themselves and their actions; invite them in the worlds of others; understand the biological, social, or physical
world; or solve problems that are timely and important. Texts worthy of instruction also allow students to develop
their literary prowess and become informed citizens. Although there is not a clear-cut definition and wide-spread
agreement about worthy texts, there are texts worth studying.”
In the article, “Reading Volume and Reading Achievement: A Review of Recent Research,” Allington and
McGill-Franzen (2021) examine the significant positive correlation between reading volume and reading
achievement, especially after students achieve basic reading proficiency. Studies since 2000, including
experimental designs, demonstrate that increased reading, particularly self-selected reading, improves reading
skills, especially mitigating the summer reading loss disproportionately affecting low-income students.
In the book, Reader Come Home: The Reading Brain in a Digital World, Wolf (2018) examines how digital
technology is transforming our reading habits from deep, reflective engagement to quick, superficial skimming.
This shift has profound implications for cognitive processes, such as critical thinking, memory, and empathy. Wolf

advocates for nurturing a bi-literate reading brain capable of deep reading and digital navigation, emphasizing
the importance of maintaining these skills in education to support children's cognitive development. The book
intertwines scientific research with personal insights, highlighting the role of reading in fostering empathy and
understanding. It offers strategies for balancing digital and print reading to preserve the benefits of traditional
reading in a rapidly evolving digital landscape.
The book, Teaching Stamina and Silent Reading in the Digital-Global Age, argues that in the 21st century, high
literacy levels are essential for success in higher education, communities, and workplaces. However, a
significant portion of U.S. students fail to achieve proficiency, as noted by the National Assessment of
Educational Progress (2013). Although most students can recognize words, they often lack the stamina for
independent reading. The book explores how silent reading practices can evolve to improve students' literacy
over the next decade. It emphasizes the need to balance both oral and silent reading, highlighting their
complementary roles rather than viewing them as mutually exclusive. The book critiques the overemphasis on
oral reading and the simplistic implementation of independent silent reading practices from previous decades. It
argues for a more nuanced approach that incorporates effective instructional techniques, ongoing teacher
support, and adaptation to digital contexts. To enhance literacy skills, educators must strategically integrate both
reading methods and adapt to the demands of the digital age, ensuring that students are prepared for future
literacy challenges.
In the article, “Scaffolded Silent Reading: A Complement to Guided Repeated Oral Reading That Works!” Reutzel,
Jones, Fawson, and Smith (2008) discuss Structured Silent Reading’s (ScSR) benefits compared to Sustained
Silent Reading (SSR). ScSR proves to be a viable complement to traditional SSR and Guided Repeated Oral
Reading (GROR) by offering structured guidance, monitoring, and feedback, addressing past criticisms of SSR. It
combines student choice with systematic support, making it an effective alternative for enhancing reading
fluency and comprehension. ScSR balances engagement with accountability, providing a practical solution for
schools aiming to improve reading practices and cater to diverse learner needs. ScSR offers a balanced
approach to reading practice by incorporating elements of student choice and engagement with structured
monitoring and accountability.
In the article, “Building a Stronger Case for Independent Reading at School,” Bus, Shang, and Roskos (2024)
investigate the impact of in-school independent reading on K-10 students' attitudes toward reading, word
recognition, and comprehension. Analyzing 47 studies, the researchers found a statistically significant overall
positive effect, though this effect is primarily observed in word recognition and attitudes toward reading. The
effect on comprehension was negligible. The study also explores debates surrounding independent reading,
including the level of control over students' reading choices and the role of independent reading in a
comprehensive reading program. The meta-analysis concludes that independent reading is a valuable addition
to reading instruction, particularly for fostering positive attitudes toward reading and improving word recognition
skills. However, the impact on comprehension may be less pronounced and may depend on the nature of
activities in the control group.
Resources:
● CCSS Appendix A
● CCSS Appendix B
● Placing Texts at the Center of the Standards-Aligned ELA Classroom

Indicator 2a Guiding Question:
Are students reading a range and volume of content-rich and engaging texts, both through interaction with
the teacher and/or classmates and independently?
Evidence Collection
Note:
● The first three criteria for this indicator consider the anchor or core texts in a program. “Anchor texts” are
defined as those texts used as core to instruction.
● Texts identified as “supplemental” or “optional” are not considered core texts.
● Short-form texts refer to picture books, short stories, articles, poems, essays, blog posts, etc.
● Long-form texts refer to full-length chapter books, full-length novels (including full-length graphic novels),
full-length plays, and full-length books.
In the instructional materials being reviewed:
● Review the Text Analysis information to identify the anchor/core texts.
● Read through anchor texts and accompanying teacher resources outlining them.
● Review the appendices, teacher resources, or another source for information about the anchor texts.
● Review the instructional materials Table of Contents for literary and informational texts.
● Review the literary and informational texts that anchor a year’s worth of curriculum.
● Identify the balance of literary and informational texts (45/55 for Grades 6-8, 30/70 for Grades 9-12).
● Identify the subgenres covered by the anchor or core texts in the program.
● Identify the independent reading system included in the materials (including teacher guidance).
Cluster Meeting
Preparing for the cluster meeting:
● Do the materials reflect a balance of informational and literary reading selections? What is the
percentage of each? Is there roughly a 55/45 (grades 6-8) or 70/30 (grades 9-12) split of informational
to literary?

● Do the selections reflect a variety of genres, including poetry, short stories, dramas, and novels?
Record the variety and balance, noting specific numbers of each type, as applicable.
● Are any genres or text types “missing?”
● Do the materials include a range of full texts and excerpts? Do the materials include a purpose for why
excerpts are used? Note the percentage of full texts and excerpts in the program.
● Do the materials include a range of short-form and long-form texts? Note the percentage of short-form
texts and long-form texts in the program.
● Are the anchor texts rich in language? Do they provide academic vocabulary?
● Do most literary anchor texts provide rich characterizations (v. one-dimensional characters) and
various literary archetypes?
● Are informational texts from trustworthy sources?
● Do texts consider a range of student interests?
● Would this text be interesting to the average X-grader?
● Is there a proposed schedule for when students will engage in independent reading?
● Is there a tracking system (possibly with a student component) to ensure accountability for all readers?
● How are opportunities for student choice provided?
● Is there teacher guidance on how to lead, monitor, and provide feedback during independent reading?
● How do instructional materials specifically address a range and volume of reading? Consider whole
texts, excerpts, and text sets.
During the cluster meeting:
● Discuss the balance of informational and literary anchor/core texts. Discuss whether the balance is
appropriate for the grade level.
● Discuss the variety of subgenres included in the materials. Note any missing subgenres.
● Discuss if the materials include a range of full texts and excerpts, and whether there is an explanation
for why excerpts are used. Discuss the percentage of full texts and excerpts in the program.
● Discuss whether the materials include a range of short-form and long-form texts. Note the percentage
of short-form texts and long-form texts in the program.
● Discuss whether anchor texts are well-crafted and content-rich. Consider whether the texts are rich in
language and academic vocabulary. Note if any anchor texts lack rich language and academic
vocabulary.
● Discuss the characterization and literary archetypes in the texts. Note if texts heavily favor one type of
person or story.
● Discuss if informational texts are from trustworthy sources. Note if any texts are not.
● Discuss if the texts would be engaging for an average X grader and consider a range of interests.
● Discuss how the program provides opportunities for independent reading, including accountability
structures.
● Discuss any questions that were not answered by the curriculum.
● Look for and discuss whether the indicator was met fully, partially, or did not meet any scoring bullet in
the scoring section.
● Agree on the final rating.

Gateway 2: Comprehension Through Texts,
Questions, and Tasks
Criterion 2.1 Materials include content-rich, engaging texts that meet the text complexity
criteria for the grade level. Texts and text sets cohesively work together to
build knowledge of specific topics and/or content themes.

Indicator 2g Most questions, tasks, and assignments are text-based, allowing students to
demonstrate their thinking in various formats.
Scoring:
4 points
Materials meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
2 points
Materials DO NOT meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
0 points
Materials DO NOT meet ANY of
the requirements of this indicator.
● Materials provide opportunities to support students in making meaning of the texts being studied through
text-based questions and tasks that require students to answer in varying formats (i.e., speaking, writing,
etc).
● Materials include text-based questions and tasks that require students to closely read and/or re-read
complex parts of texts to deepen their analysis and understanding.
About this indicator:
What is the purpose of this Indicator?
The purpose of this indicator is to ensure that the majority of questions in a program require students to engage
deeply with texts through reading and re-reading. By focusing on text-based questions, tasks, and assignments,
students are encouraged to ground their responses in evidence from the text, which helps to improve
comprehension and analytical skills. This approach also facilitates a deeper understanding of the material, as
students must interact directly with the content to derive meaning and answer questions. Additionally, providing
opportunities for students to demonstrate their thinking in various formats—such as written responses,
discussions, presentations, or projects—caters to different learning styles and promotes a more comprehensive
skill set. This diversity in format allows for more creative and personalized expressions of understanding,
accommodating the varied needs and strengths of all students.
Research or Standards connection:
In “Implementing the Common Core State Standards: A Primer on ‘Close Reading of Text',” Brown and Kappes
(2012) provide a definition of Close Reading and explain its importance in developing students' reading
comprehension skills and their ability to analyze complex texts. They argue that close reading is not just an
English language arts strategy, but can be effectively used across all academic disciplines. It also emphasizes
that prior knowledge plays a crucial role in close reading and that teachers must be mindful of this when

planning lessons. Finally, the document outlines key considerations for implementing close reading in practice,
including the importance of situating it within a broader literacy framework, understanding text complexity, and
using text-dependent questions effectively.
In “More Than Just Glitter: Using Text-Dependent Questions as Part of Foundational Literacy Practice,” Henry
(2022) advocates for the use of text-dependent questions as a foundation for quality literacy instruction. She
argues that these questions, which require students to cite evidence from the text to support their answers, are
more effective than reader-centric questions that rely on prior knowledge or personal feelings. Henry explains
how text-dependent questions can be used at different cognitive levels (literal, structural, inferential, and
action-oriented) and how they can be strategically integrated into a variety of literacy activities. She highlights
the importance of modeling and practicing text-dependent questioning and concludes by emphasizing that
text-dependent questions are a crucial part of a comprehensive literacy framework that supports students'
comprehension, understanding, and discussion of complex texts.
In Text-Dependent Questions: Pathways to Close and Critical Reading, Fisher and Frey (2014) provide educators
with strategies for designing effective text-dependent questions that facilitate close and critical reading among
students. The book emphasizes the importance of questions that require students to return to the text for
evidence, thereby deepening their comprehension and analytical skills. Fisher and Frey outline how to craft
questions that address different levels of understanding, from literal comprehension to inferential analysis and
evaluative thinking. They offer practical examples and guidance on implementing these strategies across grade
levels, from K-5 to 6-12, showing how text-dependent questions can enhance students' engagement with
complex texts and support their development as critical thinkers.
Resources:
● CCSS Appendix A
Indicator 2g Guiding Question:
Do 80% or more of the questions, tasks, and assignments require students to use and/or close read the texts
to answer?
Evidence Collection
In the instructional materials being reviewed:
● Review tasks, questions, and assignments associated with texts, paired selections, text sets, and
chapters/units. Consider if at least 80% of these tasks, questions, and assignments are firmly rooted in the
text and require students to use/draw from the text.
● Look for tasks that specifically require students to perform close reading and re-reading of complex
sections of the text, either to unpack difficult language, themes, or concepts.
● Ensure that the materials offer diverse ways for students to respond to text-based questions and tasks,
including speaking, writing, presentations, and other creative formats.
● Identify questions and tasks that are not associated with a text, paired selection, or text set and compare
these to the overall number of text-based questions and tasks.
Cluster Meeting
Preparing for the cluster meeting:
● Are at least 80% of tasks, questions, and assignments associated with texts, paired selections, text sets,
chapters, or units firmly rooted in the text and require students to draw from it?

● Are there tasks specifically requiring students to perform close reading and re-reading of complex text
sections to unpack difficult language, themes, or concepts?
● Do the materials offer various ways for students to respond to text-based questions and tasks, such as
through speaking, writing, presentations, and other creative formats?
● Are there questions and tasks that are not associated with a text, paired selection, or text set, and how do
these compare to the overall quantity of text-based ones?
During the cluster meeting:
● Share evidence of the indicator.
● Discuss whether 80% or more of the questions, tasks, and assignments require students to use and/or
close read the texts to answer.
● Look for and discuss whether the indicator was met fully, partially, or did not meet any scoring bullet in the
scoring section.
● Agree on the final rating.

Gateway 2: Comprehension Through Texts,
Questions, and Tasks
Criterion 2.2 Materials include questions, tasks, and assignments that are meaningful,
evidence-based, and support students in making meaning and building
knowledge as they progress toward grade-level mastery of literacy skills.
Materials include clear, explicit instruction guidance for teachers across all
literacy skills.

Indicator 2i Materials include structured protocols and teacher guidance that frequently
allow students to engage in evidence-based discussions about the texts they
are reading.
Scoring:
2 points
Materials meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
1 point
Materials DO NOT meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
0 points
Materials DO NOT meet ANY of
the requirements of this indicator.
● Materials include structured protocols that support students in participating in various types of discussions,
using both background knowledge and their interpretation of the text to build upon each other’s
understanding.
● Speaking and listening instruction includes facilitation, monitoring, and feedback guidance for teachers.
About this indicator:
What is the purpose of this Indicator?
This indicator focuses on the various speaking and listening protocols included throughout a program to build
students’ speaking and listening skills. Regular, structured discussions can increase student engagement and
motivation by making reading a more interactive and collaborative experience. Materials should provide various
speaking and listening frameworks and support for teachers to facilitate meaningful, evidence-based
discussions among students about the texts they are reading through a range of speaking and listening
activities. Students should be provided multiple frameworks to work with partners, small groups, and when
appropriate, large groups, to practice sharing information they have summarized and synthesized, and present
research they have individually and/or in groups conducted. As students engage in speaking and listening
activities, they should use a combination of their own background knowledge and their interpretation of the text
(including textual evidence) to articulate, listen to, and evaluate ideas and viewpoints. In order to meet all the
requirements of this indicator, materials should include teacher guidance on how to facilitate, monitor, and give
feedback to students as they engage in the various speaking and listening protocols throughout the program.
This guidance should support teachers in increasing students' oral language skills.

Research or Standards connection:
According to Appendix A of the Common Core State Standards (p. 26), speaking and listening are crucial in
literacy development, emphasizing that these skills are foundational for mastering reading and writing. It
highlights that oral language skills, including listening and speaking, are strong predictors of children's reading
and writing abilities. The distinction between receptive language (listening and understanding) and expressive
language (speaking and producing) is made, noting that receptive language typically develops before
expressive language in young children. Research indicates that the quantity of words children hear during
preschool significantly impacts their vocabulary growth and reading comprehension later on. The text advocates
for explicit instruction in oral language to support reading skills, calling for an emphasis on read-alouds and
structured conversations to enhance comprehension. As children progress through grades, while independent
reading becomes more prominent, read-alouds should still play a vital role, enriching instruction and exposing
students to complex literacies they may not yet be able to decode independently.
In “A Rationale for Classroom Listening and Speaking Instruction,” Pershey (2001) outlines the importance of
listening and speaking skills in the classroom. She proposes a three-part model of language learning: 1) learning
language, 2) learning about language, and 3) learning through language. Pershey discusses the challenges
students face in each area and suggests strategies for teachers to incorporate these skills into their classroom
routines. The article highlights the role of language in supporting students' understanding of academic content
and emphasizes the need for teachers to provide explicit instruction in language awareness, metalinguistic
awareness, and metapragmatic awareness. It concludes by emphasizing the importance of creating a balanced
program of instruction that includes conferencing, small group work, and whole-class discussions, all designed
to promote student engagement and improve their communication skills.
In “Toward Integrative Reading Science: The Direct and Indirect Effects Model of Reading,” Kim (2020) proposes
a new model of reading called the Direct and Indirect Effects Model (DIER), which builds upon and expands on
existing models of reading. The DIER model identifies the skills and knowledge required for reading
comprehension: word reading, listening comprehension, text reading fluency, background knowledge, reading
affect, higher order cognitions and regulation, vocabulary, grammatical knowledge, phonology, morphology,
orthography, and domain-general cognitions. The DIER model further hypothesizes that these skills and
knowledge are hierarchically related: component skills with direct relations to reading comprehension (e.g.,
word reading, listening comprehension, text reading fluency) and distal skills that support proximal skills and
indirectly contribute to reading comprehension through them (e.g., higher order cognitions, vocabulary). The
DIER model also posits that these skills and knowledge are dynamic and interactive, changing as a function of
text, activity, and development.
In “Engaging the Adolescent Learner: The First 20 Days: Establishing Productive Group Work in the Classroom,”
Fisher and Frey (2011) outline a practical and effective approach to implementing productive group work in
secondary classrooms. The authors emphasize the importance of establishing routines and procedures for
group work, as well as fostering personal responsibility, respectful discourse, and collaborative problem solving
among students. The authors advocate for a gradual release of responsibility framework, which emphasizes a
shift from teacher-led instruction to student-directed learning, and advocate for the use of accountable talk, a
form of academic discourse that encourages students to clarify, question, provide evidence, disagree, and
develop solutions.
In “Literacy Practices that Adolescents Deserve: Opportunities to Develop Oral Language,” Zwiers (2014)
emphasizes the crucial role of oral language in adolescent literacy development, arguing that it's often
neglected despite its importance. He contrasts two forms of oral language: output (one-way communication like
presentations) and conversation (back-and-forth interaction). Zwiers highlights the value of conversation, arguing
that its text-like quality facilitates smoother comprehension and more fluent writing. He details strategies for

improving both the quantity and quality of classroom talk, suggesting activities to enhance students' ability to
construct meaning through conversation, focusing on skills like creating, clarifying, supporting, and negotiating
ideas. The overall aim is to align students' oral language with the language of texts, leading to improved literacy
skills.
Resources:
● CCSS ELA Speaking and Listening Anchor Standards (p. 35)
● CCSS Appendix A
Indicator 2i Guiding Question:
Do materials provide structured protocols and teacher guidance for student engagement in evidence-based
discussions of the texts they are reading?
Evidence Collection
In the instructional materials being reviewed:
● Look for clear protocols that facilitate various types of discussions, such as whole-class, small-group, or
paired conversations.
● Ensure that the protocols encourage students to bring in their background knowledge as well as textual
evidence to enhance collective understanding.
● Check if the materials promote critical thinking and encourage students to build on each other’s ideas.
● Review whether there are explicit instructions and strategies for teachers to facilitate discussions
effectively, ensuring that all students have the opportunity to participate.
● Evaluate the guidance provided for teachers to monitor discussions, helping them identify when
interventions are needed to keep discussions focused and productive.
● Assess the resources available for providing feedback to students, aimed at improving their speaking
and listening skills. This includes rubrics, checklists, or sample feedback statements that focus on
contributions’ relevance, clarity, and evidence use.
Cluster Meeting
Preparing for the cluster meeting:
● Are there clear protocols in place that facilitate various types of discussions, such as whole class, small
group, or paired conversations?
● Do the protocols encourage students to incorporate both their background knowledge and textual
evidence to enhance collective understanding?
● Do the materials promote critical thinking and encourage students to build on each other's ideas?
● Are there explicit instructions and strategies provided for teachers to facilitate discussions effectively,
ensuring that all students have the opportunity to participate?
● Is there guidance for teachers on how to monitor discussions and identify when interventions are needed
to keep discussions focused and productive?
● What resources are available for providing feedback to students aimed at improving their speaking and
listening skills, such as rubrics, checklists, or sample feedback statements that focus on contributions’
relevance, clarity, and use of evidence?
During the cluster meeting:
● Share evidence of the indicator.

● Discuss whether there are clear protocols in place that facilitate various types of discussions, such as
whole-class, small-group, or paired conversations.
● Discuss whether the protocols encourage students to incorporate both their background knowledge and
textual evidence to enhance collective understanding.
● Discuss whether the materials promote critical thinking and encourage students to build on each other's
ideas.
● Discuss whether there are explicit instructions and strategies provided for teachers to facilitate
discussions effectively, ensuring that all students have the opportunity to participate.
● Discuss whether there is guidance for teachers on how to monitor discussions and identify when
interventions are needed to keep discussions focused and productive.
● Discuss what resources are available for providing feedback to students aimed at improving their
speaking and listening skills, such as rubrics, checklists, or sample feedback statements that focus on
contributions’ relevance, clarity, and use of evidence.
● Look for and discuss whether the indicator was met fully, partially, or did not meet any scoring bullet in
the scoring section.
● Agree on the final rating.

Gateway 2: Comprehension Through Texts,
Questions, and Tasks
Criterion 2.2 Materials include questions, tasks, and assignments that are meaningful,
evidence-based, and support students in making meaning and building
knowledge as they progress toward grade-level mastery of literacy skills.
Materials include clear, explicit instruction guidance for teachers across all
literacy skills.

Indicator 2j Materials include opportunities that frequently allow students to engage in
evidence-based discussions about the texts they are reading.
Scoring:
2 points
Materials meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
1 point
Materials DO NOT meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
0 points
Materials DO NOT meet ANY of
the requirements of this indicator.
● Materials provide opportunities for students to engage in collaborative conversations about the text being
read, which require them to utilize, apply, and incorporate evidence from texts and/or sources.
● Materials provide opportunities for students to consider others’ perspectives and engage in intellectual
discourse about texts and topics they are reading.
About this indicator:
What is the purpose of this Indicator?
While the previous indicator considered the type of speaking and listening protocols and teacher guidance
provided for these protocols in a program, this indicator examines the specific opportunities provided for
students to engage in evidence-based discussions. Regular opportunities for evidence-based discussion
encourage students to think critically, analyze information, and evaluate different viewpoints. By discussing texts
and using evidence to support their ideas, students can deepen their understanding of the material and clarify
their interpretations. In order to meet the requirements of this indicator, materials should provide frequent
opportunities for students to engage in collaborative conversations about the texts they are studying while using
textual evidence. These conversations should allow students to learn from each other, building on shared
insights and contributing to a collective understanding of the text.
Research or Standards connection:
While the previous indicator considered the type of speaking and listening protocols and teacher guidance
provided for these protocols in a program, this indicator examines the specific opportunities provided for
students to engage in evidence-based discussions. Regular opportunities for evidence-based discussion
encourage students to think critically, analyze information, and evaluate different viewpoints. By discussing texts
and using evidence to support their ideas, students can deepen their understanding of the material and clarify
their interpretations. In order to meet the requirements of this indicator, materials should provide frequent

opportunities for students to engage in collaborative conversations about the texts they are studying while using
textual evidence. These conversations should allow students to learn from each other, building on shared
insights and contributing to a collective understanding of the text.
Resources:
● CCSS ELA Speaking and Listening Anchor Standards (p. 35)
● CCSS Appendix A
Indicator 2j Guiding Question:
Do materials include frequent opportunities for students to engage in evidence-based discussions about the
texts they are reading?
Evidence Collection
In the instructional materials being reviewed:
● Look for specific opportunities that promote interaction among students, such as group discussions,
partner dialogues, or peer reviews (these should be specific tasks, not overall protocols).
● Ensure that these activities require students to cite evidence from the text or sources, reinforcing the
practice of supporting their ideas with clear references.
● Check for prompts and questions that guide students to effectively utilize and apply textual evidence in
their conversations.
● Review whether the materials encourage students to actively listen to and thoughtfully consider the
perspectives and arguments presented by their peers.
● Assess if there are activities designed to foster respectful debate and discourse, where students can
analyze differing viewpoints and deepen their understanding of the topics or texts.
Cluster Meeting
Preparing for the cluster meeting:
● Are there specific opportunities within the materials that promote interaction among students, such as
group discussions, partner dialogues, or peer reviews?
● Do these activities require students to cite evidence from the text or sources, thereby reinforcing the
practice of supporting their ideas with clear references?
● Are there prompts and questions included that guide students to effectively utilize and apply textual
evidence in their conversations?
● Do the materials encourage students to actively listen to and thoughtfully consider the perspectives and
arguments presented by their peers?
● Are there activities designed to foster respectful debate and discourse, allowing students to analyze
differing viewpoints and deepen their understanding of the topics or texts?
During the cluster meeting:
● Share evidence of the indicator.
● Discuss whether there are specific opportunities within the materials that promote interaction among
students, such as group discussions, partner dialogues, or peer reviews.
● Discuss whether these activities require students to cite evidence from the text or sources, thereby
reinforcing the practice of supporting their ideas with clear references.
● Discuss whether there are prompts and questions included that guide students to effectively utilize and
apply textual evidence in their conversations.

● Discuss whether the materials encourage students to actively listen to and thoughtfully consider the
perspectives and arguments presented by their peers.
● Discuss whether there are activities designed to foster respectful debate and discourse, allowing
students to analyze differing viewpoints and deepen their understanding of the topics or texts.
● Look for and discuss whether the indicator was met fully, partially, or did not meet any scoring bullet in
the scoring section.
● Agree on the final rating.

Gateway 2: Comprehension Through Texts,
Questions, and Tasks
Criterion 2.2 Materials include questions, tasks, and assignments that are meaningful,
evidence-based, and support students in making meaning and building
knowledge as they progress toward grade-level mastery of literacy skills.
Materials include clear, explicit instruction guidance for teachers across all
literacy skills.

Indicator 2o Materials include a mix of both on-demand and process writing opportunities
that are appropriately-aligned in purpose, genre, and/or topic to the reading
of that unit.
Narrative Only Criteria (this information will be included in the narrative report but will not affect scoring):
● Materials reflect the distribution indicated by the standards for process writing (6-8 35/35/30, 9-12
40/40/20 persuade/explain/convey experience).
Scoring:
2 points
Materials meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
1 point
Materials DO NOT meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator
0 points
Materials DO NOT meet ANY of
the requirements of this indicator.
● Materials include a mix of grade-appropriate on-demand and process writing.
● Writing opportunities are appropriately aligned to the purpose, genre, and/or topic of the unit’s reading.
About this indicator:
What is the purpose of this Indicator?
The purpose of this indicator is to ensure that materials provide students with varied writing experiences that
complement their reading activities. Materials should include both on-demand and process-writing opportunities
to ensure that students practice different types of writing. On-demand writing develops the ability to quickly
organize and articulate ideas, while process writing emphasizes planning, drafting, revising, and editing. By
engaging in a variety of writing tasks, students are better prepared to meet the diverse demands of academic
and real-world writing, enhancing their versatility as writers. To strengthen the connection between reading and
writing, writing tasks throughout the program should be directly linked in purpose, genre, and/or topic to the
reading of each unit. Aligning writing opportunities with the genre and topic of the reading unit reinforces
comprehension and critical thinking. It enables students to make connections between what they read and what
they write, enhancing their overall understanding of the content. Overall, this indicator emphasizes the
importance of integrating writing practice with reading instruction to create a cohesive and comprehensive
literacy experience that supports student growth as both readers and writers.

Research or Standards connection:
In the Introduction to the Writing Standards (pg. 42), the Common Core State Standards state, “Each year in their
writing, students should demonstrate increasing sophistication in all aspects of language use, from vocabulary
and syntax to the development and organization of ideas, and they should address increasingly demanding
content and sources.”
In “Writing Next: Effective Strategies to Improve Writing of Adolescents in Middle and High Schools,” Graham
and Perin (2007) present a critical analysis of adolescent writing instruction in the United States, highlighting a
significant crisis in writing proficiency. They argue that while reading instruction has shown progress, adolescent
writing skills have remained stagnant. The report uses meta-analysis to synthesize a large body of research on
writing instruction and identifies 11 key elements that are supported by evidence:
● Writing Strategies: Teaching students specific strategies for planning, revising, and editing.
● Summarization: Explicitly teaching students how to summarize texts.
● Collaborative Writing: Using instructional arrangements where students work together to write.
● Specific Product Goals: Assigning students specific, achievable goals for their writing.
● Word Processing: Using computers and word processors as instructional tools.
● Sentence Combining: Teaching students to construct more complex sentences.
● Prewriting: Engaging students in activities designed to generate or organize ideas for writing.
● Inquiry Activities: Engaging students in analyzing data to develop ideas for writing.
● Process Writing Approach: Interweaving a variety of writing activities in a workshop environment.
● Study of Models: Providing opportunities for students to read, analyze, and emulate good writing.
● Writing for Content Learning: Using writing as a tool for learning content material.
In “Reading and Writing Relationships and Their Development,” Fitzgerald and Shanahan (2000) examine the
intricate relationship between reading and writing, arguing that while they share a significant amount of
knowledge and rely on similar mental processes, they are not identical and their relationship evolves over time.
The authors discuss four categories of shared knowledge: metaknowledge, domain knowledge, text attributes,
and procedural knowledge. They advocate for an integrated approach to teaching reading and writing,
recognizing that focusing on their shared aspects can be more effective than teaching them separately.
Ultimately, the authors advocate for a more holistic understanding of literacy development, recognizing the
importance of both shared and distinct aspects of reading and writing in fostering successful learners.
In “Reading and Writing Relations Are Not Uniform: They Differ by the Linguistic Grain Size, Developmental
Phase, and Measurement,” Kim, Wolters, and Lee (2024) investigated the complex relationship between reading
and writing, examining how the relationship varies depending on linguistic grain size (word-level vs. text-level),
developmental stage (grade level), and measurement methods. A meta-analysis of 395 studies found that
overall, reading and writing were strongly related (r = .72). However, the strength of the relationship varied
depending on linguistic grain size, developmental phase, measurement, and language. The study emphasizes
the multifaceted nature of reading-writing relations and highlights the importance of considering these factors
when teaching and researching literacy. It suggests that integrating reading and writing instruction can be more
effective than teaching them separately. Additionally, the findings emphasize the importance of using multiple
measures of reading comprehension and written composition to gain a more complete understanding of the
complex relationship between these skills.
Resources:
● CCSS Anchor Writing Standards (p .41)
● CCSS Anchor Reading Standards (p. 35)
● CCSS Anchor Writing Standard 10 (p. 41)
● NAEP Writing Framework (2017)
● Introduction to the Writing Standards (pg. 19)

Indicator 2o Guiding Question:
Do the materials include a mix of both on-demand and process writing opportunities that are appropriately
aligned in purpose, genre, and/or topic to the reading of that unit?
Evidence Collection
Note:
● Writing with the purpose to persuade refers to argumentative writing.
● Writing with the purpose to explain refers to informative writing.
● Writing with the purpose to convey experience refers to narrative writing.
In the Instructional Materials being reviewed:
● Ensure that materials provide a balanced range of grade-appropriate on-demand and process writing
opportunities. On-demand writing might involve quick responses or timed essays, while process writing
should engage students in drafting, revising, and editing over more extended periods.
● Verify that the materials reflect the distribution of writing types as indicated by relevant educational
standards (e.g., 6-8: 35/35/30; 9-12: 40/40/20 persuade, explain, convey experience).
● Assess whether the materials offer sufficient variety in prompts and writing tasks.
● Check that writing opportunities are explicitly connected to the purpose, genre, and topic of the unit’s
reading. For example, if the reading includes persuasive texts, writing opportunities should encourage
students to practice persuasive writing techniques.
● Evaluate whether the materials provide clear prompts or frameworks that help students understand how
to relate their writing to the reading content, encouraging deeper engagement and comprehension.
● Assess whether the writing tasks are appropriately challenging for the grade level and support students’
development of both content knowledge and writing skills.
● Look for opportunities where writing tasks can enhance reading comprehension, such as writing
reflections, responses, or analyses related to the texts being studied.
● Ensure that the materials encourage students to draw connections between their reading and writing,
fostering a deeper understanding of both.
Cluster Meeting
Preparing for the cluster meeting:
● Do the materials provide a balanced range of grade-appropriate on-demand and process writing
opportunities, with on-demand writing involving quick responses or timed essays, and process writing
engaging students in drafting, revising, and editing over extended periods?
● Do the materials reflect the distribution of writing types as indicated by relevant educational standards
(e.g., 6-8: 35/35/30; 9-12: 40/40/20 for persuade, explain, convey experience)?
● Do the materials offer sufficient variety in prompts and writing tasks?

● Are writing opportunities explicitly connected to the purpose, genre, and topic of the unit’s reading? For
example, if the reading includes persuasive texts, do the writing opportunities encourage students to
practice persuasive writing techniques?
● Do the materials provide clear prompts or frameworks that help students understand how to relate their
writing to the reading content, thereby encouraging deeper engagement and comprehension?
● Are the writing tasks appropriately challenging for the grade level and supportive of students’
development of both content knowledge and writing skills?
● Do the materials include opportunities where writing tasks can enhance reading comprehension, such as
writing reflections, responses, or analyses related to the texts being studied?
● Do the materials encourage students to draw connections between their reading and writing, fostering a
deeper understanding of both?
During the cluster meeting:
● Share evidence of the indicator.
● Discuss whether the materials provide a balanced range of grade-appropriate on-demand and process
writing opportunities, with on-demand writing involving quick responses or timed essays, and process
writing engaging students in drafting, revising, and editing over extended periods.
● Discuss whether the materials reflect the distribution of writing types as indicated by relevant educational
standards (e.g., 6-8: 35/35/30; 9-12: 40/40/20 for persuade, explain, convey experience).
● Discuss whether the materials offer sufficient variety in prompts and writing tasks.
● Discuss whether there are writing opportunities explicitly connected to the purpose, genre, and topic of
the unit’s reading. For example, if the reading includes persuasive texts, the writing opportunities should
encourage students to practice persuasive writing techniques.
● Discuss whether the materials provide clear prompts or frameworks that help students understand how
to relate their writing to the reading content, thereby encouraging deeper engagement and
comprehension.
● Discuss whether the writing tasks are appropriately challenging for the grade level and supportive of
students’ development of both content knowledge and writing skills.
● Discuss whether the materials include opportunities where writing tasks can enhance reading
comprehension, such as writing reflections, responses, or analyses related to the texts being studied.
● Discuss whether the materials encourage students to draw connections between their reading and
writing, fostering a deeper understanding of both.
● Look for and discuss whether the indicator was met fully, partially, or did not meet any scoring bullet in
the scoring section.
● Agree on the final rating.

Gateway 2: Comprehension Through Texts,
Questions, and Tasks
Criterion 2.2 Materials include questions, tasks, and assignments that are meaningful,
evidence-based, and support students in making meaning and building
knowledge as they progress toward grade-level mastery of literacy skills.
Materials include clear, explicit instruction guidance for teachers across all
literacy skills.

Indicator 2p Materials include explicit instruction in varied writing processes, embedded in
what students are studying throughout the unit.
Scoring:
2 points
Materials meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
1 point
Materials DO NOT meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
0 points
Materials DO NOT meet ANY of
the requirements of this indicator.
● Materials include explicit instruction in writing processes (paragraph and multi-paragraph construction for
varying purposes), embedded in what students are studying throughout the unit.
● Materials provide teachers with mentor texts and/or student exemplars to support students in examining
how the genre works.
● Materials provide guidance and instruction to teachers on how to provide timely and constructive
feedback on student writing.
About this indicator:
What is the purpose of this Indicator?
While the previous indicator considered whether materials include opportunities for students to practice both
on-demand and process writing, this indicator solely looks at process writing (at the paragraph and
multi-paragraph level). Materials should include clear and structured guidance on the various stages of writing
processes, as well as ample opportunities to apply these processes through proven, evidence-based strategies.
This indicator uses the term “processes” instead of process to emphasize that, depending on the genre and
intended audience of a piece of writing, the writing process differs. Through exposure to varied writing
processes, students learn how to adapt their writing style and approach to suit different contexts, genres, and
audiences, enhancing their versatility as writers. Teacher guidance should include explicit instruction to help
students understand and navigate the stages of writing—prewriting, drafting, revising, editing, and
publishing—enhancing their overall writing proficiency. By breaking down the writing process into clear,
manageable steps, students can approach writing tasks with more confidence and clarity and master organizing
and developing their ideas. In order to meet expectations for this indicator, materials should also include teacher
guidance on providing timely and constructive writing feedback that supports students in improving their writing
skills.
Research or Standards connection:

In the Introduction to the Writing Standards (pg. 42), the Common Core State Standards state, “Each year in their
writing, students should demonstrate increasing sophistication in all aspects of language use, from vocabulary
and syntax to the development and organization of ideas, and they should address increasingly demanding
content and sources.”
In “Writing Next: Effective Strategies to Improve Writing of Adolescents in Middle and High Schools,” Graham
and Perin (2007) present a critical analysis of adolescent writing instruction in the United States, highlighting a
significant crisis in writing proficiency. They argue that while reading instruction has shown progress, adolescent
writing skills have remained stagnant. The report uses meta-analysis to synthesize a large body of research on
writing instruction and identifies 11 key elements that are supported by evidence:
● Writing Strategies: Teaching students specific strategies for planning, revising, and editing.
● Summarization: Explicitly teaching students how to summarize texts.
● Collaborative Writing: Using instructional arrangements where students work together to write.
● Specific Product Goals: Assigning students specific, achievable goals for their writing.
● Word Processing: Using computers and word processors as instructional tools.
● Sentence Combining: Teaching students to construct more complex sentences.
● Prewriting: Engaging students in activities designed to generate or organize ideas for writing.
● Inquiry Activities: Engaging students in analyzing data to develop ideas for writing.
● Process Writing Approach: Interweaving a variety of writing activities in a workshop environment.
● Study of Models: Providing opportunities for students to read, analyze, and emulate good writing.
● Writing for Content Learning: Using writing as a tool for learning content material.
In “Evidence-Based Recommendations for Teaching Writing,” Graham, Collins, and Ciullo (2024) provide 11
evidence-based recommendations for effective writing instruction, drawing on a comprehensive review of nearly
1,000 research studies. They emphasize the importance of providing support for students as they write, teaching
foundational writing skills, incorporating twenty-first century tools, and encouraging students to write across the
curriculum, connecting writing with reading. The authors also highlight the crucial role of creating a motivating
writing environment where students are encouraged to try hard and believe in their abilities. They conclude by
emphasizing the importance of teaching writing effectively, advocating for a more holistic approach that
recognizes the evolving landscape of technology and communication in society.
Resources:
● CCSS Anchor Writing Standards (p. 41)
● Introduction to the Writing Standards (p. 42)
Indicator 2p Guiding Question:
Do the materials include explicit instruction in varied writing processes, embedded in what students are
studying throughout the unit?
Evidence Collection
Note: This indicator uses the term “processes” instead of process to emphasize that depending on the genre
and intended audience of a piece of writing, the writing process differs.
In the Instructional Materials being reviewed:
● Look for clear, structured lessons that provide explicit instruction on each stage of the writing process,
including prewriting, drafting, revising, editing, and publishing.

● Ensure that the materials include teacher modeling of writing strategies and processes, demonstrating
how to approach writing tasks effectively.
● Verify that the materials provide mentor texts and student exemplars that illustrate how different genres
work and highlight effective writing techniques.
● Look to see that the materials include clear, step-by-step guidance on writing processes for constructing
paragraphs and multi-paragraph texts for various purposes (e.g., narrative, persuasive, expository).
● Check to see that the materials provide clear guidance and strategies for teachers on how to offer timely
and constructive feedback on student writing. This includes criteria for evaluating writing and
suggestions for improvement.
● Evaluate whether the materials encourage a supportive feedback approach, focusing on developmental
growth and specific areas for revision, rather than only on errors.
● Ensure that the instruction on writing processes is integrated with activities that allow students to
practice these processes, reinforcing learned strategies in authentic writing tasks.
● Ensure that guidance is included to help teachers support students in improving their writing skills
through targeted and actionable feedback.
Cluster Meeting
Preparing for the cluster meeting:
● Do the materials provide clear, structured lessons that offer explicit instruction on each stage of the
writing process, including prewriting, drafting, revising, editing, and publishing?
● Do the materials include teacher modeling of writing strategies and processes, demonstrating effective
approaches to writing tasks?
● Do the materials provide mentor texts and student exemplars that illustrate how different genres work
and highlight effective writing techniques?
● Is there clear, step-by-step guidance in the materials on writing processes for constructing paragraphs
and multi-paragraph texts for various purposes (e.g., narrative, persuasive, expository)?
● Do the materials offer clear guidance and strategies for teachers on how to provide timely and
constructive feedback on student writing, including criteria for evaluating writing and suggestions for
improvement?
● Do the materials encourage a supportive feedback approach that focuses on developmental growth and
specific areas for revision, rather than solely on errors?
● Is the instruction on writing processes integrated with activities that allow students to practice these
processes, reinforcing learned strategies in authentic writing tasks?
● Is there guidance included to help teachers support students in improving their writing skills through
targeted and actionable feedback?
During the cluster meeting:
● Share evidence of the indicator.
● Discuss whether the materials provide clear, structured lessons that offer explicit instruction on each
stage of the writing process, including prewriting, drafting, revising, editing, and publishing.
● Discuss whether the materials include teacher modeling of writing strategies and processes,
demonstrating effective approaches to writing tasks.
● Discuss whether the materials provide mentor texts and student exemplars that illustrate how different
genres work and highlight effective writing techniques.
● Discuss whether there is clear, step-by-step guidance in the materials on writing processes for
constructing paragraphs and multi-paragraph texts for various purposes (e.g., narrative, persuasive,
expository).

● Discuss whether the materials offer clear guidance and strategies for teachers on how to provide timely
and constructive feedback on student writing, including criteria for evaluating writing and suggestions for
improvement.
● Discuss whether the materials encourage a supportive feedback approach that focuses on
developmental growth and specific areas for revision, rather than solely on errors.
● Discuss whether the instruction on writing processes is integrated with activities that allow students to
practice these processes, reinforcing learned strategies in authentic writing tasks.
● Discuss whether there is guidance included to help teachers support students in improving their writing
skills through targeted and actionable feedback.
● Look for and discuss whether the indicator was met fully, partially, or did not meet any scoring bullet in
the scoring section.
● Agree on the final rating.

Gateway 2: Comprehension Through Texts,
Questions, and Tasks
Criterion 2.2 Materials include questions, tasks, and assignments that are meaningful,
evidence-based, and support students in making meaning and building
knowledge as they progress toward grade-level mastery of literacy skills.
Materials include clear, explicit instruction guidance for teachers across all
literacy skills.

Indicator 2r Materials include frequent opportunities for students to practice
evidence-based writing (by drawing from the texts and knowledge built
throughout the unit), citing textual evidence to support analysis of what the
text says explicitly and implicitly.
Scoring:
2 points
Materials meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
1 point
Materials DO NOT meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
0 points
Materials DO NOT meet ANY of
the requirements of this indicator.
● Materials provide frequent writing opportunities that require students to cite textual evidence to support
analysis of what the text says explicitly, as well as inferences drawn from the text.
● Materials provide frequent writing opportunities focused on students’ analyses and claims, which are
developed by reading closely and working with texts and sources to provide supporting evidence.
About this indicator:
What is the purpose of this Indicator?
This indicator considers whether materials provide students with ample opportunities to engage in
evidence-based writing in order to enhance their analytical, argumentative, and informational writing skills.
Frequent practice in writing with evidence encourages students to communicate ideas clearly and concisely,
ensuring that information is conveyed effectively and accurately. By reading closely in order to produce stronger
evidence-based writing, students learn to critically analyze texts and sources, identifying key ideas and drawing
logical conclusions supported by evidence. By using evidence in their writing, students strengthen their
argumentation skills, developing the ability to construct well-defended claims with credible support. Overall, this
indicator aims to foster students' proficiency in writing that is grounded in evidence, supporting their
development as effective communicators and thinkers.
Research or Standards connection:
The Introduction to the Common Core State Standards (pg. 7) states, “Students cite specific evidence when
offering an oral or written interpretation of a text. They use relevant evidence when supporting their own points
in writing and speaking, making their reasoning clear to the reader or listener, and they constructively evaluate
others’ use of evidence.”

In “Writing to Read: Evidence for How Writing Can Improve Reading,” Graham and Hebert (2010) provide strong
evidence for the effectiveness of writing in improving student reading. The report highlights the benefits of
having students write about the texts they are reading, as opposed to simply reading them. The researchers
found that when students write personal reactions, summaries, or notes about a text, it enhances their
comprehension of the material. Furthermore, the report emphasizes the importance of teaching students the
writing skills and processes that go into creating text, including things like spelling, sentence construction, and
text structure. This kind of instruction was found to directly improve reading fluency and word recognition. The
report also emphasizes that simply increasing how much students write, regardless of the specific activity, can
lead to improved reading comprehension. These findings suggest that incorporating writing into the curriculum
is essential for fostering strong reading skills.
In “Writing Next: Effective Strategies to Improve Writing of Adolescents in Middle and High Schools,” Graham
and Perin (2007) present a critical analysis of adolescent writing instruction in the United States, highlighting a
significant crisis in writing proficiency. They argue that while reading instruction has shown progress, adolescent
writing skills have remained stagnant. The report uses meta-analysis to synthesize a large body of research on
writing instruction and identifies 11 key elements that are supported by evidence:
● Writing Strategies: Teaching students specific strategies for planning, revising, and editing.
● Summarization: Explicitly teaching students how to summarize texts.
● Collaborative Writing: Using instructional arrangements where students work together to write.
● Specific Product Goals: Assigning students specific, achievable goals for their writing.
● Word Processing: Using computers and word processors as instructional tools.
● Sentence Combining: Teaching students to construct more complex sentences.
● Prewriting: Engaging students in activities designed to generate or organize ideas for writing.
● Inquiry Activities: Engaging students in analyzing data to develop ideas for writing.
● Process Writing Approach: Interweaving a variety of writing activities in a workshop environment.
● Study of Models: Providing opportunities for students to read, analyze, and emulate good writing.
● Writing for Content Learning: Using writing as a tool for learning content material.
In “Evidence-Based Recommendations for Teaching Writing,” Graham, Collins, and Ciullo (2024) provide 11
evidence-based recommendations for effective writing instruction, drawing on a comprehensive review of nearly
1,000 research studies. They emphasize the importance of providing support for students as they write, teaching
foundational writing skills, incorporating twenty-first century tools, and encouraging students to write across the
curriculum, connecting writing with reading. The authors also highlight the crucial role of creating a motivating
writing environment where students are encouraged to try hard and believe in their abilities. They conclude by
emphasizing the importance of teaching writing effectively, advocating for a more holistic approach that
recognizes the evolving landscape of technology and communication in society.
Resources:
● Introduction to the Common Core State Standards (p. 3-8)
Indicator 2r Guiding Question:
Do materials include frequent opportunities for students to practice evidence-based writing (by drawing from
the texts and knowledge built throughout the unit), citing textual evidence to support analysis of what the text
says explicitly and implicitly?
Evidence Collection

In the instructional materials being reviewed:
● Consider how frequently students are required to use textual evidence in their writing.
● Assess whether students are prompted to develop claims supported by their analyses.
● Look for specific writing assignments that prompt students to cite textual evidence from the material
they are studying.
● Determine whether there are activities that require students to analyze both explicit content and make
inferences, thus encouraging deeper engagement with the text.
● Look for whether there are frequent prompts that encourage students to develop their analyses and
claims based on the texts.
● Verify that students are expected to work with multiple texts or sources, allowing them to compare
perspectives or viewpoints in their analyses.
● Look for examples or models provided to help students structure their analyses and claims effectively.
Cluster Meeting
Preparing for the cluster meeting:
● How frequently are students required to use textual evidence in their writing?
● Are students prompted to develop claims supported by their analyses?
● Are there specific writing assignments that prompt students to cite textual evidence from the material
they are studying?
● Do the materials include activities that require students to analyze both explicit content and make
inferences, encouraging deeper engagement with the text?
● Are there frequent prompts that encourage students to develop their analyses and claims based on
the texts?
● Are students expected to work with multiple texts or sources, allowing them to compare perspectives
or viewpoints in their analyses?
● Are there examples or models provided to help students structure their analyses and claims
effectively?
During the cluster meeting:
● Share evidence of the indicator.
● Discuss how frequently students are required to use textual evidence in their writing.
● Discuss whether students are prompted to develop claims supported by their analyses.
● Discuss whether there are specific writing assignments that prompt students to cite textual evidence
from the material they are studying.
● Discuss whether the materials include activities that require students to analyze both explicit content
and make inferences, encouraging deeper engagement with the text.
● Discuss whether there are frequent prompts that encourage students to develop their analyses and
claims based on the texts.
● Discuss whether students are expected to work with multiple texts or sources, allowing them to
compare perspectives or viewpoints in their analyses.
● Discuss whether there are examples or models provided to help students structure their analyses and
claims effectively.
● Look for and discuss whether the indicator was met fully, partially, or did not meet any scoring bullet in
the scoring section.
● Agree on the final rating.

Gateway 2: Comprehension Through Texts,
Questions, and Tasks
Criterion 2.2 Materials include questions, tasks, and assignments that are meaningful,
evidence-based, and support students in making meaning and building
knowledge as they progress toward grade-level mastery of literacy skills.
Materials include clear, explicit instruction guidance for teachers across all
literacy skills.

Indicator 2m Materials include explicit instruction on sentence composition appropriate to
grade-level standards, embedded in what students are studying throughout
the unit.
Scoring:
2 points
Materials meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
1 point
Materials DO NOT meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
0 points
Materials DO NOT meet ANY of
the requirements of this indicator.
● Materials include explicit instruction in sentence-composition skills (use of punctuation, sentence
elaboration, sentence combining using cohesive ties, sentence fluency), embedded in what students are
studying throughout the unit.
● Materials utilize exemplar sentences from core and mentor texts that contain clear, varied, and rich
examples of sentence structure.
About this indicator:
What is the purpose of this Indicator?
The purpose of this indicator is to ensure that materials provide clear and direct instruction on sentence
composition that aligns with grade-level standards and is embedded in what students are studying throughout
the unit. This involves explicit instruction that helps students understand sentence structure, syntax, and
grammar, forming the foundation for effective writing. Teaching sentence composition helps students develop a
nuanced understanding of language, enabling them to vary sentence structures and lengths for rhetorical effect.
Mastery of sentence composition is crucial for academic writing across subjects, and aligning with grade-level
standards ensures that instruction is developmentally appropriate. By focusing on sentence composition,
students learn to craft clear and coherent sentences, improving their ability to communicate ideas effectively.
Research or Standards connection:
According to the Introduction of the Common Core State Standards (pg. 8), “The Language standards include
the essential ‘rules’ of standard written and spoken English, but they also approach language as a matter of craft
and informed choice among alternatives. The vocabulary standards focus on understanding words and phrases,

their relationships, and their nuances and on acquiring new vocabulary, particularly general academic and
domain-specific words and phrases.”
In “Writing Next: Effective Strategies to Improve Writing of Adolescents in Middle and High Schools,” Graham
and Perin (2007) summarize research findings on grammar instruction, revealing that explicit and systematic
teaching of parts of speech and sentence structure generally has a negative effect on students' writing quality.
This negative impact is statistically significant across various ability levels, including low-achieving writers,
challenging the traditional emphasis on grammar instruction in writing education. However, alternative
instructional methods like sentence combining show positive outcomes by enhancing both writing quality and
syntactic skills. Additionally, teaching grammar within the practical context of writing, rather than as a separate
activity, has been found to significantly improve students’ writing. Overall, the research suggests that while
grammar instruction is important, employing more integrative and context-focused methods is more effective for
improving student writing.
In “Grammar Intertwined Throughout the Writing Process: An ‘Inch Wide and a Mile Deep,’” Weaver, Bush,
Anderson, and Bills (2006) argue that grammar should be taught within the writing process, not as a separate
subject, by focusing on a few key concepts and teaching them in depth using real-world examples from
literature and student writing. The authors suggest integrating grammar into writing workshops through
mini-lessons, focus lessons, and peer editing sessions, where students can practice and apply grammar
concepts as they arise naturally in their writing. They also emphasize the importance of modeling good writing
and teaching students to understand the underlying principles of grammar, rather than simply focusing on
correcting errors, empowering them to become independent editors who can diagnose and correct their own
writing.
In Teaching Grammar in Context, Weaver (1996) advocates for integrating grammar instruction into the context
of reading and writing rather than teaching it in isolation. Weaver argues that this contextual approach helps
students understand the practical application of grammar in real communication. The book emphasizes the
importance of teaching grammar as a tool for enhancing clarity and effectiveness in written expression, rather
than mere adherence to rules. She addresses different aspects of grammar instruction, including sentence
structure, punctuation, and usage, and presents research that supports learning grammar through context.
Resources:
● CCSS Anchor Language Standards (p. 51)

Indicator 2m Guiding Question:
Do the materials include explicit instruction in sentence-composition skills that align with grade-level
standards, embedded in what students are studying throughout the unit?
Evidence Collection
In the Instructional Materials being reviewed
● Look for lessons or activities that focus specifically on teaching sentence-composition skills, including
proper use of punctuation, techniques for sentence elaboration, and strategies for sentence combining
using cohesive ties.
● Ensure that materials address sentence fluency, helping students understand how to create varied
sentences that flow naturally.
● Check for exercises that explicitly teach sentence composition skills and provide opportunities for
students to practice and apply them in their writing.
● Verify that the materials include exemplar sentences drawn from core/anchor texts that demonstrate
clear, varied, and rich sentence structures.
● Ensure that these examples are integrated into instruction to model effective sentence construction for
students, illustrating how different elements of grammar and composition work together.
● Look for opportunities where students analyze and discuss these exemplar sentences to gain a deeper
understanding of effective writing techniques and styles.
Cluster Meeting
Preparing for the cluster meeting:
● Do the lessons or activities focus specifically on teaching sentence-composition skills, including the
proper use of punctuation, techniques for sentence elaboration, and strategies for sentence combining
using cohesive ties?
● Do the materials address sentence fluency, helping students understand how to create varied sentences
that flow naturally?
● Do the materials explicitly teach sentence composition skills and provide opportunities for students to
practice and apply them in their writing?
● Do the materials include exemplar sentences drawn from core or anchor texts that demonstrate clear,
varied, and rich sentence structures?
● Are these examples integrated into instruction to model effective sentence construction for students,
illustrating how different elements of grammar and composition work together?
● Are there opportunities for students to analyze and discuss these exemplar sentences to gain a deeper
understanding of effective writing techniques and styles?
During the cluster meeting:
● Share evidence of the indicator.
● Discuss whether the lessons or activities focus specifically on teaching sentence-composition skills,
including the proper use of punctuation, techniques for sentence elaboration, and strategies for sentence
combining using cohesive ties.
● Discuss whether the materials address sentence fluency, helping students understand how to create
varied sentences that flow naturally.
● Discuss whether the materials explicitly teach sentence composition skills and provide opportunities for
students to practice and apply them in their writing.
● Discuss whether the materials include exemplar sentences drawn from core or anchor texts that
demonstrate clear, varied, and rich sentence structures.

● Discuss if the examples used instruction to model effective sentence construction for students, and
illustrate how different elements of grammar and composition work together.
● Discuss whether there are opportunities for students to analyze and discuss these exemplar sentences to
gain a deeper understanding of effective writing techniques and styles.
● Look for and discuss whether the indicator was met fully, partially, or did not meet any scoring bullet in
the scoring section.
● Agree on the final rating.

Gateway 2: Comprehension Through Texts,
Questions, and Tasks
Criterion 2.2 Materials include questions, tasks, and assignments that are meaningful,
evidence-based, and support students in making meaning and building
knowledge as they progress toward grade-level mastery of literacy skills.
Materials include clear, explicit instruction guidance for teachers across all
literacy skills.

--- v2.0 source 1: Indicator 2k ---

Indicator 2k Materials include explicit instruction on independent word-learning strategies
and key vocabulary words to build knowledge within and across texts.
Scoring:
2 points
Materials meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
1 point
Materials DO NOT meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
0 points
Materials DO NOT meet ANY of
the requirements of this indicator.
● Materials include structured and explicit practices for introducing key vocabulary words and independent
word-learning strategies within the context of the texts (student-friendly definitions, analyzing morphemes,
etymology, word maps, and discussion of word relationships/shades of meaning, dictionary skills, context
clues).
● Attention is paid to vocabulary essential to understanding the text and high-utility academic words.
● Materials provide multiple exposures to key vocabulary within (i.e., before, during, after reading) and
across texts.
About this indicator:
What is the purpose of this Indicator?
This indicator examines whether materials include structured and explicit practices for vocabulary instruction.
Materials should clearly teach students how to learn and use new words effectively, enabling them to expand
their vocabulary. Students should learn techniques to decode unfamiliar words, such as using context clues,
word roots, affixes, and other strategies that promote self-directed learning. By focusing on key vocabulary,
materials help improve students' ability to understand and analyze complex texts. Throughout the year, students
should experience multiple exposures to key vocabulary words (tier II and tier III) in order to increase their
familiarity with and knowledge of those words. In addition, by targeting vocabulary words used across multiple
texts, students can make connections between ideas and content areas, reinforcing their learning and retention.
Overall, this indicator considers whether vocabulary instruction is intentional and integrated across the program
to support students’ language development.
Research or Standards connection:
Appendix A of the Common Core State Standards underscores the vital role of rich and varied vocabulary in
enhancing reading comprehension and academic achievement, a link established through extensive research

since 1925. Although vocabulary instruction in schools often lacks consistency and depth, developing a robust
vocabulary requires repeated, varied exposure to words in diverse contexts. While children naturally acquire
vocabulary through context-rich oral interactions, vocabulary growth can stagnate without purposeful instruction,
especially in written language, where 5 to 15 percent of new words are typically retained upon first encounter.
Effective vocabulary development involves engaging students with words through various activities and
teaching the underlying structures of language, such as syntax and morphology. The text highlights a framework
by Isabel L. Beck, Margaret G. McKeown, and Linda Kucan that categorizes words into three tiers: commonly
used Tier I words, cross-disciplinary Tier II words that need careful instructional focus, and domain-specific Tier
III words that are often clearly taught within their respective fields. The model suggests that while Tier III words
are more explicitly defined, Tier II words, critical for academic success, require teachers to identify and address
them across all text types, integrating them into coherent, content-rich curricula to ensure comprehensive
vocabulary acquisition for students (p. 32-33).
The Report of the National Reading Panel (2000) highlights the critical role of vocabulary knowledge in reading
development, with vocabulary influencing both oral and print reading comprehension. The National Reading
Panel (NRP) examined over 20,000 research citations on vocabulary instruction, filtering them down to 50
studies based on strict criteria. These studies show that vocabulary instruction improves comprehension, but
methods need to be tailored to the reader's age and ability. Effective techniques include teaching words before
reading and repeated exposure to words in varied contexts. Vocabulary should be taught both directly and
indirectly, incorporating repetition and multiple exposures, supplemented by rich contexts and technology.
Direct instruction should engage students actively, and methods should be varied.
In Bringing Words to Life: Robust Vocabulary Instruction, Beck, McKeown, and Kucan (2013) examine effective
strategies for vocabulary instruction grounded in extensive research. They emphasize the importance of
teaching “tier II” words, which are versatile and applicable across various subjects, thus significantly impacting
students' academic performance. The authors present a research-based framework for vocabulary instruction
that includes explicit teaching of word meanings, facilitating rich language experiences, and promoting active
engagement with new words. A key aspect of their approach is fostering word consciousness, encouraging
students to become aware of and interested in words and their meanings.
In the article, “Advancing our Students’ Language and Literacy: The Challenge of Complex Texts,” Marilyn Jager
Adams (2010-2011) argues that to enhance students' reading comprehension and vocabulary development,
educators should employ a combination of direct vocabulary instruction and extensive reading. Direct instruction
helps with specific word learning, while extensive reading builds vocabulary through context. Cognitive research
highlights the importance of prior domain knowledge and suggests that simplifying texts can hinder advanced
comprehension. A well-sequenced curriculum, starting with simpler texts and progressing to more complex
materials, helps build background knowledge and vocabulary incrementally. Supporting these efforts with a
well-structured core curriculum ensures that students receive rigorous and relevant instruction, preparing them
for advanced academic challenges and real-world literacy demands.
In Effects of Instruction in Morphological Awareness on Literacy Achievement: An Integrative Review, Carlisle
(2010) reviews 16 studies on the effects of teaching morphological awareness (the ability to identify and analyze
word parts) to students. She explores how this practice impacts literacy development (including phonology,
orthography, and word meaning). Carlisle concludes that morphological awareness holds potential to improve
literacy, particularly when it deepens students' understanding of morphemic structure, spelling, and word
meaning.
In “Using Etymology as a Deliberate Vocabulary Learning Approach: A Psycholinguistic Analysis,” Alshatti (2023)
explores the use of etymology as a deliberate vocabulary learning approach for English language learners. The
author argues that etymology can help learners retain vocabulary, decipher unknown words, and develop a

deeper understanding of the language, surpassing the benefits of incidental learning. By understanding the
origins and building blocks of words, learners can activate existing knowledge (schema) and create nonverbal
associations (dual coding) to enhance retention. The author proposes a methodology incorporating contextual
stories, word part analysis, and engaging activities to facilitate this process, ultimately suggesting that teaching
etymology can be a valuable tool for English language learners, particularly at intermediate and advanced levels.
In “Etymology: A Word Attack Strategy for Learning the English Vocabulary,” Hashemi and Aziznezhad (2011)
argue that etymology is a crucial and effective method for expanding vocabulary for English language learners.
The authors highlight the importance of vocabulary acquisition for successful language learning, emphasizing
the limitations of traditional vocabulary instruction based solely on memorizing lists of words. They contend that
etymology, the scientific study of word origins, offers a more engaging and efficient approach. By understanding
the meanings of Latin and Greek roots, prefixes, and suffixes, learners can decipher the meanings of numerous
English words and remember them more effectively. The paper explores the origins and historical development
of the English language, categorizing words into different categories based on their source language
(Indo-European, Germanic, etc.). The authors illustrate the practical application of etymology by providing
examples of how understanding word parts can unlock the meanings of unknown words. They also emphasize
the significance of etymology in enhancing reading comprehension and word recognition skills. The article
concludes by advocating for the integration of etymology into vocabulary instruction as a powerful tool for
learners to expand their word power, improve comprehension, and enhance their overall language proficiency.
Resources:
● Appendix A of the CCSS
Indicator 2k Guiding Question:
Do the materials include explicit instruction on independent word-learning strategies and key vocabulary
words to build knowledge within and across texts?
Evidence Collection
In the instructional materials being reviewed:
● Ensure the materials focus on vocabulary critical to understanding the texts being studied and include
high-utility academic words that are relevant across various subjects.
● Look for vocabulary selection criteria that emphasize words’ frequency, utility, and relevance to students'
academic and real-world contexts.
● Verify that the materials provide opportunities for students to encounter and use targeted vocabulary
multiple times, in different contexts, and through varied activities.
● Ensure materials encourage the use of vocabulary across different texts and subjects, promoting
reinforcement and deeper understanding.
● Ensure that the materials have a clear framework for introducing vocabulary words, making it easy for
both teachers and students to follow.
● Look for variety in the types of practices used (analyzing morphemes, etymology) to accommodate
diverse learning styles.
● Evaluate how effectively the materials teach students to use strategies like word maps, dictionary skills,
and context clues independently. Consider the clarity and accessibility of these strategies for students,
ensuring they are student-friendly and practical for real-world application.
● Assess the quality of student-friendly definitions, ensuring they relate to various contexts beyond just the
text being studied.

● Ensure that materials provide students with repeated encounters with key vocabulary before, during, and
after reading, allowing for reinforcement and deeper understanding.
● Check for coherence in how vocabulary is integrated with the rest of the program, reinforcing overall
knowledge and skills.
Cluster Meeting
Preparing for the cluster meeting:
● Do the materials focus on vocabulary critical to understanding the texts being studied and include
high-utility academic words relevant across various subjects?
● Are there criteria for vocabulary selection that emphasize words’ frequency, utility, and relevance to
students' academic and real-world contexts?
● Do the materials provide opportunities for students to encounter and use targeted vocabulary multiple
times, in different contexts, and through varied activities?
● Do the materials encourage the use of vocabulary across different texts and subjects, promoting
reinforcement and deeper understanding?
● Is there a clear framework in the materials for introducing vocabulary words, making it easy for both
teachers and students to follow?
● Is there variety in the types of practices used (such as analyzing morphemes and etymology) to
accommodate diverse learning styles?
● How effectively do the materials teach students to use strategies like word maps, dictionary skills, and
context clues independently, and are these strategies clear, accessible, and practical for real-world
application?
● Are the student-friendly definitions of vocabulary high-quality, ensuring they relate to various contexts
beyond just the text being studied?
● Do the materials provide students with repeated encounters with key vocabulary before, during, and after
reading, enabling reinforcement and deeper understanding?
● Is there coherence in how vocabulary is integrated with the rest of the program, reinforcing overall
knowledge and skills?
During the cluster meeting:
● Share evidence of the indicator.
● Discuss whether the materials focus on vocabulary critical to understanding the texts being studied and
include high-utility academic words relevant across various subjects.
● Discuss whether there are criteria for vocabulary selection that emphasize words’ frequency, utility, and
relevance to students' academic and real-world contexts.
● Discuss whether the materials provide opportunities for students to encounter and use targeted
vocabulary multiple times, in different contexts, and through varied activities.
● Discuss whether the materials encourage the use of vocabulary across different texts and subjects,
promoting reinforcement and deeper understanding.
● Discuss whether there is a clear framework in the materials for introducing vocabulary words, making it
easy for both teachers and students to follow.
● Discuss whether there is variety in the types of practices used (such as analyzing morphemes and
etymology) to accommodate diverse learning styles.
● Discuss how effectively the materials teach students to use strategies like word maps, dictionary skills,
and context clues independently, and whether these strategies are clear, accessible, and practical for
real-world application.
● Discuss if the materials include student-friendly definitions of vocabulary are high-quality, ensuring they
relate to various contexts beyond just the text being studied.

● Discuss whether the materials provide students with repeated encounters with key vocabulary before,
during, and after reading, enabling reinforcement and deeper understanding.
● Discuss whether there is coherence in how vocabulary is integrated with the rest of the program,
reinforcing overall knowledge and skills.
● Look for and discuss whether the indicator was met fully, partially, or did not meet any scoring bullet in
the scoring section.
● Agree on the final rating.

Gateway 2: Comprehension Through Texts,
Questions, and Tasks
Criterion 2.2 Materials include questions, tasks, and assignments that are meaningful,
evidence-based, and support students in making meaning and building
knowledge as they progress toward grade-level mastery of literacy skills.
Materials include clear, explicit instruction guidance for teachers across all
literacy skills.

--- v2.0 source 2: Indicator 2l ---

Indicator 2l Materials include opportunities for students to practice independent
word-learning strategies, as well as newly taught vocabulary words.
Scoring:
2 points
Materials meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
1 point
Materials DO NOT meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
0 points
Materials DO NOT meet ANY of
the requirements of this indicator.
● Materials include opportunities for students to use independent word-learning strategies to understand
the meaning of challenging words (inferring from context, using morphological or etymological
awareness).
● Materials include opportunities for students to use academic and content-specific vocabulary in various
contexts.
● Practice opportunities incorporate the review of previously learned words based on their connection to
the topic of study.
About this indicator:
What is the purpose of this Indicator?
The purpose of this indicator is to ensure that materials include opportunities for students to practice using
essential vocabulary words and independent word learning strategies. This approach helps students build a
robust vocabulary, which is crucial for reading comprehension and overall literacy development. By providing
opportunities for students to practice independent word-learning strategies, materials help students become
self-sufficient learners who can decipher and understand unfamiliar words on their own. Practicing newly taught
vocabulary words allows students to reinforce their understanding and enhance retention through use in varied
contexts. By interacting with key academic vocabulary consistently, students can build a robust vocabulary base
that enhances their comprehension and communication skills across subjects. A strong vocabulary is crucial for
understanding texts and is often integral to higher-level academic work.
Research or Standards connection:
Appendix A of the Common Core State Standards underscores the vital role of rich and varied vocabulary in
enhancing reading comprehension and academic achievement, a link established through extensive research
since 1925. Although vocabulary instruction in schools often lacks consistency and depth, developing a robust

vocabulary requires repeated, varied exposure to words in diverse contexts. While children naturally acquire
vocabulary through context-rich oral interactions, vocabulary growth can stagnate without purposeful instruction,
especially in written language, where 5 to 15 percent of new words are typically retained upon first encounter.
Effective vocabulary development involves engaging students with words through various activities and
teaching the underlying structures of language, such as syntax and morphology. The text highlights a framework
by Isabel L. Beck, Margaret G. McKeown, and Linda Kucan that categorizes words into three tiers: commonly
used Tier I words, cross-disciplinary Tier II words that need careful instructional focus, and domain-specific Tier
III words that are often clearly taught within their respective fields. The model suggests that while Tier III words
are more explicitly defined, Tier II words, critical for academic success, require teachers to identify and address
them across all text types, integrating them into coherent, content-rich curricula to ensure comprehensive
vocabulary acquisition for students (p. 32-33).
The Report of the National Reading Panel highlights the critical role of vocabulary knowledge in reading
development, with vocabulary influencing both oral and print reading comprehension. The National Reading
Panel (NRP) examined over 20,000 research citations on vocabulary instruction, filtering them down to 50
studies based on strict criteria. These studies show that vocabulary instruction improves comprehension, but
methods need to be tailored to the reader's age and ability. Effective techniques include teaching words before
reading and repeated exposure to words in varied contexts. Vocabulary should be taught both directly and
indirectly, incorporating repetition and multiple exposures, supplemented by rich contexts and technology.
Direct instruction should engage students actively, and methods should be varied.
In Bringing Words to Life: Robust Vocabulary Instruction, Beck, McKeown, and Kucan (2013) examine effective
strategies for vocabulary instruction grounded in extensive research. They emphasize the importance of
teaching "tier II" words, which are versatile and applicable across various subjects, thus significantly impacting
students' academic performance. The authors present a research-based framework for vocabulary instruction
that includes explicit teaching of word meanings, facilitating rich language experiences, and promoting active
engagement with new words. A key aspect of their approach is fostering word consciousness, encouraging
students to become aware of and interested in words and their meanings.
In Effects of Instruction in Morphological Awareness on Literacy Achievement: An Integrative Review, Carlisle
(2010) reviews 16 studies on the effects of teaching morphological awareness (the ability to identify and analyze
word parts) to students. She explores how this practice impacts literacy development (including phonology,
orthography, and word meaning). Carlisle concludes that morphological awareness holds potential to improve
literacy, particularly when it deepens students' understanding of morphemic structure, spelling, and word
meaning.
In “Using Etymology as a Deliberate Vocabulary Learning Approach: A Psycholinguistic Analysis,” Alshatti (2023)
explores the use of etymology as a deliberate vocabulary learning approach for English language learners. The
author argues that etymology can help learners retain vocabulary, decipher unknown words, and develop a
deeper understanding of the language, surpassing the benefits of incidental learning. By understanding the
origins and building blocks of words, learners can activate existing knowledge (schema) and create nonverbal
associations (dual coding) to enhance retention. The author proposes a methodology incorporating contextual
stories, word part analysis, and engaging activities to facilitate this process, ultimately suggesting that teaching
etymology can be a valuable tool for English language learners, particularly at intermediate and advanced levels.
In “Etymology: A Word Attack Strategy for Learning the English Vocabulary,” Hashemi and Aziznezhad (2011)
argue that etymology is a crucial and effective method for expanding vocabulary for English language learners.
The authors highlight the importance of vocabulary acquisition for successful language learning, emphasizing
the limitations of traditional vocabulary instruction based solely on memorizing lists of words. They contend that
etymology, the scientific study of word origins, offers a more engaging and efficient approach. By understanding
the meanings of Latin and Greek roots, prefixes, and suffixes, learners can decipher the meanings of numerous

English words and remember them more effectively. The paper explores the origins and historical development
of the English language, categorizing words into different categories based on their source language
(Indo-European, Germanic, etc.). The authors illustrate the practical application of etymology by providing
examples of how understanding word parts can unlock the meanings of unknown words. They also emphasize
the significance of etymology in enhancing reading comprehension and word recognition skills. The article
concludes by advocating for the integration of etymology into vocabulary instruction as a powerful tool for
learners to expand their word power, improve comprehension, and enhance their overall language proficiency.
Resources:
● Appendix A of the CCSS
Indicator 2l Guiding Question:
Do the materials include opportunities for students to practice independent word-learning strategies, as well
as newly taught vocabulary words?
Evidence Collection
In the Instructional Materials being reviewed:
● Check if materials provide clear instructions and support for strategies like inferring meaning from
context and using morphological or etymological awareness.
● Assess whether these strategies are integrated into activities that encourage students to practice and
apply them independently.
● Determine whether materials offer varied contexts for students to use academic and content-specific
vocabulary, such as discussions, writing assignments, and projects, ensuring meaningful engagement
with the vocabulary.
● Look for activities that require students to demonstrate understanding and correct use of this vocabulary
in different contexts.
● Verify that practice opportunities are designed to reinforce and review previously learned vocabulary,
emphasizing how these words connect to the current topic of study.
● Confirm that materials encourage connections between new and existing vocabulary knowledge, aiding
comprehension and retention through thematic or conceptual links.
● Evaluate how materials promote the application of vocabulary beyond rote memorization, fostering
deeper understanding and exploration of word meanings.
Cluster Meeting
Preparing for the cluster meeting:
● Do the materials provide clear instructions and support for strategies like inferring meaning from context
and using morphological or etymological awareness?
● Are these strategies integrated into activities that encourage students to practice and apply them
independently?
● Do the materials offer varied contexts for students to use academic and content-specific vocabulary, such
as discussions, writing assignments, and projects, ensuring meaningful engagement with the vocabulary?
● Are there activities that require students to demonstrate understanding and correct use of vocabulary in
different contexts?
● Are practice opportunities designed to reinforce and review previously learned vocabulary, emphasizing
how these words connect to the current topic of study?

● Do the materials encourage connections between new and existing vocabulary knowledge, aiding
comprehension and retention through thematic or conceptual links?
● How effectively do the materials promote the application of vocabulary beyond rote memorization,
fostering deeper understanding and exploration of word meanings?
During the cluster meeting:
● Share evidence of the indicator.
● Discuss whether the materials provide clear instructions and support for strategies like inferring meaning
from context and using morphological or etymological awareness.
● Discuss whether these strategies are integrated into activities that encourage students to practice and
apply them independently.
● Discuss whether the materials offer varied contexts for students to use academic and content-specific
vocabulary, such as discussions, writing assignments, and projects, ensuring meaningful engagement
with the vocabulary.
● Discuss whether there are activities that require students to demonstrate understanding and correct use
of vocabulary in different contexts.
● Discuss whether there are practice opportunities designed to reinforce and review previously learned
vocabulary, emphasizing how these words connect to the current topic of study.
● Discuss whether the materials encourage connections between new and existing vocabulary knowledge,
aiding comprehension and retention through thematic or conceptual links.
● Discuss how effectively the materials promote the application of vocabulary beyond rote memorization,
deeper understanding, and exploration of word meanings.
● Look for and discuss whether the indicator was met fully, partially, or did not meet any scoring bullet in
the scoring section.
● Agree on the final rating.

Gateway 2: Comprehension Through Texts,
Questions, and Tasks
Criterion 2.2 Materials include questions, tasks, and assignments that are meaningful,
evidence-based, and support students in making meaning and building
knowledge as they progress toward grade-level mastery of literacy skills.
Materials include clear, explicit instruction guidance for teachers across all
literacy skills.

Indicator 2d Text sets (e.g., unit, module) are organized around topic(s) or theme(s) to
cohesively build student knowledge.
Scoring:
4 points
Materials meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
2 points
Materials DO NOT meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
0 points
Materials DO NOT meet ANY of
the requirements of this indicator.
● Text sets are organized around a grade-appropriate, tightly-connected topic or theme.
● Text set organization provides opportunities for students to address facets of the same topic or theme
over an extended period (e.g., a unit, module), enabling the development of deeper knowledge.
● Text sets cohesively build knowledge across a range of topics in social studies (including history), science,
the arts, and literature, exposing students to academic vocabulary, content knowledge, and complex
syntax.
About this indicator:
What is the purpose of this Indicator?
This indicator considers the connections between each core/anchor text in each unit/module. Reading a series
of texts on a topic(s)/theme(s) allows for students to develop coherent knowledge over time. A focused
topic/theme included for each text set increases students’ abilities to build knowledge and subsequently build
more vocabulary and reading ability. Building content knowledge across a broad range of topics helps students
understand the world better and fosters critical thinking skills. As students progress through the texts in a unit,
they should develop deeper knowledge by learning about different facets of a topic/theme. It’s important to note
that units/modules should be effectively designed to enhance student learning and comprehension across
various subjects. Encouraging connections between different fields, such as social studies, science, the arts, and
literature, helps students develop a well-rounded understanding and appreciation for diverse topics. By
incorporating academic vocabulary, students become familiar with the specific language used within each
discipline, which aids in comprehension and effective communication of complex ideas. Exposure to complex
sentence structures prepares students to comprehend and produce sophisticated texts, enhancing their reading
and writing abilities. Overall, this indicator is about ensuring that core/anchor texts are connected,
comprehensive, and challenging, to help students build essential knowledge and skills for academic success.
Research or Standards connection:
In “Effect of Prior Knowledge on Good and Poor Readers’ Memory of Text,” Recht and Leslie (1988) investigated
the effects of prior knowledge on reading comprehension, specifically examining the memory of text in good

and poor readers. They found that prior knowledge significantly impacted both the quantity and quality of recall
in all measures, regardless of reading ability. This suggests that having prior knowledge about a subject can
enhance comprehension and recall, even for students who struggle with reading comprehension. The study
further highlights the importance of prior knowledge in summarization, demonstrating that readers with high
prior knowledge can more effectively identify important ideas and create summaries that are closer to expert
summaries. Overall, this research emphasizes the crucial role of prior knowledge in reading comprehension and
suggests that incorporating prior knowledge into educational approaches could significantly improve student
learning.
In “The Role of Background Knowledge in Reading Comprehension: A Critical Review,” Smith, Snow, Serry, and
Hammond (2021) examined the impact of background knowledge on reading comprehension, analyzing 23
studies that focused on primary school-aged children. They concluded that prior knowledge plays a vital role in
reading comprehension, enhancing both the quantity and quality of information recalled, particularly for those
struggling with reading. However, the review emphasized that while background knowledge can partially
compensate for poor reading skills, it cannot fully address the challenges of making inferences and developing
a deep understanding of complex texts. Furthermore, the review highlighted the importance of text coherence
and cohesion, noting that low-cohesion texts can pose difficulties for readers with limited knowledge, while
high-knowledge readers benefit from such texts as they are forced to engage more actively with the material.
The review recommends that explicitly teaching background knowledge be a fundamental part of reading
instruction, alongside the teaching of comprehension strategies.
In “Building Insider Knowledge: Teaching Students to Read, Write, and Think within ELA and Across the
Disciplines,” Rainey and Moje (2012) argue that disciplinary literacy, the specific ways of reading, writing,
thinking, and reasoning used in different academic subjects, is crucial for student learning. The authors
demonstrate how a lack of understanding of these disciplinary practices can lead to students struggling to
comprehend texts and engage fully in their learning.
In “Building Background Knowledge Through Reading: Rethinking Text Sets,” Lupo, Strong, and Lewis (2017)
propose a "quad text set" framework, designed to improve adolescent literacy by using a combination of four
types of texts: a challenging target text, a visual or video text to activate background knowledge, informational
texts to build additional knowledge, and an accessible text to ensure connections. The authors argue that this
framework not only increases reading volume but also helps to build background knowledge and motivate
students to engage with challenging texts. They provide examples of how teachers can implement this
framework in ELA, social studies, and science classrooms, emphasizing the importance of incorporating
disciplinary literacy practices. The article addresses concerns about the use of challenging texts, suggesting that
with careful planning and a focus on building background knowledge, students can successfully engage with
such texts and reap the benefits of increased reading volume and exposure to complex ideas.
In “The Case for Bringing Content into the Language Arts Block and for a Knowledge-Rich Curriculum Core for
All Children,” Hirsch (2006) critiques current American educational practices, emphasizing that reading
comprehension relies heavily on background knowledge and vocabulary, not just decoding skills. It argues that
the prevalent focus on formal skills and strategies neglects the critical role of substantive content knowledge,
leading to stagnation in reading achievement and exacerbating educational inequities, particularly for
disadvantaged students. Hirsh calls for a curriculum overhaul to integrate broad, content-rich instruction from an
early age, enhancing students' comprehension and helping to bridge achievement gaps.
According to CCSS’ Key Shifts in English Language Arts, “students must be immersed in information about the
world around them if they are to develop the strong general knowledge and vocabulary they need to become
successful readers and be prepared for college, career, and life. Informational texts play an important part in

building students’ content knowledge. Further, it is vital for students to have extensive opportunities to build
knowledge through texts so they can learn independently.”
Resources:
● Key Shifts in English Language Arts
Indicator 2d Guiding Question:
Are text sets in each unit/module connected by a grade-appropriate topic or theme to cohesively build
student knowledge?
Evidence Collection
Note: It is not enough for text sets to be connected by a broad or vague topic or themes. Text sets should be
connected by a cohesive and specific topic or theme.
In the Instructional Materials being reviewed:
● Look at all core/anchor texts and text sets in sequence.
● Ensure that the topics or themes are suitable for the students' age and developmental level.
● Look for a logical organization of texts that facilitates learning. The progression should make sense and
support building understanding progressively.
● Ensure that the text sets are cohesive, with clear connections between each resource, allowing students
to explore the facets of a topic or theme thoroughly.
● Ensure that the text sets include materials from a range of subjects, such as social studies, science, the
arts, and literature.
● Evaluate the integration of academic vocabulary and complex syntax to promote language development
and discipline-specific literacy.
● Assess how well the texts build knowledge about the topic or theme, preparing students with
background information and context.
Note:
With regards to theme, it is important to review and ensure that the theme addressed in the materials works to
build knowledge. Note the theme title, the texts within the theme, essential questions, and tasks and evaluate
if those items work together to build knowledge of a topic within the theme.
Cluster Meeting
Preparing for the cluster meeting:
● Are the topics or themes suitable for the students' age and developmental level?
● Is there a logical organization of texts that facilitates learning, with a progression that supports building
understanding progressively?
● Are the text sets cohesive, with clear connections between each resource, allowing students to
thoroughly explore the facets of a topic or theme?
● Do the text sets include materials from a range of subjects, such as social studies, science, the arts, and
literature?
● Is there effective integration of academic vocabulary and complex syntax to promote language
development and discipline-specific literacy?
● How well do the texts build knowledge about the topic or theme, and do they prepare students with
background information and context?

During the cluster meeting:
● Share evidence of the indicator.
● Discuss the organization of the core/anchor texts in each unit/module to determine if they support
building knowledge over time.
● Discuss whether the text sets are cohesive, with clear connections between each resource, allowing
students to thoroughly explore the facets of a topic or theme.
● Discuss whether the text sets include materials from a range of subjects, such as social studies, science,
the arts, and literature.
● Discuss whether the materials effectively integrate academic vocabulary and complex syntax to promote
language development and discipline-specific literacy.
● Discuss how well the texts build knowledge about the topic or theme and how they prepare students
with background information and context.
● Look for and discuss whether the indicator was met fully, partially, or did not meet any scoring bullet in
the scoring section.
● Agree on the final rating.

Gateway 2: Comprehension Through Texts,
Questions, and Tasks
Criterion 2.1 Materials include content-rich, engaging texts that meet the text complexity
criteria for the grade level. Texts and text sets cohesively work together to
build knowledge of specific topics and/or content themes.

Indicator 2h Materials support students in developing their ability to comprehend complex
ideas within and across texts through opportunities to analyze and evaluate
texts.
Scoring:
2 points
Materials meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
1 point
Materials DO NOT meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
0 points
Materials DO NOT meet ANY of
the requirements of this indicator.
● Materials provide opportunities for students to analyze key ideas and details (according to grade-level
standards) within individual texts and across multiple texts to support students in making meaning.
● Materials provide opportunities for students to analyze craft and structure (according to grade-level
standards) within individual texts and across multiple texts to support students in making meaning.
● Materials provide opportunities for students to analyze the integration of knowledge and ideas (according
to grade-level standards) within individual texts and across multiple texts to support students in deepening
their understanding on a topic.
About this indicator:
What is the purpose of this Indicator?
This indicator considers the types of questions, tasks, and assignments that students complete throughout the
program as they interact with texts. Materials should provide opportunities for higher-order thinking skills,
specifically analysis and evaluation, which are essential for deep comprehension of complex ideas. Within the
CCSS, the reading standards are grouped into three different types of analyses that students should be able to
do with texts: analyzing key details and ideas, analyzing craft and structure, as well as analyzing the integration
of knowledge and ideas. Analyzing and evaluating texts enables students to understand not just the
surface-level information but also the underlying themes, concepts, and interconnections between various texts,
leading to a more profound comprehension of the material. Overall, this indicator ensures that the questions,
tasks, and assignments in a program are diversified and require students to implement these varying types of
analyses as they engage with complex texts.

Research or Standards connection:
The Common Core State Standards emphasize the importance of using evidence from both literary and
informational texts in reading, writing, and speaking. Rather than relying solely on students' prior knowledge and
experiences, the standards require them to answer questions based on careful reading and analysis of the texts.
The reading standards encourage students to comprehend information, arguments, and details by answering
text-dependent questions that necessitate inferences derived from the texts (Key Shifts in English Language
Arts).
In “Implementing the Common Core State Standards: A Primer on ‘Close Reading of Text',” Brown and Kappes
(2012) provide a definition of Close Reading and explain its importance in developing students' reading
comprehension skills and their ability to analyze complex texts. They argue that close reading is not just an
English language arts strategy, but can be effectively used across all academic disciplines. It also emphasizes
that prior knowledge plays a crucial role in close reading and that teachers must be mindful of this when
planning lessons. Finally, the document outlines key considerations for implementing close reading in practice,
including the importance of situating it within a broader literacy framework, understanding text complexity, and
using text-dependent questions effectively.
In Text-Dependent Questions: Pathways to Close and Critical Reading, Fisher and Frey (2014) provide educators
with strategies for designing effective text-dependent questions that facilitate close and critical reading among
students. The book emphasizes the importance of questions that require students to return to the text for
evidence, thereby deepening their comprehension and analytical skills. Fisher and Frey outline how to craft
questions that address different levels of understanding, from literal comprehension to inferential analysis and
evaluative thinking. They offer practical examples and guidance on implementing these strategies across grade
levels, from K-5 to 6-12, showing how text-dependent questions can enhance students' engagement with
complex texts and support their development as critical thinkers.
Resources:
● CCSS Key Shifts in English Language Arts
● CCSS Appendix A
● CCSS ELA Reading Anchor Standards (p.35)
Indicator 2h Guiding Question:
Do the materials support students in developing their ability to comprehend complex ideas within and across
texts through opportunities to analyze and evaluate texts?
Evidence Collection
Note:
● The first scoring bullet of this indicator attends to the key ideas and details (RI and RL.1-3) of the CCSS.
The second scoring bullet of this indicator attends to craft and structure (RI and RL.4-6) of the CCSS. The
third scoring bullet addresses integration of knowledge and ideas (RI and RL 7-9) of the CCSS.
In the Instructional Materials being reviewed:
● Open the CCSS for Reading and Literature for the appropriate grade-level(s) on the CCSS website.
● Ensure that materials offer activities or questions that require students to identify and discuss the main
ideas, themes, and supporting details of a text.

● Look for questions and tasks that encourage comparison and synthesis of information across multiple
texts, fostering a deeper understanding of texts.
● Check for alignment with grade-level standards, ensuring the complexity and depth of analysis are
appropriate for the students’ developmental stage.
● Review whether the materials prompt students to examine literary elements such as narrative voice, point
of view, and text structure.
● Assess if there are opportunities for students to explore how word choice (including figurative and
connotative meanings), sentence complexity, and paragraph organization impact meaning and tone.
● Look for questions and tasks that support students in understanding the author’s purpose and
perspective, encouraging them to evaluate how structure enhances the text’s meaning.
● Look for tasks that require students to connect ideas within and between texts, such as comparing
arguments, identifying conflicting information, and synthesizing information.
● Evaluate if the materials encourage critical thinking and problem-solving, prompting students to use
evidence from the text to support their analysis and conclusions.
● Review whether materials engage students in interdisciplinary connections, drawing on knowledge from
history, science, or other areas to deepen understanding, when applicable.
Cluster Meeting
Preparing for the cluster meeting:
● Do the materials include activities or questions that require students to identify and discuss the main
ideas, themes, and supporting details of a text? Do the materials include activities or questions that
require students to identify and discuss a text’s main ideas, themes, and supporting details?
● Are there questions and tasks that encourage students to compare and synthesize information across
multiple texts, thus fostering a deeper understanding of the material?
● Are the materials aligned with grade-level standards in terms of complexity and depth of analysis,
ensuring appropriateness for the students’ developmental stage?
● Do the materials prompt students to examine literary elements such as narrative voice, point of view, and
text structure?
● Is there an opportunity for students to explore how word choice (including figurative and connotative
meanings), sentence complexity, and paragraph organization impact meaning and tone?
● Are there questions and tasks that help students understand the author’s purpose and perspective, and
do they encourage evaluation of how structure enhances the text’s meaning?
● Do the materials include tasks that require students to connect ideas within and between texts, such as
comparing arguments, identifying conflicting information, and synthesizing information?
● Do the materials encourage critical thinking and problem-solving, prompting students to use evidence
from the text to support their analysis and conclusions?
● Do the materials engage students in interdisciplinary connections, drawing on knowledge from history,
science, or other areas to deepen understanding when applicable?
During the cluster meeting:
● Share evidence of the indicator.
● Look for and discuss whether the indicator was met fully, partially, or did not meet any scoring bullet in
the scoring section.
● Agree on the final rating.
● Discuss whether the materials include activities or questions that require students to identify and discuss
the main ideas, themes, and supporting details of a text.
● Discuss whether there are questions and tasks that encourage students to compare and synthesize
information across multiple texts, thus fostering a deeper understanding of the material.

● Discuss whether the materials are aligned with grade-level standards in terms of complexity and depth of
analysis, ensuring appropriateness for the students’ developmental stage.
● Discuss whether the materials prompt students to examine literary elements such as narrative voice,
point of view, and text structure.
● Discuss whether there is an opportunity for students to explore how word choice (including figurative and
connotative meanings), sentence complexity, and paragraph organization impact meaning and tone.
● Discuss whether there are questions and tasks that help students understand the author’s purpose and
perspective, and whether they encourage evaluation of how structure enhances the text’s meaning.
● Discuss whether the materials include tasks that require students to connect ideas within and between
texts, such as comparing arguments, identifying conflicting information, and synthesizing information.
● Discuss whether the materials encourage critical thinking and problem-solving, prompting students to use
evidence from the text to support their analysis and conclusions.
● Discuss whether the materials engage students in interdisciplinary connections, drawing on knowledge
from history, science, or other areas to deepen understanding when applicable.

Gateway 2: Comprehension Through Texts,
Questions, and Tasks
Criterion 2.2 Materials include questions, tasks, and assignments that are meaningful,
evidence-based, and support students in making meaning and building
knowledge as they progress toward grade-level mastery of literacy skills.
Materials include clear, explicit instruction guidance for teachers across all
literacy skills.

Indicator 2h Materials support students in developing their ability to comprehend complex
ideas within and across texts through opportunities to analyze and evaluate
texts.
Scoring:
2 points
Materials meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
1 point
Materials DO NOT meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
0 points
Materials DO NOT meet ANY of
the requirements of this indicator.
● Materials provide opportunities for students to analyze key ideas and details (according to grade-level
standards) within individual texts and across multiple texts to support students in making meaning.
● Materials provide opportunities for students to analyze craft and structure (according to grade-level
standards) within individual texts and across multiple texts to support students in making meaning.
● Materials provide opportunities for students to analyze the integration of knowledge and ideas (according
to grade-level standards) within individual texts and across multiple texts to support students in deepening
their understanding on a topic.
About this indicator:
What is the purpose of this Indicator?
This indicator considers the types of questions, tasks, and assignments that students complete throughout the
program as they interact with texts. Materials should provide opportunities for higher-order thinking skills,
specifically analysis and evaluation, which are essential for deep comprehension of complex ideas. Within the
CCSS, the reading standards are grouped into three different types of analyses that students should be able to
do with texts: analyzing key details and ideas, analyzing craft and structure, as well as analyzing the integration
of knowledge and ideas. Analyzing and evaluating texts enables students to understand not just the
surface-level information but also the underlying themes, concepts, and interconnections between various texts,
leading to a more profound comprehension of the material. Overall, this indicator ensures that the questions,
tasks, and assignments in a program are diversified and require students to implement these varying types of
analyses as they engage with complex texts.

Research or Standards connection:
The Common Core State Standards emphasize the importance of using evidence from both literary and
informational texts in reading, writing, and speaking. Rather than relying solely on students' prior knowledge and
experiences, the standards require them to answer questions based on careful reading and analysis of the texts.
The reading standards encourage students to comprehend information, arguments, and details by answering
text-dependent questions that necessitate inferences derived from the texts (Key Shifts in English Language
Arts).
In “Implementing the Common Core State Standards: A Primer on ‘Close Reading of Text',” Brown and Kappes
(2012) provide a definition of Close Reading and explain its importance in developing students' reading
comprehension skills and their ability to analyze complex texts. They argue that close reading is not just an
English language arts strategy, but can be effectively used across all academic disciplines. It also emphasizes
that prior knowledge plays a crucial role in close reading and that teachers must be mindful of this when
planning lessons. Finally, the document outlines key considerations for implementing close reading in practice,
including the importance of situating it within a broader literacy framework, understanding text complexity, and
using text-dependent questions effectively.
In Text-Dependent Questions: Pathways to Close and Critical Reading, Fisher and Frey (2014) provide educators
with strategies for designing effective text-dependent questions that facilitate close and critical reading among
students. The book emphasizes the importance of questions that require students to return to the text for
evidence, thereby deepening their comprehension and analytical skills. Fisher and Frey outline how to craft
questions that address different levels of understanding, from literal comprehension to inferential analysis and
evaluative thinking. They offer practical examples and guidance on implementing these strategies across grade
levels, from K-5 to 6-12, showing how text-dependent questions can enhance students' engagement with
complex texts and support their development as critical thinkers.
Resources:
● CCSS Key Shifts in English Language Arts
● CCSS Appendix A
● CCSS ELA Reading Anchor Standards (p.35)
Indicator 2h Guiding Question:
Do the materials support students in developing their ability to comprehend complex ideas within and across
texts through opportunities to analyze and evaluate texts?
Evidence Collection
Note:
● The first scoring bullet of this indicator attends to the key ideas and details (RI and RL.1-3) of the CCSS.
The second scoring bullet of this indicator attends to craft and structure (RI and RL.4-6) of the CCSS. The
third scoring bullet addresses integration of knowledge and ideas (RI and RL 7-9) of the CCSS.
In the Instructional Materials being reviewed:
● Open the CCSS for Reading and Literature for the appropriate grade-level(s) on the CCSS website.
● Ensure that materials offer activities or questions that require students to identify and discuss the main
ideas, themes, and supporting details of a text.

● Look for questions and tasks that encourage comparison and synthesis of information across multiple
texts, fostering a deeper understanding of texts.
● Check for alignment with grade-level standards, ensuring the complexity and depth of analysis are
appropriate for the students’ developmental stage.
● Review whether the materials prompt students to examine literary elements such as narrative voice, point
of view, and text structure.
● Assess if there are opportunities for students to explore how word choice (including figurative and
connotative meanings), sentence complexity, and paragraph organization impact meaning and tone.
● Look for questions and tasks that support students in understanding the author’s purpose and
perspective, encouraging them to evaluate how structure enhances the text’s meaning.
● Look for tasks that require students to connect ideas within and between texts, such as comparing
arguments, identifying conflicting information, and synthesizing information.
● Evaluate if the materials encourage critical thinking and problem-solving, prompting students to use
evidence from the text to support their analysis and conclusions.
● Review whether materials engage students in interdisciplinary connections, drawing on knowledge from
history, science, or other areas to deepen understanding, when applicable.
Cluster Meeting
Preparing for the cluster meeting:
● Do the materials include activities or questions that require students to identify and discuss the main
ideas, themes, and supporting details of a text? Do the materials include activities or questions that
require students to identify and discuss a text’s main ideas, themes, and supporting details?
● Are there questions and tasks that encourage students to compare and synthesize information across
multiple texts, thus fostering a deeper understanding of the material?
● Are the materials aligned with grade-level standards in terms of complexity and depth of analysis,
ensuring appropriateness for the students’ developmental stage?
● Do the materials prompt students to examine literary elements such as narrative voice, point of view, and
text structure?
● Is there an opportunity for students to explore how word choice (including figurative and connotative
meanings), sentence complexity, and paragraph organization impact meaning and tone?
● Are there questions and tasks that help students understand the author’s purpose and perspective, and
do they encourage evaluation of how structure enhances the text’s meaning?
● Do the materials include tasks that require students to connect ideas within and between texts, such as
comparing arguments, identifying conflicting information, and synthesizing information?
● Do the materials encourage critical thinking and problem-solving, prompting students to use evidence
from the text to support their analysis and conclusions?
● Do the materials engage students in interdisciplinary connections, drawing on knowledge from history,
science, or other areas to deepen understanding when applicable?
During the cluster meeting:
● Share evidence of the indicator.
● Look for and discuss whether the indicator was met fully, partially, or did not meet any scoring bullet in
the scoring section.
● Agree on the final rating.
● Discuss whether the materials include activities or questions that require students to identify and discuss
the main ideas, themes, and supporting details of a text.
● Discuss whether there are questions and tasks that encourage students to compare and synthesize
information across multiple texts, thus fostering a deeper understanding of the material.

● Discuss whether the materials are aligned with grade-level standards in terms of complexity and depth of
analysis, ensuring appropriateness for the students’ developmental stage.
● Discuss whether the materials prompt students to examine literary elements such as narrative voice,
point of view, and text structure.
● Discuss whether there is an opportunity for students to explore how word choice (including figurative and
connotative meanings), sentence complexity, and paragraph organization impact meaning and tone.
● Discuss whether there are questions and tasks that help students understand the author’s purpose and
perspective, and whether they encourage evaluation of how structure enhances the text’s meaning.
● Discuss whether the materials include tasks that require students to connect ideas within and between
texts, such as comparing arguments, identifying conflicting information, and synthesizing information.
● Discuss whether the materials encourage critical thinking and problem-solving, prompting students to use
evidence from the text to support their analysis and conclusions.
● Discuss whether the materials engage students in interdisciplinary connections, drawing on knowledge
from history, science, or other areas to deepen understanding when applicable.

Gateway 2: Comprehension Through Texts,
Questions, and Tasks
Criterion 2.2 Materials include questions, tasks, and assignments that are meaningful,
evidence-based, and support students in making meaning and building
knowledge as they progress toward grade-level mastery of literacy skills.
Materials include clear, explicit instruction guidance for teachers across all
literacy skills.

Indicator 2v Materials include culminating tasks/summative assessments that require
students to demonstrate the knowledge and skills acquired throughout the
unit/module while integrating multiple literacy skills (e.g., a combination of
reading, writing, speaking, and listening).
Scoring:
4 points
Materials meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
2 points
Materials DO NOT meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
0 points
Materials DO NOT meet ANY of
the requirements of this indicator.
● Culminating tasks/summative assessments are evident in each unit/module and align to the
unit’s/module’s topic or theme.
● Culminating tasks/summative assessments provide students with the opportunity to demonstrate the
knowledge and skills acquired throughout the unit/module while integrating multiple literacy skills
(reading, writing, speaking, listening).
● Materials provide opportunities to support students in gaining the knowledge and skills needed to
complete the culminating tasks/summative assessments.
● Materials include guidance that supports the teacher in determining and evaluating student performance
on the culminating tasks/summative assessments in the program.
About this indicator:
What is the purpose of this Indicator?
While the previous indicator examined formative assessments, this indicator examines the culminating
tasks/summative assessments included in a program. These culminating tasks/summative assessments should
be designed to require students to synthesize and apply the knowledge and skills they have acquired
throughout the instructional period. By integrating multiple literacy skills, such as reading, writing, speaking, and
listening, these assessments evaluate a student's ability to use and combine these skills in a coherent and
meaningful way, reflecting real-world applications. By being rooted in the content of the unit/module, these
assessments should provide the teacher with information about how much each student grasped the content
they learned in the unit/module and provide each student with the opportunity to synthesize their learning on
the topic/theme. Overall, the purpose of this indicator is to ensure that materials include culminating tasks or

summative assessments at the end of a unit or module that evaluate students' overall understanding and
mastery of the content and skills learned.
Research or Standards connection:
According to the Common Core State Standards Anchor Writing Standard 10 (pg. 41), students should be able to
“write routinely over extended time frames.”
In “To Make Progress in Reading, We Need to Monitor It Differently,” Wexler (2023) argues that "data-driven"
reading instruction is often ineffective because the standardized tests used to guide it are flawed. These tests,
which are widely used to assess reading levels and predict performance, fail to accurately evaluate students'
reading comprehension. Often, they do not account for a student's background knowledge, which significantly
affects comprehension. Additionally, many assessments conflate decoding skills with comprehension, leading to
inappropriate instructional focus. The article suggests that assessments should separately measure decoding
and comprehension abilities, be grounded in content that has been taught, and focus on building students'
knowledge base. Instead of relying on standardized reading comprehension tests, educators should implement
assessments that reflect the curriculum content and enhance retention through retrieval practice. This approach,
combined with content-rich instruction and writing practice, can improve overall reading proficiency. Educators
should communicate these limitations to parents who ask about reading levels and focus on meaningful
progress in knowledge and analytical skills.
In “Performance Assessment - What Is It and Why Is It Useful?,” the Assessment Learning Network (2017),
explains that performance assessments are a type of assessment that asks students to demonstrate their
knowledge and skills by creating a product, presentation, or demonstration. Performance assessments can be
used to measure a variety of literacy skills and can also be used to assess student understanding of complex
concepts.
In “Performance-Based Assessment in the Classroom,” McTighe and Ferrara (1994) advocate for a more
student-centered approach to classroom assessment, emphasizing its primary purpose as a tool to inform
teaching and improve learning rather than sorting, selecting, or justifying grades. The authors outline three
essential principles for effective assessment: promoting learning, using multiple sources of information, and
ensuring fairness, validity, and reliability. They then present a framework for selecting assessment methods
based on identified learning outcomes, purposes, and audience, exploring the strengths and weaknesses of
different types of assessment, such as performance-based and process-focused. The article stresses the
importance of collaborative assessment practices, involving students in the process, and encouraging teachers
to communicate assessment results effectively to students, parents, and school administrators. The authors
conclude by underscoring the need for teachers to develop their assessment literacy and to use a variety of
methods to gain a richer understanding of student learning and guide students in developing their critical
thinking, problem-solving, and communication skills.
In “Integrating Listening, Speaking, Reading, and Writing in the Classroom,” Dolan (1985) argues for an
integrated approach to teaching language arts in the classroom, where listening, speaking, reading, and writing
are interconnected and used to achieve a common goal. Dolan outlines the aims and priorities of an integrated
classroom, emphasizing the importance of oracy (listening and speaking) as well as literacy (reading and writing),
and the use of thematic units to create a more engaging and relevant learning experience. She suggests
including a variety of materials and resources to tap the full potential of the topic and encourage student
identification with the subject matter. Dolan concludes by advocating for a process-oriented approach to writing,
which involves students in the entire process from brainstorming to revising and publishing.
Resources:
● CCSS Anchor Writing Standard 10 (pg. 41)

Indicator 2v Guiding Question:
Do materials include culminating tasks/summative assessments that require students to demonstrate the
knowledge and skills acquired throughout the unit/module while integrating multiple literacy skills?
Evidence Collection
In the instructional materials being reviewed:
● Check if there are culminating tasks or summative assessments present in each unit or module, and if
these tasks/assessments clearly align with the unit’s or module’s topic or theme. The assessments
should feel relevant and connected to the material covered.
● Consider if the tasks require students to integrate multiple literacy skills, such as reading, writing,
speaking, and listening. Check if the assessments are designed to evaluate students’ ability to
synthesize and apply these skills comprehensively.
● Verify if the materials provide opportunities and resources that help students gain and refine the
knowledge and skills needed to successfully complete the culminating tasks or summative
assessments. Look for activities, practice exercises, and instructional support embedded throughout
the unit.
● Check if there is clear guidance provided for teachers on how to assess and evaluate student
performance on the culminating tasks. This might include rubrics, scoring guides, exemplar responses,
and criteria for measuring proficiency.
Cluster Meeting
Preparing for the cluster meeting:
● Are there culminating tasks or summative assessments present in each unit or module, and do these
tasks/assessments clearly align with the unit’s or module’s topic or theme?
● Do the tasks require students to integrate multiple literacy skills, such as reading, writing, speaking,
and listening?
● Do the materials provide opportunities and resources that help students gain and refine the
knowledge and skills needed to successfully complete the culminating tasks or summative
assessments?
● Is there clear guidance provided for teachers on how to assess and evaluate student performance on
the culminating tasks, such as rubrics, scoring guides, exemplar responses, and criteria for measuring
proficiency?
During the cluster meeting:
● Share evidence of the indicator.
● Discuss whether there are culminating tasks or summative assessments present in each unit or
module, and if these tasks/assessments clearly align with the unit’s or module’s topic or theme.
● Discuss whether the tasks require students to integrate multiple literacy skills, such as reading, writing,
speaking, and listening.
● Discuss whether the materials provide opportunities and resources that help students gain and refine
the knowledge and skills needed to successfully complete the culminating tasks or summative
assessments.
● Discuss whether there is clear guidance provided for teachers on how to assess and evaluate student
performance on the culminating tasks, such as rubrics, scoring guides, exemplar responses, and
criteria for measuring proficiency.

● Look for and discuss whether the indicator was met fully, partially, or did not meet any scoring bullet in
the scoring section.
● Agree on the final rating.

Gateway 3: Teacher and Student Supports
Criterion 3.1
Teacher Supports
Materials include opportunities for teachers to effectively plan and utilize materials with integrity and to further
develop their own understanding of the content.
What is the purpose of this Criterion?
This criterion examines how the materials support teachers in several key areas: delivering student and
ancillary materials with a particular focus on students’ literacy development, understanding the instructional
approaches of the program and the research-based strategies employed, and comprehending the range of
supplies used throughout the program. Additionally, it supports teachers in improving their own knowledge of
the subject beyond the grade level and in understanding the role and coverage of standards throughout the
program. It also aids in planning effective instruction by detailing appropriate materials and offering guidance
on how caregivers can support student progress and achievement. Lastly, the materials provide support for
interpreting and evaluating student performance throughout the assessment system, ensuring teachers have
the tools they need to assess and respond to student learning needs effectively.
Scoring:
Meets Expectations
● 8-10 points
Partially Meets Expectations
● 5-7 points
Does Not Meet Expectations
● <5 points

Gateway 3: Teacher and Student Supports
Criterion 3.1 Materials include opportunities for teachers to effectively plan and utilize
materials with integrity and to further develop their own understanding of the
content.

--- v2.0 source 1: Indicator 2q ---

Indicator 2q Materials include frequent opportunities for students to practice the writing
processes using evidence-based strategies, embedded in what students are
studying throughout the unit.
Scoring:
2 points
Materials meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
1 point
Materials DO NOT meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
0 points
Materials DO NOT meet ANY of
the requirements of this indicator.
● Materials include multiple opportunities for students to plan writing (e.g., with graphic organizers).
● Materials include multiple opportunities for students to draft their writing.
● Materials include multiple opportunities for students to revise and edit their writing with grade-appropriate
strategies and tools.
● Materials include multiple opportunities for students to use technology to produce and publish writing.
About this indicator:
What is the purpose of this Indicator?
While the previous indicator considered whether materials include opportunities for students to practice both
on-demand and process writing, this indicator solely looks at process writing (at the paragraph and
multi-paragraph level). Materials should include ample opportunities to apply these processes through proven,
evidence-based strategies. Frequent practice helps students refine their ability to express ideas clearly and
effectively. This indicator uses the term “processes” instead of process to emphasize that, depending on the
genre and intended audience of a piece of writing, the writing process differs. Through exposure to varied
writing processes, students learn how to adapt their writing style and approach to suit different contexts, genres,
and audiences, enhancing their versatility as writers. This indicator also considers whether students have
opportunities to use technology to produce and publish writing pieces. Understanding and practicing the writing
process—planning, drafting, revising, editing, and publishing—can lead to more organized and coherent writing.
Research or Standards connection:
In the Introduction to the Writing Standards (pg. 42), the Common Core State Standards state, “Each year in their
writing, students should demonstrate increasing sophistication in all aspects of language use, from vocabulary

and syntax to the development and organization of ideas, and they should address increasingly demanding
content and sources.”
In “Writing Next: Effective Strategies to Improve Writing of Adolescents in Middle and High Schools,” Graham
and Perin (2007) present a critical analysis of adolescent writing instruction in the United States, highlighting a
significant crisis in writing proficiency. They argue that while reading instruction has shown progress, adolescent
writing skills have remained stagnant. The report uses meta-analysis to synthesize a large body of research on
writing instruction and identifies 11 key elements that are supported by evidence:
● Writing Strategies: Teaching students specific strategies for planning, revising, and editing.
● Summarization: Explicitly teaching students how to summarize texts.
● Collaborative Writing: Using instructional arrangements where students work together to write.
● Specific Product Goals: Assigning students specific, achievable goals for their writing.
● Word Processing: Using computers and word processors as instructional tools.
● Sentence Combining: Teaching students to construct more complex sentences.
● Prewriting: Engaging students in activities designed to generate or organize ideas for writing.
● Inquiry Activities: Engaging students in analyzing data to develop ideas for writing.
● Process Writing Approach: Interweaving a variety of writing activities in a workshop environment.
● Study of Models: Providing opportunities for students to read, analyze, and emulate good writing.
● Writing for Content Learning: Using writing as a tool for learning content material.
In “Evidence-Based Recommendations for Teaching Writing,” Graham, Collins, and Ciullo (2024) provide 11
evidence-based recommendations for effective writing instruction, drawing on a comprehensive review of nearly
1,000 research studies. They emphasize the importance of providing support for students as they write, teaching
foundational writing skills, incorporating twenty-first century tools, and encouraging students to write across the
curriculum, connecting writing with reading. The authors also highlight the crucial role of creating a motivating
writing environment where students are encouraged to try hard and believe in their abilities. They conclude by
emphasizing the importance of teaching writing effectively, advocating for a more holistic approach that
recognizes the evolving landscape of technology and communication in society.
Resources:
● CCSS Anchor Writing Standards (p. 41)
● Introduction to the Writing Standards (p. 42)
Indicator 2q Guiding Question:
Do materials include frequent opportunities for students to practice the writing processes using
evidence-based strategies, embedded in what students are studying throughout the unit?
Evidence Collection
Note: This indicator uses the term “processes” instead of process to emphasize that depending on the genre
and intended audience of a piece of writing, the writing process differs.
Note: If materials do not include writing opportunities for all types of writing processes (to inform, to persuade,
to convey experience), it can not fully meet expectations for this indicator.
In the Instructional Materials being reviewed:
● Check to see that the materials provide graphic organizers (e.g., mind maps, outlines, storyboards) to
help students organize their thoughts/writing effectively.

● Identify if there are dedicated timeframes in the curriculum for planning writing across different types of
writing.
● Assess the presence of activities where students create initial drafts, possibly with prompts or templates.
● Check whether materials suggest breaking down the drafting process into manageable sections.
● Evaluate if there are opportunities for teacher and peer feedback on drafts, allowing students to refine
their work.
● Look for specific strategies provided for revision.
● Assess the inclusion of grade-appropriate editing tools (e.g., grammar checklists, peer review guidelines).
● Check for the presence of recommendations for specific technologies and platforms (e.g., word
processors, blogs, collaborative documents) that facilitate writing.
● Assess if there are suggestions for avenues to publish or share student writing, such as online platforms,
class newsletters, or school websites.
Cluster Meeting
Preparing for the cluster meeting:
● Do the materials provide graphic organizers (e.g., mind maps, outlines, storyboards) to help students
organize their thoughts and writing effectively?
● Are there dedicated timeframes in the curriculum for planning writing across different types of writing?
● Are there activities that allow students to create initial drafts, possibly with prompts or templates?
● Do the materials suggest breaking down the drafting process into manageable sections?
● Are there opportunities for teacher and peer feedback on drafts to help students refine their work?
● What specific strategies are provided for revision?
● Are grade-appropriate editing tools (e.g., grammar checklists, peer review guidelines) included in the
materials?
● Do the materials include recommendations for specific technologies and platforms (e.g., word
processors, blogs, collaborative documents) that facilitate writing?
● Are there suggestions for avenues to publish or share student writing, such as online platforms, class
newsletters, or school websites?
During the cluster meeting:
● Share evidence of the indicator.
● Discuss whether the materials provide graphic organizers (e.g., mind maps, outlines, storyboards) to help
students organize their thoughts and writing effectively.
● Discuss whether there are dedicated timeframes in the curriculum for planning writing across different
types of writing.
● Discuss whether there are activities that allow students to create initial drafts, possibly with prompts or
templates.
● Discuss whether the materials suggest breaking down the drafting process into manageable sections.
● Discuss whether there are opportunities for teacher and peer feedback on drafts to help students refine
their work.
● Discuss the strategies provided for revision.
● Discuss whether there are grade-appropriate editing tools (e.g., grammar checklists, peer review
guidelines) included in the materials.
● Discuss whether the materials include recommendations for specific technologies and platforms (e.g.,
word processors, blogs, collaborative documents) that facilitate writing.
● Discuss whether there are suggestions for avenues to publish or share student writing, such as online
platforms, class newsletters, or school websites.

● Look for and discuss whether the indicator was met fully, partially, or did not meet any scoring bullet in
the scoring section.
● Agree on the final rating.

Gateway 2: Comprehension Through Texts,
Questions, and Tasks
Criterion 2.2 Materials include questions, tasks, and assignments that are meaningful,
evidence-based, and support students in making meaning and building
knowledge as they progress toward grade-level mastery of literacy skills.
Materials include clear, explicit instruction guidance for teachers across all
literacy skills.

--- v2.0 source 2: Indicator 2p ---

Indicator 2p Materials include explicit instruction in varied writing processes, embedded in
what students are studying throughout the unit.
Scoring:
2 points
Materials meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
1 point
Materials DO NOT meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
0 points
Materials DO NOT meet ANY of
the requirements of this indicator.
● Materials include explicit instruction in writing processes (paragraph and multi-paragraph construction for
varying purposes), embedded in what students are studying throughout the unit.
● Materials provide teachers with mentor texts and/or student exemplars to support students in examining
how the genre works.
● Materials provide guidance and instruction to teachers on how to provide timely and constructive
feedback on student writing.
About this indicator:
What is the purpose of this Indicator?
While the previous indicator considered whether materials include opportunities for students to practice both
on-demand and process writing, this indicator solely looks at process writing (at the paragraph and
multi-paragraph level). Materials should include clear and structured guidance on the various stages of writing
processes, as well as ample opportunities to apply these processes through proven, evidence-based strategies.
This indicator uses the term “processes” instead of process to emphasize that, depending on the genre and
intended audience of a piece of writing, the writing process differs. Through exposure to varied writing
processes, students learn how to adapt their writing style and approach to suit different contexts, genres, and
audiences, enhancing their versatility as writers. Teacher guidance should include explicit instruction to help
students understand and navigate the stages of writing—prewriting, drafting, revising, editing, and
publishing—enhancing their overall writing proficiency. By breaking down the writing process into clear,
manageable steps, students can approach writing tasks with more confidence and clarity and master organizing
and developing their ideas. In order to meet expectations for this indicator, materials should also include teacher
guidance on providing timely and constructive writing feedback that supports students in improving their writing
skills.
Research or Standards connection:

In the Introduction to the Writing Standards (pg. 42), the Common Core State Standards state, “Each year in their
writing, students should demonstrate increasing sophistication in all aspects of language use, from vocabulary
and syntax to the development and organization of ideas, and they should address increasingly demanding
content and sources.”
In “Writing Next: Effective Strategies to Improve Writing of Adolescents in Middle and High Schools,” Graham
and Perin (2007) present a critical analysis of adolescent writing instruction in the United States, highlighting a
significant crisis in writing proficiency. They argue that while reading instruction has shown progress, adolescent
writing skills have remained stagnant. The report uses meta-analysis to synthesize a large body of research on
writing instruction and identifies 11 key elements that are supported by evidence:
● Writing Strategies: Teaching students specific strategies for planning, revising, and editing.
● Summarization: Explicitly teaching students how to summarize texts.
● Collaborative Writing: Using instructional arrangements where students work together to write.
● Specific Product Goals: Assigning students specific, achievable goals for their writing.
● Word Processing: Using computers and word processors as instructional tools.
● Sentence Combining: Teaching students to construct more complex sentences.
● Prewriting: Engaging students in activities designed to generate or organize ideas for writing.
● Inquiry Activities: Engaging students in analyzing data to develop ideas for writing.
● Process Writing Approach: Interweaving a variety of writing activities in a workshop environment.
● Study of Models: Providing opportunities for students to read, analyze, and emulate good writing.
● Writing for Content Learning: Using writing as a tool for learning content material.
In “Evidence-Based Recommendations for Teaching Writing,” Graham, Collins, and Ciullo (2024) provide 11
evidence-based recommendations for effective writing instruction, drawing on a comprehensive review of nearly
1,000 research studies. They emphasize the importance of providing support for students as they write, teaching
foundational writing skills, incorporating twenty-first century tools, and encouraging students to write across the
curriculum, connecting writing with reading. The authors also highlight the crucial role of creating a motivating
writing environment where students are encouraged to try hard and believe in their abilities. They conclude by
emphasizing the importance of teaching writing effectively, advocating for a more holistic approach that
recognizes the evolving landscape of technology and communication in society.
Resources:
● CCSS Anchor Writing Standards (p. 41)
● Introduction to the Writing Standards (p. 42)
Indicator 2p Guiding Question:
Do the materials include explicit instruction in varied writing processes, embedded in what students are
studying throughout the unit?
Evidence Collection
Note: This indicator uses the term “processes” instead of process to emphasize that depending on the genre
and intended audience of a piece of writing, the writing process differs.
In the Instructional Materials being reviewed:
● Look for clear, structured lessons that provide explicit instruction on each stage of the writing process,
including prewriting, drafting, revising, editing, and publishing.

● Ensure that the materials include teacher modeling of writing strategies and processes, demonstrating
how to approach writing tasks effectively.
● Verify that the materials provide mentor texts and student exemplars that illustrate how different genres
work and highlight effective writing techniques.
● Look to see that the materials include clear, step-by-step guidance on writing processes for constructing
paragraphs and multi-paragraph texts for various purposes (e.g., narrative, persuasive, expository).
● Check to see that the materials provide clear guidance and strategies for teachers on how to offer timely
and constructive feedback on student writing. This includes criteria for evaluating writing and
suggestions for improvement.
● Evaluate whether the materials encourage a supportive feedback approach, focusing on developmental
growth and specific areas for revision, rather than only on errors.
● Ensure that the instruction on writing processes is integrated with activities that allow students to
practice these processes, reinforcing learned strategies in authentic writing tasks.
● Ensure that guidance is included to help teachers support students in improving their writing skills
through targeted and actionable feedback.
Cluster Meeting
Preparing for the cluster meeting:
● Do the materials provide clear, structured lessons that offer explicit instruction on each stage of the
writing process, including prewriting, drafting, revising, editing, and publishing?
● Do the materials include teacher modeling of writing strategies and processes, demonstrating effective
approaches to writing tasks?
● Do the materials provide mentor texts and student exemplars that illustrate how different genres work
and highlight effective writing techniques?
● Is there clear, step-by-step guidance in the materials on writing processes for constructing paragraphs
and multi-paragraph texts for various purposes (e.g., narrative, persuasive, expository)?
● Do the materials offer clear guidance and strategies for teachers on how to provide timely and
constructive feedback on student writing, including criteria for evaluating writing and suggestions for
improvement?
● Do the materials encourage a supportive feedback approach that focuses on developmental growth and
specific areas for revision, rather than solely on errors?
● Is the instruction on writing processes integrated with activities that allow students to practice these
processes, reinforcing learned strategies in authentic writing tasks?
● Is there guidance included to help teachers support students in improving their writing skills through
targeted and actionable feedback?
During the cluster meeting:
● Share evidence of the indicator.
● Discuss whether the materials provide clear, structured lessons that offer explicit instruction on each
stage of the writing process, including prewriting, drafting, revising, editing, and publishing.
● Discuss whether the materials include teacher modeling of writing strategies and processes,
demonstrating effective approaches to writing tasks.
● Discuss whether the materials provide mentor texts and student exemplars that illustrate how different
genres work and highlight effective writing techniques.
● Discuss whether there is clear, step-by-step guidance in the materials on writing processes for
constructing paragraphs and multi-paragraph texts for various purposes (e.g., narrative, persuasive,
expository).

● Discuss whether the materials offer clear guidance and strategies for teachers on how to provide timely
and constructive feedback on student writing, including criteria for evaluating writing and suggestions for
improvement.
● Discuss whether the materials encourage a supportive feedback approach that focuses on
developmental growth and specific areas for revision, rather than solely on errors.
● Discuss whether the instruction on writing processes is integrated with activities that allow students to
practice these processes, reinforcing learned strategies in authentic writing tasks.
● Discuss whether there is guidance included to help teachers support students in improving their writing
skills through targeted and actionable feedback.
● Look for and discuss whether the indicator was met fully, partially, or did not meet any scoring bullet in
the scoring section.
● Agree on the final rating.

Gateway 2: Comprehension Through Texts,
Questions, and Tasks
Criterion 2.2 Materials include questions, tasks, and assignments that are meaningful,
evidence-based, and support students in making meaning and building
knowledge as they progress toward grade-level mastery of literacy skills.
Materials include clear, explicit instruction guidance for teachers across all
literacy skills.

--- v2.0 source 1: Indicator 2s ---

Indicator 2s Materials include explicit instruction of research skills that guide research and
writing projects to encourage students to develop knowledge of a topic by
confronting and analyzing different aspects of a topic using multiple texts and
source materials.
Scoring:
2 points
Materials meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
1 points
Materials DO NOT meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
0 points
Materials DO NOT meet ANY of
the requirements of this indicator.
● Materials include research projects to build research skills that lead to mastery of the grade-level
standards.
● Materials include explicit instruction of research skills that encourage students to develop knowledge of a
topic by confronting and analyzing different aspects of a topic using multiple texts and source materials.
About this indicator:
What is the purpose of this Indicator?
The purpose of this indicator is to ensure that materials include explicit instruction to support students in
building the research skills they need to be successful throughout their education and careers. Students should
participate in structured research that helps them deepen their understanding of a particular topic by examining
various facets of a topic through multiple texts and sources. This indicator examines whether research projects
are present in materials and whether teacher guidance for these research projects is thorough. Consequently, as
students develop their research and analysis skills, they develop the media literacy skills that they need to be
successful citizens in the digital age.
Research or Standards connection:
The Introduction to the Common Core State Standards (p. 7) states, “Students establish a base of knowledge
across a wide range of subject matter by engaging with works of quality and substance. They become proficient
in new areas through research and study. They read purposefully and listen attentively to gain both general
knowledge and discipline-specific expertise. They refine and share their knowledge through writing and
speaking.”

In “Measuring the Acquisition of Media-Literacy Skills,” Hobbs and Frost (2003) investigate the impact of a
yearlong media literacy curriculum on students' reading comprehension, writing skills, and critical thinking skills.
They compared a group of students who received media literacy instruction with a control group who did not.
The results showed that the media literacy treatment group outperformed the control group in reading
comprehension, identifying specific details, and using more sophisticated message analysis skills. The study
also found that the treatment group significantly outperformed the control group in writing and in identifying the
purpose, target audience, and construction techniques of media messages.
In “Students’ Civic Online Reasoning: A National Portrait,” Breakstone, Smith, Wineburg, Rapaport, Carle,
Garland, and Saavedra (2019) investigated high school students' ability to evaluate information online. The study
found that students nationwide struggled to demonstrate basic skills of civic online reasoning, such as
identifying the source of information, evaluating evidence, and considering alternative perspectives. Only a small
percentage of students performed at the Mastery level on the tasks. The study concludes that the current
dominant approach to teaching digital literacy, which relies heavily on checklists and focuses on evaluating a
single website, is inadequate for equipping students with the skills they need to navigate the complex and often
misleading information environment of the internet. Instead, the authors advocate for research-based
approaches to teaching civic online reasoning, which will necessitate a shift in educational practices and a
greater investment in professional development for teachers.
In Mind Over Media: Propaganda Education for the Digital Age, Hobbs and Rushkoff (2020) explore how
propaganda influences our digital world and the importance of educating individuals to critically analyze media
messages. The book delves into the history and techniques of propaganda and how it has evolved in the digital
age with the advent of social media and online platforms. It provides educators with tools and strategies to help
students recognize different types of propaganda, distinguish between credible and misleading information, and
develop critical thinking skills. Hobbs emphasizes the role of media literacy in empowering individuals to
navigate the complex media landscape and make informed decisions.
In “Digital Readiness Gaps,” Horrigan (2016) highlights that digital readiness shifts focus from mere access to
technology to how effectively individuals use it for learning. He notes that digital skills and trust in online
information are pivotal readiness factors separate from demographics like education or age. Despite the
potential for change over time with evolving e-learning tools, these findings provide a snapshot of current digital
readiness and its impact on personal growth and learning engagement in the digital age.
In “Critical Media Literacy, Democracy, and the Reconstruction of Education,” Kellner and Share (2007)
emphasize the importance of critical media literacy in helping students navigate the complex media landscape
of the 21st century. They critique existing approaches to media education—the protectionist, media arts, and
media literacy movements—as inadequate because they either focus too much on shielding students or lack a
strong ideological component. Instead, the authors propose a comprehensive approach that includes ideology
critique, multiperspectival analysis, alternative media production, and a connection to social justice. These
elements aim to prepare students to be active citizens in a media-saturated world. The article also advocates for
transformative pedagogy that encourages dialogue and critical reflection, empowering students to contribute to
a democratic and equitable society. Educators are called to embrace new methods that challenge traditional
literacy instruction, promote critical analysis and social change, and ensure access to quality media literacy
education. Overall, the article argues that critical media literacy is crucial for empowering students and
transforming education and society.
Resources:
● Introduction to the Common Core State Standards (p. 3-8)

Indicator 2s Guiding Question:
Do the materials include explicit instruction of research skills that guide research and writing projects to
encourage students to develop knowledge of a topic by confronting and analyzing different aspects of a topic
using multiple texts and source materials?
Evidence Collection
In the instructional materials being reviewed:
● Look for materials that build research skills, from identifying reliable sources to synthesizing information
and presenting findings, ensuring mastery of grade-level standards.
● Ensure materials provide clear, step-by-step guidance on research skills such as formulating research
questions, conducting searches, evaluating source credibility, and citing sources correctly.
● Verify that students are instructed and encouraged to use a variety of texts and resources, including
books, scholarly articles, and digital media, to gain a comprehensive understanding of a topic.
● Look for assignments that prompt students to confront and analyze different perspectives within their
research to develop a well-rounded knowledge base.
● See if the materials support integrating research findings into written work, teaching students how to
construct arguments and support them with evidence from their research.
Cluster Meeting
Preparing for the cluster meeting:
● Do the materials build research skills, from identifying reliable sources to synthesizing information and
presenting findings, ensuring mastery of grade-level standards?
● Do the materials provide clear, step-by-step guidance on research skills such as formulating research
questions, conducting searches, evaluating source credibility, and citing sources correctly?
● Are students instructed and encouraged to use a variety of texts and resources, including books,
scholarly articles, and digital media, to gain a comprehensive understanding of a topic?
● Are there assignments that prompt students to confront and analyze different perspectives within their
research to develop a well-rounded knowledge base?
● Do the materials support integrating research findings into written work, teaching students how to
construct arguments and support them with evidence from their research?
During the cluster meeting:
● Share evidence of the indicator.
● Discuss whether the materials build research skills, from identifying reliable sources to synthesizing
information and presenting findings, ensuring mastery of grade-level standards.
● Discuss whether the materials provide clear, step-by-step guidance on research skills such as formulating
research questions, conducting searches, evaluating source credibility, and citing sources correctly.
● Discuss whether students are instructed and encouraged to use a variety of texts and resources,
including books, scholarly articles, and digital media, to gain a comprehensive understanding of a topic.
● Discuss whether there are assignments that prompt students to confront and analyze different
perspectives within their research to develop a well-rounded knowledge base.
● Discuss whether the materials support integrating research findings into written work, teaching students
how to construct arguments and support them with evidence from their research.
● Look for and discuss whether the indicator was met fully, partially, or did not meet any scoring bullet in
the scoring section.
● Agree on the final rating.

Gateway 2: Comprehension Through Texts,
Questions, and Tasks
Criterion 2.2 Materials include questions, tasks, and assignments that are meaningful,
evidence-based, and support students in making meaning and building
knowledge as they progress toward grade-level mastery of literacy skills.
Materials include clear, explicit instruction guidance for teachers across all
literacy skills.

--- v2.0 source 2: Indicator 2t ---

Indicator 2t Materials include multiple opportunities for students to apply research skills
to develop knowledge of a topic by confronting and analyzing different
aspects of a topic.
6-8 Scoring:
2 points
Materials meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
1 point
Materials DO NOT meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
0 points
Materials DO NOT meet ANY of
the requirements of this indicator.
● Materials include multiple opportunities for students to conduct short research projects to answer a
question, drawing on several sources and generating additional related, focused questions for further
research and investigation.
● Materials provide opportunities for students to gather relevant information from multiple print and digital
sources, use search terms effectively, assess the credibility and accuracy of each source, and quote or
paraphrase the data and conclusions of others while avoiding plagiarism and following a standard format
for citation.
● Materials provide opportunities for students to draw evidence from literary or informational texts to
support analysis, reflection, and research.
9-12 Scoring:
2 points
Materials meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
1 point
Materials DO NOT meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
0 points
Materials DO NOT meet ANY of
the requirements of this indicator.
● Materials include multiple opportunities for students to apply research skills to short and sustained
research projects by answering a given or self-generated question or solving a problem, narrowing or
broadening the inquiry when appropriate, synthesizing multiple sources on the subject, and demonstrating
knowledge of the subject under investigation.
● Materials provide opportunities for students to gather relevant information from multiple print and digital
sources, use search terms effectively, assess the credibility and accuracy of each source, and quote or
paraphrase the data and conclusions of others while avoiding plagiarism and following a standard format
for citation.

● Materials provide opportunities for students to draw evidence from literary or informational texts to
support analysis, reflection, and research.
About this indicator:
What is the purpose of this Indicator?
The purpose of this indicator is to ensure that materials provide numerous chances for students to practice and
hone their research skills, such as identifying credible sources, gathering information, and critically evaluating
data. Students must build research skills to be successful throughout their education and careers. Students
should participate in structured research that helps them deepen their understanding of a particular topic by
examining various facets of a topic through multiple texts and sources, allowing students to gain a deeper and
more nuanced understanding of a topic by examining it from multiple perspectives and considering different
aspects. This indicator examines the opportunities that materials include for students to engage in the research
process. As students develop their research and analysis skills, they develop the media literacy skills that they
need to be successful citizens in the digital age and become critical thinkers who can navigate information-rich
environments effectively.
Research or Standards connection:
The Introduction to the Common Core State Standards (p. 7) states, “Students establish a base of knowledge
across a wide range of subject matter by engaging with works of quality and substance. They become proficient
in new areas through research and study. They read purposefully and listen attentively to gain both general
knowledge and discipline-specific expertise. They refine and share their knowledge through writing and
speaking.”
In “Measuring the Acquisition of Media-Literacy Skills,” Hobbs and Frost (2003) investigate the impact of a
yearlong media literacy curriculum on students' reading comprehension, writing skills, and critical thinking skills.
They compared a group of students who received media literacy instruction with a control group who did not.
The results showed that the media literacy treatment group outperformed the control group in reading
comprehension, identifying specific details, and using more sophisticated message analysis skills. The study
also found that the treatment group significantly outperformed the control group in writing and in identifying the
purpose, target audience, and construction techniques of media messages.
In “Students’ Civic Online Reasoning: A National Portrait,” Breakstone, Smith, Wineburg, Rapaport, Carle,
Garland, and Saavedra (2019) investigated high school students' ability to evaluate information online. The study
found that students nationwide struggled to demonstrate basic skills of civic online reasoning, such as
identifying the source of information, evaluating evidence, and considering alternative perspectives. Only a small
percentage of students performed at the Mastery level on the tasks. The study concludes that the current
dominant approach to teaching digital literacy, which relies heavily on checklists and focuses on evaluating a
single website, is inadequate for equipping students with the skills they need to navigate the complex and often
misleading information environment of the internet. Instead, the authors advocate for research-based
approaches to teaching civic online reasoning, which will necessitate a shift in educational practices and a
greater investment in professional development for teachers.
In Mind Over Media: Propaganda Education for Digital Age, Hobbs and Rushkoff (2020) explore how
propaganda influences our digital world and the importance of educating individuals to critically analyze media
messages. The book delves into the history and techniques of propaganda and how it has evolved in the digital
age with the advent of social media and online platforms. It provides educators with tools and strategies to help
students recognize different types of propaganda, distinguish between credible and misleading information, and

develop critical thinking skills. Hobbs emphasizes the role of media literacy in empowering individuals to
navigate the complex media landscape and make informed decisions.
In “Digital Readiness Gaps,” Horrigan (2016) highlights that digital readiness shifts focus from mere access to
technology to how effectively individuals use it for learning. He notes that digital skills and trust in online
information are pivotal readiness factors separate from demographics like education or age. Despite the
potential for change over time with evolving e-learning tools, these findings provide a snapshot of current digital
readiness and its impact on personal growth and learning engagement in the digital age.
In “Critical Media Literacy, Democracy, and the Reconstruction of Education,” Kellner and Share (2007)
emphasize the importance of critical media literacy in helping students navigate the complex media landscape
of the 21st century. They critique existing approaches to media education—the protectionist, media arts, and
media literacy movements—as inadequate because they either focus too much on shielding students or lack a
strong ideological component. Instead, the authors propose a comprehensive approach that includes ideology
critique, multiperspectival analysis, alternative media production, and a connection to social justice. These
elements aim to prepare students to be active citizens in a media-saturated world. The article also advocates for
transformative pedagogy that encourages dialogue and critical reflection, empowering students to contribute to
a democratic and equitable society. Educators are called to embrace new methods that challenge traditional
literacy instruction, promote critical analysis and social change, and ensure access to quality media literacy
education. Overall, the article argues that critical media literacy is crucial for empowering students and
transforming education and society.
Resources:
● Introduction to the Common Core State Standards (p. 3-8)
Indicator 2t Guiding Question:
Do the materials include multiple opportunities for students to apply research skills to develop knowledge of a
topic by confronting and analyzing different aspects of a topic?
Evidence Collection
In the instructional materials being reviewed:
● Check for a variety of short research projects that allow students to explore different questions and
topics, encouraging curiosity and engagement.
● Look for materials that prompt students to generate additional related questions, fostering deeper
investigation and critical thinking.
● Ensure that opportunities are provided for students to gather relevant information from a range of print
and digital sources, enhancing their research skills.
● Assess if the materials provide opportunities for students to use effective search terms and strategies to
locate credible information efficiently.
● Verify that materials provide students opportunities on assessing the credibility and accuracy of sources,
helping students discern reliable information from unreliable.
● Look for opportunities where students are required to draw evidence from literary or informational texts
to support their analyses, reflections, and research.
Cluster Meeting
Preparing for the cluster meeting:

● Are there a variety of research projects that allow students to explore different questions and topics,
encouraging curiosity and engagement?
● Do the materials prompt students to generate additional related questions, fostering deeper investigation
and critical thinking?
● Are opportunities provided for students to gather relevant information from a range of print and digital
sources, enhancing their research skills?
● Do the materials offer opportunities for students to use effective search terms and strategies to locate
credible information efficiently?
● Are students provided with opportunities to assess the credibility and accuracy of sources, helping them
discern reliable information from unreliable?
● Are there opportunities where students are required to draw evidence from literary or informational texts
to support their analyses, reflections, and research?
During the cluster meeting:
● Share evidence of the indicator.
● Discuss whether there are a variety of short research projects that allow students to explore different
questions and topics, encouraging curiosity and engagement.
● Discuss whether the materials prompt students to generate additional related questions, fostering deeper
investigation and critical thinking.
● Discuss whether there are opportunities provided for students to gather relevant information from a
range of print and digital sources, enhancing their research skills.
● Discuss whether the materials offer opportunities for students to use effective search terms and
strategies to locate credible information efficiently.
● Discuss whether students are provided with opportunities to assess the credibility and accuracy of
sources, helping them discern reliable information from unreliable.
● Discuss whether there are opportunities where students are required to draw evidence from literary or
informational texts to support their analyses, reflections, and research.
● Look for and discuss whether the indicator was met fully, partially, or did not meet any scoring bullet in
the scoring section.
● Agree on the final rating.

Gateway 2: Comprehension Through Texts,
Questions, and Tasks
Criterion 2.2 Materials include questions, tasks, and assignments that are meaningful,
evidence-based, and support students in making meaning and building
knowledge as they progress toward grade-level mastery of literacy skills.
Materials include clear, explicit instruction guidance for teachers across all
literacy skills.

Indicator 2f Materials include a clear, research-based core instructional pathway with
reasonable pacing throughout the year, which allows students to work
towards grade-level proficiency.
Scoring:
4 points
Materials meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator
2 points
Materials DO NOT meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
0 points
Materials DO NOT meet ANY of
the requirements of this indicator.
● Materials clearly outline the essential elements for the core instructional pathway.
● Materials clearly explain how to use and implement the core instructional pathway, which does not deviate
from currently accepted research.
● When present, supplemental materials are designed to work coherently with the core instructional
pathway.
● Materials provide detailed explanations of when and how to use supplemental materials so that all
students can access grade-level materials.
● Materials provide implementation schedules, including lesson-specific guidance, that are well paced, and
can reasonably be completed in the school year, allowing students to dive deeply into content.
About this indicator:
What is the purpose of this Indicator?
This indicator considers whether a program clearly defines a primary instructional trajectory that does not
deviate from current research, and guides both teachers and students through the essential content and skills
required for the grade level. The pathway should be organized to pace instruction effectively throughout the
academic year, allowing sufficient time for in-depth exploration and understanding of each topic. This indicator
also looks for explicit guidance for when and how supplemental materials, including supplemental supports for
students who need them, should be used in addition to detailing the core instructional pathway. This indicator
also considers whether daily lessons are reasonably paced and whether the overall program can be reasonably
completed in one school year. By including reasonable pacing, the materials help support students in gradually
developing their skills and understanding, ultimately working towards achieving grade-level proficiency. This
approach allows students to absorb information effectively and provides time to address any difficulties students
may encounter. Overall, this indicator aims to ensure that materials are not “bloated” by ensuring that the core

instructional pathway for materials is clearly defined by the publisher and can be reasonably taught in an
average school year.
Research or Standards connection:
In “Time to Transfer: Long-Term Effects of a Sustained and Spiraled Content Literacy Intervention in the
Elementary Grades,” Kim, Gilbert, Relyea, Rich, Scherer, Burkhauser, and Tvedt (2023) used a spiraled content
literacy intervention called the Model of Reading Engagement (MORE) to teach science to students in grades 1 to
3. The intervention was built on previously learned knowledge from year to year, meaning that it was sustained
across grades. Each year, the content was introduced in a new context, but it always built on the previous year's
instruction. For example, the intervention in grade 1 covered animal survival, which provided a foundation for
understanding dinosaur survival in grade 2. In grade 3, students built on this knowledge of living systems to
understand the skeletal and muscular systems of birds and how they adapt over time. The authors found that
this sustained, spiraled intervention led to better long-term outcomes for students in both reading and
mathematics.
In “Curriculum Research: What We Know and Where We Need to Go,” Steiner (2017) reviews research on the
effects of curriculum choices in K-12 education. He finds that high-quality, comprehensive curriculum is essential
for student success and that curriculum choices made by individual teachers have a significant impact on
learning. However, the author highlights several issues that complicate curriculum research, including:
● A lack of a clear definition of "curriculum"
● The absence of a taxonomy of curricular features to guide research
● The difficulty of measuring fidelity of implementation
● The challenge of comparing the effects of different curricula, especially when researchers compare one
curriculum to “business as usual,” which can vary greatly from school to school
Steiner argues for a new approach to curriculum research that focuses on understanding what makes a
curriculum effective, including the importance of content-rich curricula and the need for rigorous research
designs that account for fidelity of implementation. The authors conclude that curriculum must be a top priority
for education reform efforts and that high-quality curriculum is a necessary component of a successful education
system.
In “Curriculum NOW: Curriculum Brings Coherence to the Whole Educational Endeavor,” Schmoker (2011)
emphasizes that coherence in curriculum design is critical for enhancing student learning and bridging the
achievement gap. A coherent curriculum, defined as a well-organized sequence of content topics and essential
skills, is considered the most influential school factor in promoting learning and preparing students for college
and career readiness. It should include high-quality texts and sufficient writing assignments, allowing teachers
some flexibility to incorporate their own material. Research shows that such a coherent, content-rich curriculum
has a significant positive effect on reading comprehension and test scores, exceeding the impact of pedagogical
methods alone. The article highlights the global success of countries with coherent curricula and criticizes
current educational practices for neglecting this vital component, often due to distractions from various
educational fads. It calls for a focused effort in establishing coherent curricula to ensure meaningful content
learning, supported by recent developments in the Common Core State Standards that advocate concentrating
on core concepts rather than a sprawling array of skills. The article urges immediate action toward building
coherent curricula as a fundamental step in improving education.
Resources:
● All CCSS ELA Standards

Indicator 2f Guiding Question:
Do materials include a clear, research-based core instructional pathway with reasonable pacing throughout
the year, which allows students to work towards grade-level proficiency?
Evidence Collection
Note: The average school is around 180 days. This does not mean that materials should include 180 lessons;
however, the amount should be reasonable to ensure teachers have enough material to teach while also
leaving space in the curriculum for assessments, breaks, and other interruptions.
In the instructional materials being reviewed:
● Look for a clear outline of the essential elements that make up the core instructional pathway, ensuring
that it is straightforward and easy for educators to follow.
● Determine whether materials provide comprehensive explanations on how to use and implement the
core instructional pathway, emphasizing adherence to currently accepted research practices.
● Assess if supplemental materials are seamlessly integrated with the core instructional pathway and
whether they include detailed explanations on when and how to use them effectively.
● Verify that materials explain when and how to use supplemental supports specifically designed to help all
students access grade-level content, ensuring inclusivity in the learning process.
● Check for the presence of implementation schedules that offer lesson-specific guidance, ensuring that
pacing is appropriate and that lessons can be realistically completed within the academic year.
● Ensure that the material allows for sufficient depth in content exploration, supporting students’ ability to
engage thoroughly with the subject matter.
Cluster Meeting
Preparing for the cluster meeting:
● Is there a clear outline of the essential elements that make up the core instructional pathway, ensuring
that it is straightforward and easy for educators to follow?
● Do the materials provide comprehensive explanations on how to use and implement the core
instructional pathway, emphasizing adherence to currently accepted research practices?
● Are supplemental materials seamlessly integrated with the core instructional pathway, including detailed
explanations on when and how to use them effectively?
● Do the materials explain when and how to use supplemental supports specifically designed to help all
students access grade-level content, ensuring inclusivity in the learning process?
● Is there an implementation schedule that offers lesson-specific guidance, ensuring that pacing is
appropriate and that lessons can be realistically completed within the academic year?
● Do the materials allow for sufficient depth in content exploration, supporting students’ ability to engage
thoroughly with the subject matter?
During the cluster meeting:
● Share evidence of the indicator.
● Discuss whether there is a clear outline of the essential elements that make up the core instructional
pathway, ensuring that it is straightforward and easy for educators to follow.
● Discuss whether the materials provide comprehensive explanations on how to use and implement the
core instructional pathway, emphasizing adherence to currently accepted research practices.
● Discuss whether supplemental materials are seamlessly integrated with the core instructional pathway,
including detailed explanations on when and how to use them effectively.

● Discuss whether the materials explain when and how to use supplemental supports specifically designed
to help all students access grade-level content, ensuring inclusivity in the learning process.
● Discuss whether there is an implementation schedule that offers lesson-specific guidance, ensuring that
pacing is appropriate and that lessons can be realistically completed within the academic year.
● Discuss whether the material allows for sufficient depth in content exploration, supporting students’ ability
to engage thoroughly with the subject matter.
● Look for and discuss whether the indicator was met fully, partially, or did not meet any scoring bullet in
the scoring section.
● Agree on the final rating.

Gateway 2: Comprehension Through Texts,
Questions, and Tasks
Criterion 2.2 Materials include questions, tasks, and assignments that are meaningful,
evidence-based, and support students in making meaning and building
knowledge as they progress toward grade-level mastery of literacy skills.
Materials include clear, explicit instruction guidance for teachers across all
literacy skills.

Indicator 2u Materials include formative assessments and guidance that provide the
teacher with information for instructional next steps.
Scoring:
4 points
Materials meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
2 points
Materials DO NOT meet ALL of the
requirements of this indicator.
0 points
Materials DO NOT meet ANY of
the requirements of this indicator.
● Materials include formative assessments and support for the teacher in determining students’ current
skills/level of understanding.
● Materials include guidance that supports the teacher in making instructional adjustments to increase
student progress.
About this indicator:
What is the purpose of this Indicator?
This indicator examines the formative assessments included throughout a program. Formative assessments are
informal assessments that provide ongoing feedback to both students and teachers, allowing them to identify
learning needs and adjust teaching strategies accordingly. This indicator also examines the guidance for
instructional next steps included in the materials to support teachers in making informed decisions about how to
modify their instruction, differentiate learning activities, and provide targeted support to enhance student
learning outcomes. Overall, the purpose of this indicator is to ensure that instructional materials include tools
and resources that help teachers assess students' understanding and learning progress throughout the
instructional process.
Research or Standards connection:
In “Revising the Definition of Formative Assessment,” the FAST SCASS of CCSSO (2018) provides a revision of
the definition of formative assessment by the Formative Assessment for Students and Teachers (FAST) State
Collaborative on Assessment and Student Standards (SCASS) organization. It explains the changes to the
original definition of formative assessment as well as the new attributes and practices that comprise effective
formative assessment. They define formative assessment as:
“Formative assessment is a planned, ongoing process used by all students and teachers during
learning and teaching to elicit and use evidence of student learning to improve student

understanding of intended disciplinary learning outcomes and support students to become
self-directed learners.
Effective use of the formative assessment process requires students and teachers to integrate
and embed the following practices in a collaborative and respectful classroom environment:
● Clarifying learning goals and success criteria within a broader progression of learning;
● Eliciting and analyzing evidence of student thinking;
● Engaging in self-assessment and peer feedback;
● Providing actionable feedback; and
● Using evidence and feedback to move learning forward by adjusting learning strategies, goals, or
next instructional steps.” (pp. 2-3)
In “Reaping the Benefits of Deep Formative Assessment: Lessons from Around the World,” the FAST SCASS of
CCSSO (2016) report highlights the importance of formative assessment as a process of continuous learning for
both teachers and students. The authors, experts in formative assessment from New Zealand, England, and
Australia, discuss how formative assessment practices have evolved, emphasizing the need for educators to
embrace the process and empower students as active participants. The key takeaway is that formative
assessment is not just about measuring student learning; it's about using evidence of student learning to adapt
the teaching work to meet learning needs. This can only happen when teachers have a deep understanding of
their subject matter and students’ needs and when they are willing to collaborate with colleagues and students
to create a learning environment that fosters a sense of ownership and responsibility for learning.
In “Formative Assessment and Next-Generation Assessment Systems: Are We Losing an Opportunity?,” Heritage
(2010) argues that formative assessment is not just a tool or a test, but a process that involves teachers and
students working together to monitor student learning and to make adjustments to teaching and learning in
response to that evidence. This process, she argues, is more than just "giving feedback"; it's about helping
students develop the skills they need to become independent learners who can monitor their own progress and
take responsibility for their own learning. The paper explores the theoretical underpinnings of formative
assessment, drawing on research in cognitive psychology and sociocultural theory, and then examines a number
of definitions of formative assessment that have been adopted by various policy groups.
Resources:
● N/A
Indicator 2u Guiding Question:
Do the materials include formative assessments and guidance that provide the teacher with information for
instructional next steps?
Evidence Collection
In the instructional materials being reviewed:
● Check if the materials offer a range of formative assessment types, such as quizzes, observations,
student reflections, peer assessments, or informal checks for understanding.
● Look for specific instructions or resources that help teachers interpret assessment results. This might
include scoring rubrics, exemplars of student work, or analysis tools that make it easier to understand
student performance and areas of need.
● Ensure that the materials provide actionable guidance for teachers on how to adjust instruction based on
assessment results. This might involve differentiated instruction strategies, targeted interventions, or
enrichment activities for students who need more challenge.

● Look for resources that help teachers use assessment data to plan future lessons. This might include
planning tools or templates that assist in identifying focus areas for subsequent instruction.
Cluster Meeting
Preparing for the cluster meeting:
● Do the materials offer a range of formative assessment types, such as quizzes, observations, student
reflections, peer assessments, or informal checks for understanding?
● Are there specific instructions or resources provided that help teachers interpret assessment results,
such as scoring rubrics, exemplars of student work, or analysis tools to understand student performance
and areas of need?
● Do the materials provide actionable guidance for teachers on how to adjust instruction based on
assessment results, possibly involving differentiated instruction strategies, targeted interventions, or
enrichment activities for students who need more challenge?
● Are there resources available that help teachers use assessment data to plan future lessons, including
planning tools or templates that assist in identifying focus areas for subsequent instruction?
During the cluster meeting:
● Share evidence of the indicator.
● Discuss whether the materials offer a range of formative assessment types, such as quizzes,
observations, student reflections, peer assessments, or informal checks for understanding.
● Discuss whether the materials include specific instructions or resources provided that help teachers
interpret assessment results, such as scoring rubrics, exemplars of student work, or analysis tools to
understand student performance and areas of need.
● Discuss whether the materials provide actionable guidance for teachers on how to adjust instruction
based on assessment results, possibly involving differentiated instruction strategies, targeted
interventions, or enrichment activities for students who need more challenge.
● Discuss whether there are resources available that help teachers use assessment data to plan future
lessons, including planning tools or templates that assist in identifying focus areas for subsequent
instruction.
● Look for and discuss whether the indicator was met fully, partially, or did not meet any scoring bullet in
the scoring section.
● Agree on the final rating.

Gateway 2: Comprehension Through Texts,
Questions, and Tasks
Criterion 2.2 Materials include questions, tasks, and assignments that are meaningful,
evidence-based, and support students in making meaning and building
knowledge as they progress toward grade-level mastery of literacy skills.
Materials include clear, explicit instruction guidance for teachers across all
literacy skills.

Indicator 3a Materials provide teacher guidance with useful annotations and suggestions
for how to enact the student materials and ancillary materials to support
students’ literacy development.
Scoring:
2 points
● Materials provide
comprehensive guidance that
will assist teachers in
presenting the student and
ancillary materials.
AND
● Materials include sufficient and
useful annotations and
suggestions that are presented
within the context of the
specific learning objectives.
1 point
● Materials provide
comprehensive guidance that
will assist teachers in
presenting the student and
ancillary materials.
OR
● Materials include sufficient and
useful annotations and
suggestions that are presented
within the context of the
specific learning objectives.
0 points
● Materials do not provide
comprehensive guidance that
will assist them in presenting
the student and ancillary
materials.
AND
● Materials do not include
sufficient and useful
annotations and suggestions
that are presented within the
context of the specific learning
objectives.
About this indicator:
What is the purpose of this Indicator?
This indicator examines whether materials offer comprehensive guidance for teachers, including annotations
and practical suggestions, to effectively implement both the core student materials and any supplementary
resources. This support aims to enhance teachers' ability to facilitate student literacy development by providing
strategies and insights on how to engage with the materials. Such guidance can include tips for differentiating
instruction, addressing diverse learning needs, and integrating ancillary materials to reinforce learning.
Ultimately, it helps teachers optimize the use of the provided resources to improve student literacy outcomes.
Indicator 3a Guiding Question:
Do the materials provide teacher guidance with useful annotations and suggestions for how to enact the
student and ancillary materials to support students' literacy development?
Evidence Collection
In the instructional materials being reviewed:
● Check that the guidance for teachers is clear and detailed, providing explicit instructions on how to

use both the student and ancillary materials effectively.
● Ensure that annotations and suggestions are directly linked to the specific learning objectives. They
should provide context for how instructional strategies support students in achieving these objectives.
● Confirm that the guidance includes ways to integrate ancillary materials seamlessly within lessons to
enhance learning. This might involve cross-referencing with core materials or suggested
supplementary activities.
● Look for references to additional resources or professional development opportunities that could
further support teachers in using the materials effectively.
Cluster Meeting
Preparing for the cluster meeting:
● Is the guidance for teachers clear and detailed, providing explicit instructions on how to use both the
student and ancillary materials effectively?
● Are the annotations and suggestions directly linked to the specific learning objectives, providing
context for how instructional strategies support students in achieving these objectives?
● Does the guidance include ways to integrate ancillary materials seamlessly within lessons to enhance
learning, such as cross-referencing with core materials or suggesting supplementary activities?
● Are there references to additional resources or professional development opportunities that could
further support teachers in using the materials effectively?
During the cluster meeting:
● Discuss whether the guidance for teachers is clear and detailed, providing explicit instructions on how
to use both the student and ancillary materials effectively.
● Discuss whether the annotations and suggestions are directly linked to the specific learning
objectives, providing context for how instructional strategies support students in achieving these
objectives.
● Discuss whether the guidance includes ways to integrate ancillary materials seamlessly within lessons
to enhance learning, such as cross-referencing with core materials or suggesting supplementary
activities.
● Discuss whether there are references to additional resources or professional development
opportunities that could further support teachers in using the materials effectively.

Gateway 3: Teacher and Student Supports
Criterion 3.1 Materials include opportunities for teachers to effectively plan and utilize
materials with integrity and to further develop their own understanding of the
content.

Indicator 3b Materials contain explanations and examples of grade-level/course-level
concepts and/or standards and how the concepts and/or standards align to
other grade/course levels so that teachers can improve their own knowledge
of the subject.
Scoring:
2 points
● Materials contain explanations
and examples of
grade/course-level concepts
and/or standards so that
teachers can improve their own
knowledge of the subject.
AND
● Materials contain explanations
and examples of how the
concepts and/or standards
align to other grade/course
levels so that teachers can
improve their own knowledge
of the subject.
1 point
● Materials contain explanations
and examples of
grade/course-level concepts
and/or standards so that
teachers can improve their own
knowledge of the subject.
AND
● Materials contain explanations
and examples of how the
concepts and/or standards
align to other grade/course
levels so that teachers can
improve their own knowledge
of the subject.
0 points
● Materials do not contain
explanations and examples of
grade/course-level concepts
and/or standards so that
teachers can improve their own
knowledge of the subject.
AND
● Materials do not contain
explanations and examples of
how the concepts and/or
standards align to other
grade/course levels so that
teachers can improve their own
knowledge of the subject.
About this indicator:
What is the purpose of this Indicator?
This indicator examines whether materials deepen teacher understanding of ELA standards and concepts that
are specific to each grade level. It also aims to show how these concepts and standards align with those taught
in other grades or courses. By offering this information, the materials support teachers in deepening their
understanding of the subject matter they are teaching, facilitating more effective instruction. This alignment
helps educators see the progression of learning objectives and how current content builds on prior knowledge
while preparing students for future learning. Ultimately, it aids teachers in delivering more cohesive and
informed instruction, benefiting student learning outcomes.
Indicator 3b Guiding Question:
Do the materials contain explanations and examples of the more complex grade/course-level concepts and
concepts beyond the current course so that teachers can improve their own knowledge of the subject?

Evidence Collection
In the instructional materials being reviewed:
● Ensure that explanations of grade- or course-level concepts and standards are thorough, clear, and
accessible. This helps teachers deepen their understanding of the subject matter and facilitates better
teaching.
● Look for relevant, concrete examples that illustrate the concepts and standards. Examples should be
practical and applicable to classroom instruction, helping teachers visualize how to teach the material
effectively.
● Check for explanations of how concepts and standards align with those taught in previous and
subsequent grade or course levels. This can help teachers understand the progression and continuity
of learning objectives.
● Look for clear descriptions of how skills and knowledge build upon each other from one grade or
course to the next. This can guide teachers in ensuring they are preparing students for future learning
challenges.
● Identify whether the materials include visual aids, such as charts, diagrams, or flowcharts, to help
illustrate how concepts and standards are connected across grade levels.
● Look for insights or annotations aimed explicitly at teachers, which explain the rationale behind the
concepts and standards and how they fit into the broader curriculum.
● Check if there are suggestions or links to professional development resources that can further
enhance teachers' understanding of subject matter progression.
Cluster Meeting
Preparing for the cluster meeting:
● Are the explanations of grade- or course-level concepts and standards thorough, clear, and accessible
to help teachers deepen their understanding of the subject matter and facilitate better teaching?
● Are there relevant, concrete examples that illustrate the concepts and standards, which are practical
and applicable to classroom instruction, to help teachers visualize how to teach the material
effectively?
● Do the materials include explanations of how concepts and standards align with those taught in
previous and subsequent grade or course levels to help teachers understand the progression and
continuity of learning objectives?
● Are there clear descriptions of how skills and knowledge build upon each other from one grade or
course to the next, guiding teachers in preparing students for future learning challenges?
● Do the materials include visual aids, such as charts, diagrams, or flowcharts, to help illustrate how
concepts and standards are connected across grade levels?
● Are there insights or annotations aimed explicitly at teachers that explain the rationale behind the
concepts and standards and how they fit into the broader curriculum?
● Are there suggestions or links to professional development resources that can further enhance
teachers' understanding of subject matter progression?
During the cluster meeting:
● Discuss whether the explanations of grade- or course-level concepts and standards are thorough,
clear, and accessible to help teachers deepen their understanding of the subject matter and facilitate
better teaching.
● Discuss whether there are relevant, concrete examples that illustrate the concepts and standards,
which are practical and applicable to classroom instruction, to help teachers visualize how to teach the
material effectively.

● Discuss whether the materials include explanations of how concepts and standards align with those
taught in previous and subsequent grade or course levels to help teachers understand the
progression and continuity of learning objectives.
● Discuss whether there are clear descriptions of how skills and knowledge build upon each other from
one grade or course to the next, guiding teachers in preparing students for future learning challenges.
● Discuss whether the materials include visual aids, such as charts, diagrams, or flowcharts, to help
illustrate how concepts and standards are connected across grade levels.
● Discuss whether there are insights or annotations aimed explicitly at teachers that explain the rationale
behind the concepts and standards and how they fit into the broader curriculum.
● Discuss whether there are suggestions or links to professional development resources that can further
enhance teachers' understanding of subject matter progression.

Gateway 3: Teacher and Student Supports
Criterion 3.1 Materials include opportunities for teachers to effectively plan and utilize
materials with integrity and to further develop their own understanding of the
content.

Indicator 3c Materials include a standards correlation information document.
Scoring:
1 point
● Correlation information is present for the ELA
standards addressed throughout the grade
level/series.
● Materials identify the standards assessed for
formative assessments.
● Materials identify the standards assessed for
culminating tasks/summative assessments.
0 points
● Standards correlations are inaccurate or missing.
About this indicator:
What is the purpose of this Indicator?
This indicator examines whether materials contain a standards correlation information document, which maps or
aligns the content and activities within the materials to specific ELA Common Core State Standards. This
document serves as a resource for teachers to quickly identify how and where the material addresses particular
standards, enabling better planning and instruction. It helps ensure that teaching is aligned with required
educational benchmarks and offers transparency on how the materials support meeting those standards. Lastly,
this indicator looks at whether materials clearly identify the CCSS assessed in each formative and summative
assessment to further maximize teacher clarity.
Resources:
● Common Core English Language Arts Standards
Indicator 3c Guiding Question:
Do the materials include a standards correlation information document?
Evidence Collection
In the instructional materials being reviewed:
● Consider how teacher materials provide documentation that addresses how individual units, lessons,
or activities throughout the series are aligned to reading, writing, speaking, and/or listening (Common
Core ELA Standards), as applicable.

● Ensure that the correlation document covers all relevant ELA standards for the entire grade level or
series, including reading, writing, speaking, and listening standards.
● Look to see that the materials identify the standards assessed in formative and summative
assessments.
Note:
● If standards correlation is inconsistent between levels (I.e., from the overview to a module or a lesson).
● If standards correlation is inaccurate.
Cluster Meeting
Preparing for the cluster meeting:
● How do teacher materials provide documentation that addresses how individual units, lessons, or
activities throughout the series are aligned to reading, writing, speaking, and/or listening (Common
Core ELA Standards), as applicable?
● Does the correlation document cover all relevant ELA standards for the entire grade level or series,
including reading, writing, speaking, and listening standards?
● Do the materials identify the standards assessed in formative and summative assessments?
During the cluster meeting:
● Discuss how teacher materials provide documentation that addresses how individual units, lessons, or
activities throughout the series are aligned to reading, writing, speaking, and/or listening (Common
Core ELA Standards), as applicable.
● Discuss whether the correlation document covers all relevant ELA standards for the entire grade level
or series, including reading, writing, speaking, and listening standards.
● Discuss whether the materials identify the standards assessed in formative and summative
assessments.

Gateway 3: Teacher and Student Supports
Criterion 3.1 Materials include opportunities for teachers to effectively plan and utilize
materials with integrity and to further develop their own understanding of the
content.

Indicator 3e Materials provide explanations of the instructional approaches of the
program, identify the research-based strategies, and explain the role of the
standards.
Scoring:
2 points
● Materials explain the
instructional approaches of the
program.
AND
● Materials include and
reference research-based
strategies.
AND
● Materials include and
reference the role of the
standards in the program.
1 point
● Materials explain the
instructional approaches of the
program.
OR
● Materials include and
reference research-based
strategies.
OR
● Materials include and
reference the role of the
standards in the program.
0 points
● Materials do not explain the
instructional approaches of the
program.
AND
● Materials do not include and
reference research-based
strategies.
AND
● Materials do not include and
reference the role of the
standards in the program.
About this indicator:
What is the purpose of this Indicator?
This indicator examines whether materials provide a clear and comprehensive explanation of the instructional
approaches used within the program. It emphasizes the identification and justification of research-based
strategies employed in the curriculum, demonstrating how these methods are grounded in educational research
to enhance teaching effectiveness and student learning. Additionally, the indicator highlights the role of the
standards, explaining how the program aligns with and supports these benchmarks to meet educational goals
and ensure consistency across different instructional settings. This transparency helps educators understand the
rationale behind the teaching methods and how they contribute to achieving desired learning outcomes,
thereby enhancing instructional fidelity and effectiveness.
Indicator 3e Guiding Question:
Do the materials provide explanations of the instructional approaches of the program, identification of the
research-based strategies, and reference the role of the standards in the program?
Evidence Collection

In the instructional materials being reviewed:
● Ensure that the materials clearly outline the instructional approaches used within the program, providing
a comprehensive overview of how these methods guide teaching and learning activities.
● Check for detailed descriptions of how these approaches are implemented in various lessons and
activities, helping educators visualize their practical application.
● Look for explicit references to research-based strategies, including citations of studies or educational
research that support the effectiveness of the strategies employed.
● Assess whether the materials explain the reasoning behind choosing specific strategies, illustrating how
they are designed to enhance learning outcomes and support evidence-based teaching practices.
● Confirm that the materials clearly explain how the program aligns with educational standards, such as
state, national, or Common Core standards, highlighting their role in shaping the curriculum.
Cluster Meeting
Preparing for the cluster meeting:
● Do the materials clearly outline the instructional approaches used within the program, providing a
comprehensive overview of how these methods guide teaching and learning activities?
● Are there detailed descriptions of how these instructional approaches are implemented in various
lessons and activities to help educators visualize their practical application?
● Do the materials include explicit references to research-based strategies, along with citations of studies
or educational research that support the effectiveness of the strategies employed?
● Do the materials explain the reasoning behind choosing specific strategies, illustrating how they are
designed to enhance learning outcomes and support evidence-based teaching practices?
● Do the materials clearly explain how the program aligns with educational standards, such as state,
national, or Common Core standards, highlighting their role in shaping the curriculum?
During the cluster meeting:
● Discuss whether the materials clearly outline the instructional approaches used within the program,
providing a comprehensive overview of how these methods guide teaching and learning activities.
● Discuss whether there are detailed descriptions of how these instructional approaches are implemented
in various lessons and activities to help educators visualize their practical application.
● Discuss whether the materials include explicit references to research-based strategies, along with
citations of studies or educational research that support the effectiveness of the strategies employed.
● Discuss whether the materials explain the reasoning behind choosing specific strategies, illustrating how
they are designed to enhance learning outcomes and support evidence-based teaching practices.
● Discuss whether the materials clearly explain how the program aligns with educational standards, such
as state, national, or Common Core standards, highlighting their role in shaping the curriculum.

Gateway 3: Teacher and Student Supports
Criterion 3.1 Materials include opportunities for teachers to effectively plan and utilize
materials with integrity and to further develop their own understanding of the
content.

Indicator 3f Materials provide a comprehensive list of supplies needed to support
instructional activities.
Scoring:
1 point
● Materials include a comprehensive list of supplies
needed to support the instructional activities.
0 points
● Materials do not include a comprehensive list of
supplies needed to support instructional activities.
About this indicator:
What is the purpose of this Indicator?
This indicator examines whether the materials include a thorough and detailed list of all supplies and resources
required to support the instructional activities in a program. This comprehensive list allows teachers to
effectively plan and prepare for lessons by ensuring they have all necessary materials available for successful
implementation. By clearly identifying what is needed, educators can minimize disruptions, manage their time
efficiently, and create a conducive learning environment. Ultimately, this clarity supports smoother lesson
delivery and enhances the overall effectiveness of the instructional activities.
Indicator 3f Guiding Question:
Do the materials provide a comprehensive list of supplies needed to support instructional activities?
Evidence Collection
In the instructional materials being reviewed:
● Look for an organized and easy-to-navigate list, possibly categorized by lesson, unit, or type of
activity, so teachers can quickly find and gather materials.
● Ensure that both digital resources (software, online tools) and physical supplies are included, with
clear indications of what is required for digital learning environments, if applicable.
● Look for suggested alternatives or substitutions for the materials listed to accommodate different
teaching environments or available resources, adding flexibility for teachers.
Cluster Meeting
Preparing for the cluster meeting:
● Is the list organized and easy to navigate, possibly categorized by lesson, unit, or type of activity, so
that teachers can quickly find and gather materials?

● Are both digital resources (software, online tools) and physical supplies included, with clear
indications of what is required for digital learning environments, if applicable?
● Are there suggested alternatives or substitutions for the materials listed to accommodate different
teaching environments or available resources, adding flexibility for teachers?
During the cluster meeting:
● Discuss whether the list is organized and easy to navigate, possibly categorized by lesson, unit, or
type of activity, so that teachers can quickly find and gather materials.
● Discuss whether both digital resources (software, online tools) and physical supplies are included,
with clear indications of what is required for digital learning environments, if applicable.
● Discuss whether there are suggested alternatives or substitutions for the materials listed to
accommodate different teaching environments or available resources, adding flexibility for teachers.

Gateway 3: Teacher and Student Supports
Criterion 3.1 Materials include opportunities for teachers to effectively plan and utilize
materials with integrity and to further develop their own understanding of the
content.

Indicator 3g The assessment system provides consistent opportunities to determine
student learning throughout the school year. The assessment system
provides sufficient teacher guidance for evaluating student performance and
determining instructional next steps.
Scoring:
2 points
● The assessment system
provides opportunities to
determine student learning
throughout the school year.
AND
● The assessment system
provides sufficient teacher
guidance for evaluating
student performance.
AND
● The assessment system
provides sufficient teacher
guidance for interpreting
student performance and
determining next instructional
steps.
1 point
● The assessment system
provides opportunities to
determine student learning
throughout the school year, but
not consistently.
OR
● The assessment system
provides sufficient teacher
guidance for evaluating
student performance, but not
consistently.
OR
● The assessment system
provides sufficient teacher
guidance for interpreting
student performance and
determining next instructional
steps, but not consistently.
0 points
● The assessment system does
not provide opportunities to
determine student learning
throughout the school year.
AND
● The assessment system does
not provide sufficient teacher
guidance for evaluating
student performance.
AND
● The assessment system does
not provide sufficient teacher
guidance for interpreting
student performance and
determining next instructional
steps.
About this indicator:
What is the purpose of this Indicator?
This indicator examines whether the assessment system within materials offers regular and consistent
opportunities to evaluate student learning progress throughout the school year. It emphasizes the importance of
a well-structured assessment system that not only tracks student performance consistently over time but also
provides teachers with clear guidance on how to interpret assessment results. This includes offering insights on
evaluating student understanding and making informed decisions about instructional next steps. By doing so,
teachers identify areas where students may need additional support or enrichment, allowing for timely
interventions and personalized learning pathways that enhance student growth and achievement.

Indicator 3g Guiding Question:
Does the assessment system provide consistent opportunities to determine student learning throughout the
school year, sufficient teacher guidance for evaluating student performance, and sufficient teacher guidance
for determining instructional next steps?
Evidence Collection
Note: This indicator looks at the assessment system as a whole and how all of the types of assessments in a
program work together to show student progress toward mastery and provide guidance to teachers about
how to adjust instruction. Information specific to formative and summative assessments is looked at in
Gateway 2.
In the instructional materials being reviewed:
● Ensure the assessment system provides regular and structured opportunities throughout the school
year to measure student learning. This should include formative assessments that offer ongoing
insights and summative assessments that evaluate cumulative learning.
● Look for a variety of assessment types (e.g., quizzes, projects, observations, standardized tests) to
capture different aspects of student learning and demonstrate a comprehensive view of progress.
● Ensure that there is comprehensive guidance for teachers on how to administer the system of
assessments, including instructions, rubrics, and criteria for consistent and fair evaluation of student
performance.
● Confirm that the materials include clear guidance on how to interpret the results of student
assessments throughout all assessments.
● Across the assessment system as a whole, look for specific recommendations or strategies for
teachers on how to use assessment data to inform instructional decisions, adjust teaching plans, and
provide targeted interventions or enrichment activities based on student needs.
● Assess whether the system includes support for providing timely and constructive feedback to
students, helping them understand their progress and areas for improvement.
Cluster Meeting
Preparing for the cluster meeting:
● Does the assessment system provide regular and structured opportunities throughout the school year
to measure student learning, including both formative assessments that offer ongoing insights and
summative assessments that evaluate cumulative learning?
● Is there a variety of assessment types (e.g., quizzes, projects, observations, standardized tests) to
capture different aspects of student learning and demonstrate a comprehensive view of progress?
● Is there comprehensive guidance for teachers on how to administer the assessment system, including
instructions, rubrics, and criteria for consistent and fair evaluation of student performance?
● Do the materials include clear guidance on how to interpret the results of student assessments across
all assessments?
● Are there specific recommendations or strategies for teachers on how to use assessment data to
inform instructional decisions, adjust teaching plans, and provide targeted interventions or enrichment
activities based on student needs?
● Does the system include support for providing timely and constructive feedback to students, helping
them understand their progress and areas for improvement?
During the cluster meeting:

● Discuss whether the assessment system provides regular and structured opportunities throughout the
school year to measure student learning, including both formative assessments that offer ongoing
insights and summative assessments that evaluate cumulative learning.
● Discuss whether there are a variety of assessment types (e.g., quizzes, projects, observations,
standardized tests) to capture different aspects of student learning and demonstrate a comprehensive
view of progress.
● Discuss whether there is comprehensive guidance for teachers on how to administer the assessment
system, including instructions, rubrics, and criteria for consistent and fair evaluation of student
performance.
● Discuss whether the materials include clear guidance on how to interpret the results of student
assessments across all assessments.
● Discuss whether there are specific recommendations or strategies for teachers on how to use
assessment data to inform instructional decisions, adjust teaching plans, and provide targeted
interventions or enrichment activities based on student needs.
● Discuss whether the system includes support for providing timely and constructive feedback to
students, helping them understand their progress and areas for improvement.

Gateway 3: Teacher and Student Supports
Criterion 3.1 Materials include opportunities for teachers to effectively plan and utilize
materials with integrity and to further develop their own understanding of the
content.

Indicator 3g The assessment system provides consistent opportunities to determine
student learning throughout the school year. The assessment system
provides sufficient teacher guidance for evaluating student performance and
determining instructional next steps.
Scoring:
2 points
● The assessment system
provides opportunities to
determine student learning
throughout the school year.
AND
● The assessment system
provides sufficient teacher
guidance for evaluating
student performance.
AND
● The assessment system
provides sufficient teacher
guidance for interpreting
student performance and
determining next instructional
steps.
1 point
● The assessment system
provides opportunities to
determine student learning
throughout the school year, but
not consistently.
OR
● The assessment system
provides sufficient teacher
guidance for evaluating
student performance, but not
consistently.
OR
● The assessment system
provides sufficient teacher
guidance for interpreting
student performance and
determining next instructional
steps, but not consistently.
0 points
● The assessment system does
not provide opportunities to
determine student learning
throughout the school year.
AND
● The assessment system does
not provide sufficient teacher
guidance for evaluating
student performance.
AND
● The assessment system does
not provide sufficient teacher
guidance for interpreting
student performance and
determining next instructional
steps.
About this indicator:
What is the purpose of this Indicator?
This indicator examines whether the assessment system within materials offers regular and consistent
opportunities to evaluate student learning progress throughout the school year. It emphasizes the importance of
a well-structured assessment system that not only tracks student performance consistently over time but also
provides teachers with clear guidance on how to interpret assessment results. This includes offering insights on
evaluating student understanding and making informed decisions about instructional next steps. By doing so,
teachers identify areas where students may need additional support or enrichment, allowing for timely
interventions and personalized learning pathways that enhance student growth and achievement.

Indicator 3g Guiding Question:
Does the assessment system provide consistent opportunities to determine student learning throughout the
school year, sufficient teacher guidance for evaluating student performance, and sufficient teacher guidance
for determining instructional next steps?
Evidence Collection
Note: This indicator looks at the assessment system as a whole and how all of the types of assessments in a
program work together to show student progress toward mastery and provide guidance to teachers about
how to adjust instruction. Information specific to formative and summative assessments is looked at in
Gateway 2.
In the instructional materials being reviewed:
● Ensure the assessment system provides regular and structured opportunities throughout the school
year to measure student learning. This should include formative assessments that offer ongoing
insights and summative assessments that evaluate cumulative learning.
● Look for a variety of assessment types (e.g., quizzes, projects, observations, standardized tests) to
capture different aspects of student learning and demonstrate a comprehensive view of progress.
● Ensure that there is comprehensive guidance for teachers on how to administer the system of
assessments, including instructions, rubrics, and criteria for consistent and fair evaluation of student
performance.
● Confirm that the materials include clear guidance on how to interpret the results of student
assessments throughout all assessments.
● Across the assessment system as a whole, look for specific recommendations or strategies for
teachers on how to use assessment data to inform instructional decisions, adjust teaching plans, and
provide targeted interventions or enrichment activities based on student needs.
● Assess whether the system includes support for providing timely and constructive feedback to
students, helping them understand their progress and areas for improvement.
Cluster Meeting
Preparing for the cluster meeting:
● Does the assessment system provide regular and structured opportunities throughout the school year
to measure student learning, including both formative assessments that offer ongoing insights and
summative assessments that evaluate cumulative learning?
● Is there a variety of assessment types (e.g., quizzes, projects, observations, standardized tests) to
capture different aspects of student learning and demonstrate a comprehensive view of progress?
● Is there comprehensive guidance for teachers on how to administer the assessment system, including
instructions, rubrics, and criteria for consistent and fair evaluation of student performance?
● Do the materials include clear guidance on how to interpret the results of student assessments across
all assessments?
● Are there specific recommendations or strategies for teachers on how to use assessment data to
inform instructional decisions, adjust teaching plans, and provide targeted interventions or enrichment
activities based on student needs?
● Does the system include support for providing timely and constructive feedback to students, helping
them understand their progress and areas for improvement?
During the cluster meeting:

● Discuss whether the assessment system provides regular and structured opportunities throughout the
school year to measure student learning, including both formative assessments that offer ongoing
insights and summative assessments that evaluate cumulative learning.
● Discuss whether there are a variety of assessment types (e.g., quizzes, projects, observations,
standardized tests) to capture different aspects of student learning and demonstrate a comprehensive
view of progress.
● Discuss whether there is comprehensive guidance for teachers on how to administer the assessment
system, including instructions, rubrics, and criteria for consistent and fair evaluation of student
performance.
● Discuss whether the materials include clear guidance on how to interpret the results of student
assessments across all assessments.
● Discuss whether there are specific recommendations or strategies for teachers on how to use
assessment data to inform instructional decisions, adjust teaching plans, and provide targeted
interventions or enrichment activities based on student needs.
● Discuss whether the system includes support for providing timely and constructive feedback to
students, helping them understand their progress and areas for improvement.

Gateway 3: Teacher and Student Supports
Criterion 3.1 Materials include opportunities for teachers to effectively plan and utilize
materials with integrity and to further develop their own understanding of the
content.

Indicator 3g The assessment system provides consistent opportunities to determine
student learning throughout the school year. The assessment system
provides sufficient teacher guidance for evaluating student performance and
determining instructional next steps.
Scoring:
2 points
● The assessment system
provides opportunities to
determine student learning
throughout the school year.
AND
● The assessment system
provides sufficient teacher
guidance for evaluating
student performance.
AND
● The assessment system
provides sufficient teacher
guidance for interpreting
student performance and
determining next instructional
steps.
1 point
● The assessment system
provides opportunities to
determine student learning
throughout the school year, but
not consistently.
OR
● The assessment system
provides sufficient teacher
guidance for evaluating
student performance, but not
consistently.
OR
● The assessment system
provides sufficient teacher
guidance for interpreting
student performance and
determining next instructional
steps, but not consistently.
0 points
● The assessment system does
not provide opportunities to
determine student learning
throughout the school year.
AND
● The assessment system does
not provide sufficient teacher
guidance for evaluating
student performance.
AND
● The assessment system does
not provide sufficient teacher
guidance for interpreting
student performance and
determining next instructional
steps.
About this indicator:
What is the purpose of this Indicator?
This indicator examines whether the assessment system within materials offers regular and consistent
opportunities to evaluate student learning progress throughout the school year. It emphasizes the importance of
a well-structured assessment system that not only tracks student performance consistently over time but also
provides teachers with clear guidance on how to interpret assessment results. This includes offering insights on
evaluating student understanding and making informed decisions about instructional next steps. By doing so,
teachers identify areas where students may need additional support or enrichment, allowing for timely
interventions and personalized learning pathways that enhance student growth and achievement.

Indicator 3g Guiding Question:
Does the assessment system provide consistent opportunities to determine student learning throughout the
school year, sufficient teacher guidance for evaluating student performance, and sufficient teacher guidance
for determining instructional next steps?
Evidence Collection
Note: This indicator looks at the assessment system as a whole and how all of the types of assessments in a
program work together to show student progress toward mastery and provide guidance to teachers about
how to adjust instruction. Information specific to formative and summative assessments is looked at in
Gateway 2.
In the instructional materials being reviewed:
● Ensure the assessment system provides regular and structured opportunities throughout the school
year to measure student learning. This should include formative assessments that offer ongoing
insights and summative assessments that evaluate cumulative learning.
● Look for a variety of assessment types (e.g., quizzes, projects, observations, standardized tests) to
capture different aspects of student learning and demonstrate a comprehensive view of progress.
● Ensure that there is comprehensive guidance for teachers on how to administer the system of
assessments, including instructions, rubrics, and criteria for consistent and fair evaluation of student
performance.
● Confirm that the materials include clear guidance on how to interpret the results of student
assessments throughout all assessments.
● Across the assessment system as a whole, look for specific recommendations or strategies for
teachers on how to use assessment data to inform instructional decisions, adjust teaching plans, and
provide targeted interventions or enrichment activities based on student needs.
● Assess whether the system includes support for providing timely and constructive feedback to
students, helping them understand their progress and areas for improvement.
Cluster Meeting
Preparing for the cluster meeting:
● Does the assessment system provide regular and structured opportunities throughout the school year
to measure student learning, including both formative assessments that offer ongoing insights and
summative assessments that evaluate cumulative learning?
● Is there a variety of assessment types (e.g., quizzes, projects, observations, standardized tests) to
capture different aspects of student learning and demonstrate a comprehensive view of progress?
● Is there comprehensive guidance for teachers on how to administer the assessment system, including
instructions, rubrics, and criteria for consistent and fair evaluation of student performance?
● Do the materials include clear guidance on how to interpret the results of student assessments across
all assessments?
● Are there specific recommendations or strategies for teachers on how to use assessment data to
inform instructional decisions, adjust teaching plans, and provide targeted interventions or enrichment
activities based on student needs?
● Does the system include support for providing timely and constructive feedback to students, helping
them understand their progress and areas for improvement?
During the cluster meeting:

● Discuss whether the assessment system provides regular and structured opportunities throughout the
school year to measure student learning, including both formative assessments that offer ongoing
insights and summative assessments that evaluate cumulative learning.
● Discuss whether there are a variety of assessment types (e.g., quizzes, projects, observations,
standardized tests) to capture different aspects of student learning and demonstrate a comprehensive
view of progress.
● Discuss whether there is comprehensive guidance for teachers on how to administer the assessment
system, including instructions, rubrics, and criteria for consistent and fair evaluation of student
performance.
● Discuss whether the materials include clear guidance on how to interpret the results of student
assessments across all assessments.
● Discuss whether there are specific recommendations or strategies for teachers on how to use
assessment data to inform instructional decisions, adjust teaching plans, and provide targeted
interventions or enrichment activities based on student needs.
● Discuss whether the system includes support for providing timely and constructive feedback to
students, helping them understand their progress and areas for improvement.

Gateway 3: Teacher and Student Supports
Criterion 3.1 Materials include opportunities for teachers to effectively plan and utilize
materials with integrity and to further develop their own understanding of the
content.

Indicator 3j Materials provide strategies and support for students in special populations to
work with grade-level content and meet or exceed grade-level standards,
which support their regular and active participation in learning.
Scoring:
2 points
● Materials provide strategies,
supports, and resources for
students in special populations
to support their regular and
active participation in
grade-level literacy work.
1 point
● Materials provide strategies,
supports, and resources for
students in special populations
to support their regular and
active participation in
grade-level literacy work, but
not consistently.
0 points
● Materials do not provide
strategies, supports, and
resources for students in
special populations to support
their regular and active
participation in grade-level
literacy work.
About this indicator:
What is the purpose of this Indicator?
This indicator considers whether materials include strategies and support designed to help students in special
populations, such as students with exceptional needs and those requiring additional learning support, to access
and engage with grade-level content. This indicator aims to promote equity by ensuring that materials enable all
students to meet or exceed grade-level standards. By providing targeted support and resources, the materials
facilitate regular and active participation in learning for all students, helping them to overcome barriers and
achieve success alongside their peers. This approach fosters an inclusive learning environment that recognizes
and accommodates diverse learning needs and styles.
Resources:
● Supporting Special Populations, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education
Indicator 3j Guiding Question:
Do materials provide strategies, supports, and resources for students in special populations to support their
active participation in grade-level literacy work?
Evidence Collection
● Ensure the materials include specific strategies for differentiating instruction to meet the diverse
needs of students in special populations. These strategies should be adaptable to individual learning
styles and needs.

● Check if the materials provide scaffolding strategies, such as breaking down tasks into manageable
steps, using graphic organizers, or providing sentence starters to support students in building their
understanding and skills.
● Confirm that the materials include comprehensive guidance for teachers on how to implement these
strategies effectively, including professional development resources if applicable.
● Ensure there are tools and resources for monitoring the progress of students in special populations,
allowing teachers to assess effectiveness and adjust strategies as needed.
Cluster Meeting
Preparing for the cluster meeting:
● Do the materials include specific strategies for differentiating instruction to meet the diverse needs of
students in special populations, adaptable to individual learning styles and needs?
● Do the materials provide scaffolding strategies, such as breaking down tasks into manageable steps,
using graphic organizers, or providing sentence starters to support students in building their
understanding and skills?
● Do the materials include comprehensive guidance for teachers on how to implement these strategies
effectively, including professional development resources if applicable?
● Are there tools and resources for monitoring the progress of students in special populations, allowing
teachers to assess effectiveness and adjust strategies as needed?
During the cluster meeting:
● Discuss whether the materials include specific strategies for differentiating instruction to meet the
diverse needs of students in special populations, adaptable to individual learning styles and needs.
● Discuss whether the materials provide scaffolding strategies, such as breaking down tasks into
manageable steps, using graphic organizers, or providing sentence starters to support students in
building their understanding and skills.
● Discuss whether the materials include comprehensive guidance for teachers on how to implement
these strategies effectively, including professional development resources if applicable.
● Discuss whether there are tools and resources for monitoring the progress of students in special
populations, allowing teachers to assess effectiveness and adjust strategies as needed.

Gateway 3: Teacher and Student Supports
Criterion 3.2 Materials are designed for each student’s regular and active participation in
grade-level/grade-band/series content.

Indicator 3k Materials regularly provide extensions and/or opportunities for advanced
students to engage with grade-level/course-level literary content at greater
depth.
Scoring:
2 points
● Materials regularly provide
multiple extensions and/or
opportunities for advanced
students to engage with
grade-level/course-level
literary concepts at greater
depth.
AND
● There are no instances of
advanced students doing more
assignments than their
classmates.
1 point
● Materials regularly provide
multiple extensions and/or
opportunities for advanced
students to engage with
grade-level/course-level
literary concepts at greater
depth.
OR
● There are some instances of
advanced students doing more
assignments than their
classmates.
0 points
● Materials do not regularly
provide multiple extensions
and/or opportunities for
advanced students to engage
with grade-level/course-level
literary concepts at greater
depth.
AND
● There are instances of
advanced students doing more
assignments than their
classmates.
About this indicator:
What is the purpose of this Indicator?
This indicator examines whether materials include opportunities for students who perform above grade level to
delve deeper into literacy content and concepts. By providing extensions and more challenging activities, the
materials support advanced learners in further developing their skills and comprehension beyond the standard
curriculum. This approach helps to keep advanced students engaged and motivated, ensuring they continue to
be challenged and experience academic growth. In order to meet expectations for this indicator, there must be
no instances of advanced students doing more assignments than their classmates; rather, assignments should
be differentiated in a way that extends learning. By catering to the needs of advanced learners, the indicator
promotes a more personalized learning experience and fosters a classroom environment where all students
have the opportunity to reach their full potential.
Indicator 3k Guiding Question:
Do the materials regularly provide extensions for students who are above grade level to engage with literacy
content and concepts at greater depth?
Evidence Collection

In the instructional materials being reviewed:
● Ensure there are activities that allow advanced students to explore grade-level content at a deeper
level, encouraging higher-order thinking skills such as analysis, synthesis, and evaluation.
● Look for tasks that are more complex rather than just more of the same work.
● Check for enrichment activities that extend the content in meaningful ways without simply adding to
the workload. These could include advanced readings, thematic projects, or interdisciplinary
connections.
● Verify that advanced learners are given choices in how they explore topics or demonstrate
understanding, allowing for greater autonomy and personalized learning experiences.
● Ensure that the advanced materials remain connected to the core curriculum, maintaining relevance
and ensuring coherence with overall learning objectives.
● Ensure that there are no instances of advanced students doing more assignments than their
classmates.
Cluster Meeting
Preparing for the cluster meeting:
● Are there activities that allow advanced students to explore grade-level content at a deeper level,
encouraging higher-order thinking skills such as analysis, synthesis, and evaluation?
● Do the tasks offer complexity rather than just more of the same work?
● Are there enrichment activities that extend the content in meaningful ways without simply adding to
the workload, such as advanced readings, thematic projects, or interdisciplinary connections?
● Are advanced learners given choices in how they explore topics or demonstrate understanding,
allowing for greater autonomy and personalized learning experiences?
● Do the advanced materials remain connected to the core curriculum, maintaining relevance and
ensuring coherence with overall learning objectives?
● Are there any instances of advanced students doing more assignments than their classmates?
During the cluster meeting:
● Discuss whether there are activities that allow advanced students to explore grade-level content at a
deeper level, encouraging higher-order thinking skills such as analysis, synthesis, and evaluation.
● Discuss whether the tasks offer complexity rather than just more of the same work, possibly involving
open-ended projects, independent research, or inquiry-based learning opportunities.
● Discuss whether there are enrichment activities that extend the content in meaningful ways without
simply adding to the workload, such as advanced readings, thematic projects, or interdisciplinary
connections.
● Discuss whether advanced learners are given choices in how they explore topics or demonstrate
understanding, allowing for greater autonomy and personalized learning experiences.
● Discuss whether the advanced materials remain connected to the core curriculum, maintaining
relevance and ensuring coherence with overall learning objectives.
● Discuss whether there are any instances of advanced students doing more assignments than their
classmates.

Gateway 3: Teacher and Student Supports
Criterion 3.2 Materials are designed for each student’s regular and active participation in
grade-level/grade-band/series content.

Indicator 3j Materials provide strategies and support for students in special populations to
work with grade-level content and meet or exceed grade-level standards,
which support their regular and active participation in learning.
Scoring:
2 points
● Materials provide strategies,
supports, and resources for
students in special populations
to support their regular and
active participation in
grade-level literacy work.
1 point
● Materials provide strategies,
supports, and resources for
students in special populations
to support their regular and
active participation in
grade-level literacy work, but
not consistently.
0 points
● Materials do not provide
strategies, supports, and
resources for students in
special populations to support
their regular and active
participation in grade-level
literacy work.
About this indicator:
What is the purpose of this Indicator?
This indicator considers whether materials include strategies and support designed to help students in special
populations, such as students with exceptional needs and those requiring additional learning support, to access
and engage with grade-level content. This indicator aims to promote equity by ensuring that materials enable all
students to meet or exceed grade-level standards. By providing targeted support and resources, the materials
facilitate regular and active participation in learning for all students, helping them to overcome barriers and
achieve success alongside their peers. This approach fosters an inclusive learning environment that recognizes
and accommodates diverse learning needs and styles.
Resources:
● Supporting Special Populations, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education
Indicator 3j Guiding Question:
Do materials provide strategies, supports, and resources for students in special populations to support their
active participation in grade-level literacy work?
Evidence Collection
● Ensure the materials include specific strategies for differentiating instruction to meet the diverse
needs of students in special populations. These strategies should be adaptable to individual learning
styles and needs.

● Check if the materials provide scaffolding strategies, such as breaking down tasks into manageable
steps, using graphic organizers, or providing sentence starters to support students in building their
understanding and skills.
● Confirm that the materials include comprehensive guidance for teachers on how to implement these
strategies effectively, including professional development resources if applicable.
● Ensure there are tools and resources for monitoring the progress of students in special populations,
allowing teachers to assess effectiveness and adjust strategies as needed.
Cluster Meeting
Preparing for the cluster meeting:
● Do the materials include specific strategies for differentiating instruction to meet the diverse needs of
students in special populations, adaptable to individual learning styles and needs?
● Do the materials provide scaffolding strategies, such as breaking down tasks into manageable steps,
using graphic organizers, or providing sentence starters to support students in building their
understanding and skills?
● Do the materials include comprehensive guidance for teachers on how to implement these strategies
effectively, including professional development resources if applicable?
● Are there tools and resources for monitoring the progress of students in special populations, allowing
teachers to assess effectiveness and adjust strategies as needed?
During the cluster meeting:
● Discuss whether the materials include specific strategies for differentiating instruction to meet the
diverse needs of students in special populations, adaptable to individual learning styles and needs.
● Discuss whether the materials provide scaffolding strategies, such as breaking down tasks into
manageable steps, using graphic organizers, or providing sentence starters to support students in
building their understanding and skills.
● Discuss whether the materials include comprehensive guidance for teachers on how to implement
these strategies effectively, including professional development resources if applicable.
● Discuss whether there are tools and resources for monitoring the progress of students in special
populations, allowing teachers to assess effectiveness and adjust strategies as needed.

Gateway 3: Teacher and Student Supports
Criterion 3.2 Materials are designed for each student’s regular and active participation in
grade-level/grade-band/series content.