1
State of Our Classrooms: Instructional Materials Questionnaire Report
August 2017
About this Report:
High-quality, standards-aligned instructional materials and the effective use of those materials by teachers are
critical to student achievement (Curriculum Counts, 2017). Since instructional materials are the conduit through
which students access content, a teacher’s ability to access, understand, and use high-quality materials has a
tangible effect on student success (Wiener & Pimentel, 2017). It should also be noted that in a randomized
experiment, switching to a better curriculum was found to be almost 40 times more cost-effective than reducing
class size (Boser, Chingos, & Strauss, 2015). Content-focused, integrated professional development on
instructional materials centers adult learning on the paramount goal: higher student achievement (Koedel &
Polikoff 2017).
In early 2017, Student Achievement Partners (SAP) surveyed over 3,700 teacher-leaders in our Core Advocate
network to understand more about the instructional materials in use in their schools and districts, as well as the
structures and supports in place that sustain effective use of instructional materials across their schools and
districts. SAP received 356 total replies (response rate of 9%) and it should be noted that not every respondent
answered all the questions. As a result, insights gained are directional.
The questionnaire was open only to the Core Advocate network (composed of teacher-leaders working to support
college- and career-ready instruction in their classrooms) as the objective was to glean information from a
population likely to have strong foundational knowledge of college- and career-ready standards. While our
respondents are neither a representative nor a randomized set of educators, many of the findings reinforce data
coming from studies that do use randomized samples of teachers in their design.
Organizations working to improve the use of adopted instructional materials, to improve knowledge and selection
of standards-aligned full-year or supplemental materials, or answer questions of curriculum design may find the
information in this report helpful in identifying how their tools and resources can best support teachers.
Introduction:
Even SAP’s Core Advocates, a group that is supportive of and knowledgeable about the Shifts needed to
implement college- and career-ready standards, struggle with selecting and implementing high-quality,
instructional materials aligned to such standards. Questionnaire results suggest that there is still a lack of expertise
about college- and career-ready standards-aligned instructional materials. The results also suggest that school and
system factors can prohibit the selection or effective use of adopted standards-aligned materials. This presents
valuable opportunities for schools, districts, and any organization working within these systems to address these
challenges.
Finding 1 - Respondents are not clear on what college- and career-ready standards-aligned materials look like or
where to find trustworthy information about them.
Forty-eight percent of respondents believe their district- or school-selected instructional materials are mostly or
completely aligned to college- and career-ready standards (Figure 1). Eighteen percent of respondents are unsure
if their instructional materials are aligned to college- and career-ready standards (Figure 2).
However, 46% also rely on the evidence for alignment that is self-reported by publishers (Figure 2).
2
Although only 46% of all respondents teach in states with textbook adoption lists, 52% of respondents said that
state lists of approved instructional materials, even if the list did was not generated by their home state, influence
decisions about instructional materials in their school or district (Figure 3). Publishers also influence the
school/district decisions about instructional materials selection, according to 38% of respondents (Figure 3).
Thirty one percent 31% of respondents say that independent, expert online reviews such as
EdReports influence
instructional materials decisions within their school or district (Figure 3).
Relying on publishers to rate their own alignment to college- and career-ready standards is problematic. Shortly
after the adoption of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS), several publishers branded their products as
aligned to the CCSS even though those products pre-dated the release of the standards (Polikoff, 2015). State lists
can provide some guidance but they also can be problematic because many are updated infrequently and may not
include newer materials developed specifically to align to the CCSS or other comparable college- and career-
ready standards (2015 ELA/ELD adoption, 2017). On the other hand, free, timely, teacher-led collections of
reviews, like
EdReports and the instructional material reviews conducted by the Louisiana Department of
Education (and other jurisdictions), are independent, up-to-date resources available to help teachers, districts, and
states decide which materials are best aligned to college- and career-ready standards. Resources like these can
also be useful when adopting new materials is not feasible and existing materials fall short of alignment. They
can help schools, systems, and teachers identify and understand the gaps so they can seek out or prepare
supplemental materials and adaptations to address areas of weakness.
Action Step(s):
Review
EdReports’ free, detailed reports of mathematics and ELA/literacy textbooks, Louisiana Department
of Education’s materials review webpage, Student Achievement Partners’ work on materials adaptation, and
the Washington State Office of Superintendent and Public Instruction’s open educational resource reviews.
All are invaluable resources for those involved in selecting or seeking to adapt instructional materials.
Promote college- and career-ready alignment criteria for instructional materials through evaluation tools like
Instructional Materials Evaluation Tool (IMET) and Achieve’s EQuIP rubric.
Focus discussions on Core Action 1
of the Instructional Practice Guide (IPG) to drive initial conversations
about instructional materials alignment through the lens of classroom practice in addition to providing
ongoing content-focused professional development.
3
Figure 1
Figure 2
16%
18%
20%
46%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
I used the Instructional Materials Evaluation
Toolkit (IMET).
I don't know that they are aligned to college- and
career-ready standards
I used information from EdReports
The publisher provided information that indicated
alignment to standards
How do you know your district-approved materials are aligned to college-and
career-ready standards?
r = 293
12%
2%
10%
28%
48%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
I don’t know
Not at all aligned
Barely aligned
Partially aligned
Completely or mostly aligned
How well are your district-approved instructional materials aligned to
college-and career-ready standards (does not include individual teacher
supplements)?
r = 338
4
Finding 2 - The professional development that respondents receive around instructional materials is not sufficient
in either quality or duration.
Respondents to our questionnaire are quite clear that they are not receiving sufficient professional development
around instructional materials.
Regarding the support provided by their districts around implementation of newly adopted materials, 20% of
respondents selected “1” on a scale from “1 (not useful)” to “4 (very useful)” and 32% selected “2” (Figure 4).
These responses reveal a troubling characterization of an investment made by schools and districts for the sole
purpose of providing implementation support to teachers. For the professional development that is given, 60% of
respondents indicate that the publisher provides some and 41% indicate that schools or districts are involved in
the professional development around their instructional materials, exhibiting school ownership of the content
professional learning (Figure 5).
Even where professional development on instructional materials is reported as useful, it is scant. Over 30% of
respondents report receiving the equivalent of a single day of professional development to support
implementation of newly purchased instructional materials over the course of the school year (Figure 6) and 87%
of those respondents’ are from schools and districts that adopted instructional materials within the last seven to
eight years. These data points line up with the nationally representative American Teacher Panel results, released
recently by the RAND Corporation, in which “the vast majorities of both ELA and mathematics teachers reported
receiving fewer than eight hours of professional development on their main instructional materials, with about
one-quarter of all teachers receiving no professional development on their main curricula at all” (Opfer, Kaufman,
& Thompson, 2016). This stands in direct contrast to research evidence that indicates that teachers who
participate in a minimum of 49 hours of professional learning grounded in high-quality, standards-aligned
curricula can have a positive impact on student achievement (Yoon et al., 2007).
Data from the questionnaire
indicate the majority of respondents are not receiving sufficient or effective support for newly adopted
instructional materials.
Content-specific professional development can “create the conditions in schools through
which teachers can become experts at teaching the curriculum they are using and adapting instruction to the needs
29%
29%
31%
38%
52%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Professional learning provider or association
Decisions made by other districts
Independent online reviews (EdReports or other)
Publishers
State-approved instructional materials list
Who or what influences or advises your school's or district's decisions about
instructional materials purchases? (Check all that apply)
r = 294
Figure 3
5
of their particular students” but this must happen over time and with practice and content-expert guidance (Yoon
et al., 2007).
Action Step(s):
Engage teachers, instructional coaches, administrators, and managers of professional development in the work
of focusing professional learning on how to teach the instructional materials and curricula that teachers are
working with daily in classrooms. The fastest way to make professional learning relevant for teachers is to
put their school’s curriculum and related evidence of student learning at its heart (Wiener & Pimentel, 2016).
Ongoing support can maximize the potential of investments in high-quality instructional materials.
20%
32%
33%
9%
How useful is the support your district provided (either by school personnel or
outside providers) for the implementation of newly adopted instructional
materials?
r = 335
1 (not useful) 2 3 4 (very useful)
Figure 4
6
Finding 3 – Respondents’ approaches to decisions around instructional materials in mathematics and
ELA/literacy are different and reflect a potential reluctance to change practice in ELA/literacy that is not as
evident in mathematics.
18%
46%
54%
23%
60%
14%
41%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
There is no formal introduction process
There is a brief intro/overview of the materials prior to
school year
Teachers collaborate to support other teachers
Teachers are supported with observation and feedback
Introduction to/training on instructional materials is
publisher provided
Introduction and use is well integrated (weekly or
biweekly) into professional learning
Introduction and training on is provided by school or
district personnel
Which of the following have been used to support or introduce effective implementation
of newly adopted instructional materials in your school or district? Check all that apply.
r = 356
30%
34%
29%
8%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Instructional materials not purchased
The equivalent of 1 day
The equivalent of 1 week
The equivalent of 1 month
How much training have you had to support your implementation of new instructional
materials purchased to support college- and career-ready standards during the current
school year (not including planned support?
r = 339
Figure 5
Figure 6
7
Respondents are implementing college- and career-ready standards-aligned instructional materials in mathematics
(Figure 7). Thirty-three percent of respondents indicate they were using EngageNY materials daily and/or often.
Twenty-nine percent indicate the same frequency of use with Eureka Math (Figure 7).
The story is different in ELA/literacy, however. The data suggest respondents are less likely—either of their own
volition or by district instruction—to abandon their pre-Common Core instructional materials, particularly those
who have adopted Balanced Literacy teaching methods. With the reported use of Journeys (33%), Fountas and
Pinnell Word Study (25%), and Teacher’s College Reading and Writing Workshop (24%), the majority of
respondents are using instructional materials that are not fully aligned to college- and career-ready standards
(Figure 8) and have some significant gaps. This lines up with the findings of the American Teacher Panel study,
conducted by the RAND Corporation, which suggest that “it is possible that state standards for mathematics are
having a greater impact on what teachers do than state standards for ELA/literacy” (Opfer, Kaufman, &
Thompson, 2016).
Although ELA/literacy respondents do not always have full-year college- and career-ready standards-aligned
materials from which to teach, they are supplementing with materials to address components such as complex text
(64%) and sequences of text-dependent and text-specific questions to build students' understanding (57%) (Figure
9). Respondents also report supplementing materials with standards-aligned, open educational resources from
achievetheCore.org, EngageNY, and Readworks (Figure 10). The rationales provided for supplementation
indicate an awareness of the shortcomings of adopted materials. While there is work to be done to ensure teachers
are provided with standards-aligned instructional materials from the outset, aligned practice can be supported
through the promotion of standards-aligned supplemental materials that address major gaps in the adopted
programs.
In mathematics, the most in-demand resources for supplementation are open educational and standards-aligned.
When asked about materials that they used occasionally or rarely, 35% of respondents indicate
EngageNY and
14% indicate Eureka Math, suggesting that respondents are supplementing with college- and career-ready
standards-aligned materials (Figure 11). The primary reasons cited to supplement math instructional materials
were to address conceptual understanding (33%) and to focus on the Major Work of the grade (27%) (Figure 12).
Regardless of materials used, 54% of respondents report collaborating with one another to support the use of
instructional materials. Forty-one percent report that professional development on instructional materials is being
done by school or district personnel (Figure 13). If collaboration and training are focused on content, ongoing,
and sanctioned and supported by the school and district, teachers will be better positioned to select and use
college- and career-ready, standards-aligned instructional materials effectively.
Action Step(s):
Introduce teacher-leaders to valuable tools with the explicit purpose of strengthening understanding about
instructional materials and, ultimately, classroom practice. Schools, districts, and organizations would benefit
by sharing open educational resources broadly with teachers. This includes:
o Tools and resources available that can help identify standards-aligned instructional materials, including
full-year curricula reviews conducted by
EdReports and Louisiana Department of Education.
o Open educational resources reviewed by the Washington State Office of Superintendent and Public
Instruction.
o Tools that can help start or continue discussion on aligned materials such as the introduction to EdReports
on Student Achievement Partner’s Aligned blog.
o Using college- and career-ready, standards-aligned programs or parts of programs as supplements to
instructional materials.
8
• Promote materials that can increase the alignment to college- and career-ready standards. If schools and
districts are not in the position to completely change all instructional materials, use full-year resources such as
EngageNY’s Foundational Skill Strand and Listening and Learning, CKLA or supplemental resources like
Dan Meyer’s Three-Act Math Tasks on his dy/dan blog in math and Readworks in ELA/literacy.
Figure 7
1%
1%
2%
2%
2%
4%
6%
6%
6%
9%
9%
14%
14%
16%
29%
33%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Saxon Math (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt)
Stepping Stones (Origo)
Investigations Everyday Mathematics/Everyday Learning…
Harcourt Math or HPS Math (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt)
Math Connects (MacMillan/McGraw Hill)
Investigations in Number, Data & Space (Pearson Scott Foresman)
Everyday Mathematics/Everyday Learning (McGraw Hill)
Math in Focus or Singapore Math (Great Source-Houghton…
Math Expressions (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt)
Bridges in Mathematics (The Math Learning Center)
My Math (McGraw Hill)
Zearn (Zearn)
Envision Math (Pearson Scott Foresman)
GO! Math (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt)
Eureka Math (Great Minds)
EngageNY Materials
Mathematics only: For K-5 teachers answering if they or their colleagues daily/almost daily (3-5X per
week) or often (1-2X per week) have drawn/will draw upon the following instructional materials for
mathematics classroom lessons for the 2016-2017
r = 323
school year. Check all that apply.
9
3%
3%
3%
3%
5%
6%
6%
7%
7%
8%
9%
9%
14%
20%
24%
25%
33%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Bookworms (Comprehensive Reading Solutions)
Ready Gen (Pearson)
Trophies (Harcourt-Houghton Mifflin)
Wit and Wisdom (Great Minds)
SRA Reading or Open Court (McGraw-Hill)
CKLA (3-5) (Core Knowledge Foundation)
Literacy by Design (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt)
American Reading Company (American Reading Company)
Expeditionary Learning (Expeditionary Learning)
Reading Wonders (McGraw-Hill)
Reading Street (Pearson)
Treasures (Macmillan/McGraw-Hill)
CKLA (K-2) (Core Knowledge Foundation)
Fundations (Wilson Language Training)
Teachers College Reading and Writing Workshop (TCRWP)
Fountas and Pinnell Word Study (Fountas and Pinnell)
Journeys (Harcourt-Houghton Mifflin)
Balanced Literacy only: What specific instructional materials do you use for K-5 ELA/literacy?
(Check all that apply)
r = 118
37%
43%
44%
45%
53%
57%
64%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Content-rich nonfiction in the areas of science, history and the
arts
Culminating tasks that require students to draw on evidence to
present careful analyses and well-defended claims
Text sets or other means to provide students with access to a
volume of texts students can read independently on a range…
Expanding students' academic vocabulary and understanding
syntax
Materials to support struggling readers
Sequences of text-dependent and text-specific questions to
build students' understanding of texts
Grade-level complex text
Balanced literacy only: Which of the following are your paramount considerations in deciding to
supplement your K-5 ELA instructional materials?
r = 69
Figure 8
Figure 9
10
64%
3%
3%
4%
6%
7%
13%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Other Supplemental Resources
Achieve the Core
Engage NY
Lucy Calkins
Reading A to Z
NewsELA
Read Works
Balanced Literacy only: Name the supplemental materials/tools that you use in your
instruction. Open Answer.
r = 110
Figure 10
11
Figure 11
2%
2%
2%
3%
3%
3%
4%
7%
7%
8%
8%
9%
10%
12%
14%
35%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Harcourt Math or HPS Math (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt)
Stepping Stones (Origo)
Math Connects (MacMillan/McGraw Hill)
Saxon Math (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt)
Math Expressions (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt)
My Math (McGraw Hill)
Zearn (Zearn)
Bridges in Mathematics (The Math Learning Center)
Investigations Everyday Mathematics/Everyday…
Everyday Mathematics/Everyday Learning (McGraw…
Envision Math (Pearson Scott Foresman)
Investigations in Number, Data & Space (Pearson…
Math in Focus or Singapore Math (Great Source-…
GO! Math (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt)
Eureka Math (Great Minds)
EngageNY Materials
Mathematics only: For K-5 teachers answering if they or their colleagues occassiuonally (2-3X permonth)
or rarely (1X per month or less) have drawn/will draw upon the following instructional materials for
mathematics classroom lessons
during the 2016-2017
r =273
school year. Check all that apply
12
Finding 4: Regardless of what is adopted by their school or districts, teachers retain a huge influence over the
instructional materials used daily in their classrooms.
33%
27%
17%
14%
9%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
To address conceptual understanding
To address focus on the Major Work of the grade
To address procedural skill and fluency
To address coherence
To address application
Which of the following is the most important consideration in deciding to
supplement your mathematics instructional materials?
r = 292
Figure 12
Figure 13
18%
46%
54%
23%
60%
14%
41%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
There is no formal introduction process
There is a brief intro/overview of the materials prior
to school year
Teachers collaborate to support other teachers
Teachers are supported with observation and feedback
Introduction to/training on instructional materials is
publisher provided
Introduction and use is well integrated (weekly or
biweekly) into professional learning
Introduction and training on is provided by school or
district personnel
Which of the following have been used to support or introduce effective
implementation of newly adopted instructional materials in your school or district?
Check all that apply.
r = 356
13
Forty-nine percent of math-focused respondents (Figure 14) and 58% of respondents in ELA/literacy (Figure 15)
are not required to use school- or district-adopted instructional materials, although there might be a
recommendation to do so. The American Teacher Panel study conducted by the RAND Corporation also shows
high numbers of teachers responding that their district does not require and only recommends use of adopted
instructional materials (Opfer, Kaufman, & Thompson, 2016).
While they don’t hold the purse strings, teachers
hold considerable power when it comes to choosing to use standards-aligned classroom materials. With the right
information and supports, they could become adept both at choosing standards-aligned materials and inspiring
their schools and districts to make wise resource investments.
Action Step(s):
Highlight existing standards-aligned, open educational resources by using tools that demonstrate aligned
materials. Since teachers often choose instructional materials for themselves, introducing teacher-leaders to
tools that help them select standards-aligned materials is key. Organizations interested in working with
teachers on selecting aligned materials should work to introduce them to tools such as the Publishers’ Criteria
for
mathematics and ELA/literacy, which pinpoint what aligned materials should look like, and the
Washington State Office of Superintendent and Public Instruction website, which has reviews of open
educational resources. Tools mentioned elsewhere in this report (EdReports, IMET, and Louisiana
Department of Education) as well as Aligned also offer valuable information to help schools and districts
make informed decisions about materials. Open Up Resources, UnboundED, Illustrative Mathematics, and
EngageNY are all viable full-year OER resources that can be used to supplement or replace instructional
materials.
Highlight examples of specific, tangible classroom resources that can be used to supplement instructional
materials such as the
Coherence Map, the Academic Word Finder, Text sets, and lessons in math and
ELA/literacy for grades K–12, all of which can be found on achievetheore.org. Illustrative Mathematics
exemplar tasks for grades K–12, including tasks for high school on algebra, fractions, and geometry are also
valuable mathematics resources.
12%
37%
51%
Please indicate whether your school or district requires or recommends
use of your adopted mathematics instructional materials.
r = 303
(Math) Materials not recommended or required
(Math) Recommends but does not require use
(Math) School or district requires use of materials
Figure 14
14
Conclusion:
The research tells us that curriculum materials have a profound effect on what happens in classrooms and how
much students learn (Koedel & Polikoff, 2017). Helping teachers gain clarity about high-quality materials
aligned to college and career-ready standards, promoting sources of reliable alignment information, and providing
sufficient, curriculum-focused professional learning are key levers in ensuring that teachers, schools and districts
are aware of the potential power of aligned instructional materials to drive student achievement.
Notes:
1. 2015 ELA/ELD Adoption (November 2015; Last Reviewed February 2017).
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/rl/im/sbeadoptedelaeldprogs.asp.
2. “Curriculum Counts,” StandardsWork, https://standardswork.org/core-beliefs/curriculum-counts/,
(Accessed June 1, 2017).
3. Boser, U., Chingos, M., and Strauss, C. (2015) The Hidden Value of Curriculum Reform: Do States and
Districts Receive the Most Bang for Their Curriculum Buck? Center for American Progress.
https://cdn.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/06111518/CurriculumMatters-report.pdf
4. Koedel, C., and Polikoff, M. (2017)Big Bang for Just a Few Bucks: The Impact of Math Textbooks in
California, Evidence Speaks Reports 2, no. 5.
https://www.brookings.edu/wpcontent/uploads/2017/01/es_20170105_polikoff_evidence_speaks.pdf
5. Opfer, V., Kaufman, J., and Thompson, L. (2016) Implementation of K–12 State Standards for
Mathematics and English Language Arts and Literacy: Findings from the American Teacher Panel (Santa
Monica, CA: RAND Corporation). https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1529-1.html
16%
42%
42%
Please indicate whether your school or district requires or recommends
use of your adopted ELA/Literacy instructional materials.
n = 277
(ELA) Materials not recommended or required
(ELA) Recommends but does not require use
(ELA) School or district requires use of materials
Figure 15
15
6. Polikoff, M. (2015) How Well Aligned Are Textbooks to the Common Core Standards in Mathematics?
American Educational Research Journal 52, no. 6.
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.3102/0002831215584435
7. Wiener, R., and Pimentel, S. (2017) Practice What You Teach: Connecting Curriculum & Professional
Learning in Schools, The Aspen Institute.
https://assets.aspeninstitute.org/content/uploads/2017/04/Practice-What-You-Teach.pdf
8. Yoon, S., Duncan, T., Wen-Yu Lee, S., Scarloss, B., and Shapley, K. (2007) Reviewing the Evidence on
How Teacher Professional Development Affects Student Achievement, Regional Education Laboratory,
Edvance Research Inc.
https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/southwest/pdf/ REL_2007033.pdf
