Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

There’s much that Robert Pondiscio got right in his recent commentary about reading instruction. He underscored the importance of consistency in school leadership and approach, as well as the critical role teachers play in every child’s success and the need to select a high-quality curriculum — one aligned to rigorous standards and the science of learning. 

However, the discussion about the role of EdReports in reviewing curriculum for districts included a key misperception: that EdReports reviews only for standards alignment in literacy, overlooking aspects such as the science of reading and text quality. As CEO of EdReports, an independent nonprofit, I want to highlight that EdReports has always evaluated literacy materials for all these elements.

This is not to say our approach has been perfect — far from it. We know that our best report has yet to be written. Over the past decade, we have continually sought feedback and made many improvements to our process, particularly in literacy. But the breadth of EdReports’ reviews and the expertise behind them have remained constant. Since Day One, educators have developed our procedures and sat on our board, and more than 1,000 have contributed their extensive knowledge and experience to conduct our reviews.

One of the things I’m most proud of is the work we’ve done to democratize the process for adopting instructional materials. Before EdReports launched in 2015, districts relied on what publishers said about their own products or on word of mouth. Today, teams of experienced educators review curriculum for multiple aspects of quality, including how well materials are grounded in research; alignment to college and career-ready standards; and supports for all students, including multilingual learners. Administrators and adoption committees from nearly 1,800 school districts have used our free and independent reviews to help them better understand and select curricula to serve their students and teachers.

When it comes to questions around the value of independent curriculum reviews, EdReports is committed to being responsive to the needs of the field, and I welcome any conversation about quality and getting better instructional materials for educators. Over the past several years, EdReports has made improvements based on feedback from many such conversations, including:

• Updating all our “review criteria,” the specific items educator reviewers use to evaluate the quality of instructional materials. Recent changes include significant enhancements in English Language Arts, where we have introduced explicit guidance to ensure materials are absent of three-cueing, a disavowed reading strategy that encourages children to guess words. In short, a curriculum reviewed using our latest criteria cannot achieve a “green” rating if it uses this technique.
• Adding clear labels to reports so educators can easily see which review criteria were used and quickly identify if a report reflects the most up-to-date research. We also added clearer guidance on how to use earlier reports, including detailed information on specific improvements we’ve made in English, math and science. We keep every published report freely available because some materials and editions reviewed years ago are still in use. 

Our work will continue to evolve to meet the needs of educators and findings from the science of learning. We will also remain committed to several key principles:

• Focus on elements of quality in materials: High-quality instructional materials are extremely important, but they are not a silver bullet. How materials are selected and implemented have a direct impact on whether they will actually be used to benefit students. And there are myriad factors beyond the design of a curriculum — such as consistency of use and supportive school environments — that impact both implementation and impact. This makes it extremely difficult to prove the effectiveness of any single program from one district to the next, because so many factors influence teaching and learning. That’s why EdReports reviews focus on how materials are designed rather than the various ways they might be used. 
• Provide a place to start: Our reports are a starting point, not a prescription. Our reviews are designed to be one part of a comprehensive, educator-led adoption process. We believe the most effective selection processes require thoughtful, thorough, collaborative work that include educators. For example, in Wisconsin, districts used EdReports to prepare for in-depth discussions with publishers. In Fife, Washington, leaders combined EdReports insights with teacher surveys to develop customized selection criteria. In Rhode Island, EdReports reviews were a key resource, but other factors were also an important part of the selection process.
• Be a trusted resource and advocate: As the federal government appears to be stepping back from education research, states and school districts need information to guide the selection of high-quality instructional materials. EdReports will continue to support states and school systems by advocating for the importance of high-quality curriculum, providing educator-led insights, sharing research that highlights effective policies and showcasing promising practices that create the conditions for strong selection, implementation and support of instructional materials.

Spurred by education researchers, journalists and policymakers, states and districts are making progress toward greater use of high-quality curriculum and instructional materials. Now it’s up to all of us — educators, advocates and organizations like EdReports — to keep the momentum going and ensure that all students have access to the resources they need to learn and grow.

Get stories like these delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter