Last Updated: 2020-07-23 HIDOE Online Content Review ASU (Canvas LMS) FLVN (Blackboard LMS) Acellus (*Learning Platform) Online Curriculum Review - ASU Thank you for your support with reviewing the ASU curriculum for Grades K and 3! Your feedback will help to provide valuable insight into the alignment of the curriculum to standards. Instructions: ● Review the ​Arizona State University Curriculum instructions​ for login and access instructions.   Arizona State University Grade K and Grade 3 Curriculum GRADE K and 3 COURSES Access this demo at: ​Canvas Username: Electives.Student1 Password: electivesStu@01 GRADE 6 COURSES Access this demo at: https://asuprepaz.instructure.com/ Username: Demo.user.004 Password: scarysoda18 To access the Curriculum: 1. On the Dashboard, select the ​Grade 3 Demo - Sandbox 1 course​. 2. Select the course that you would like to access. 3. Click on the lessons. 1 Last Updated: 2020-07-23 ● Review the content and materials for the Grade K and Grade 3 courses in the table below: Language Arts/Reading​ ​Math​ ​Science​ ​Social Studies ○ NOTE:​ ​We are working with ASU to get access to the Science and Social Studies curriculum for Grade 3. ● Provide any comments/questions and overall feedback regarding the content for those courses/lessons.   ASU ELA Course Comments/Questions Grade K As in grade 3, the intent is to use this for science and social studies which would be a better fit than ELA. The ELA time allocation is 160-180 minutes and though there is a foundational skills component built within the modules, it does not follow the research that the phonemes should be introduced in a specific sequence of high usage versus This entire program would supplant a school’s current curriculum and would require 5+ hours of daily instruction. The teacher (Learning Guide) would be expected to provide individual feedback and support through most lessons within the module. The teacher/learning guide would need to be knowledgeable and extremely involved in providing support and guidance. Pros - (1) There is a focus on building knowledge (2) Center around key text (text-centered) (3) Voice support for text (4) Questions are text-based Cons: (1) Does not follow the science in reading in the sequence of phoneme introduction (2) Does not provide enough practice and support in the foundational skills (3) Does not promote fluency and automaticity (3) Does not provide support for vocabulary in text; a list of words are provided however when examined further, no definitions or supports are provided so Learning Guide would need to provide instruction (4) Supports would be needed to navigate the site for younger children (5) Limited examples provided for new learnings (6) Skills supports are provided through Brain POP and other videos 2 Last Updated: 2020-07-23 - students listen to it but no feedback or engagement. Grade 3 As noted, the intent is to use it for science and social studies. The time allocation needed for the ELA block is 100-120 min for grade 3-8 (reading, skills and writing). In addition, the other content allocation times was set for a full day. This seems to supplant a school’s current ELA, science, social studies and math curriculum so wondering if the expectation is that certain parts of the module would be done in school and others at home. It would still require the student to dedicate 4-5 hours of online learning (ELA-100 t0 120 min; math - 45 min; science- 45 min; social studies- 45 min; and independent reading - 30 min). The teacher (Learning Guide) would also be expected to provide feedback and support throughout the module. Pros - (1) There is a strong focus on building knowledge (2) opportunities for students to collaborate/chat with each other on projects (3) CCSS writing standards are addressed throughout the module (4) voice support for students needing help with text (5) Text-centered (6) Questions are text-based (7) organizing around a project is motivating and each unit has a culminating project Cons - (1) voice support reads through all of the text for the student but this can be difficult for them to follow the directions. Had to figure out how to pause because the voice support ran quickly through the text. The directions are extremely text heavy and would be very difficult for your average third grader to navigate independently (2) Needs much more supports in the foundational skills (word reading, word analysis, etc.). Weak in addressing this area. Approach to high frequency words doesn’t seem to be grounded in the latest research(3) Needs more examples and visual supports in directions. Not enough opportunities for students to practice skills (4) Weak fluency practice, the first video for fluency contraindicated the latest research in fluency and the second one was completely teacher facing and unclear what the students were supposed to do. (4) Text had very limited vocabulary instruction and support. There was no provision of illustrations or student friendly definitions for the words, this like much of the unit could be a base for an experienced teacher to work from but would not be a stand alone curriculum. This would not work at all well for English Learners as well as any student who is not already a very strong independent reader (5) Too much time required to go through the entire module. Requires students to go on daily for a minimum of 4-5 hours of online work. I don’t think most third graders could navigate this independently, this would require a significant amount of teacher support (6) Standards identified (icon) would need to be translated to CCSS Question: Brain POP is utilized to support lessons but wasn’t able to find teacher instruction for certain literacy skills. Does it explicitly address this area? Didn’t see it in the modules. Overall Feedback:​This should not be used to supplant a school’s curriculum and we would not recommend it as a supplement because it requires such a high degree of independence and or a very skilled 3 Last Updated: 2020-07-23 teacher/learning guide to work on the activities. In addition and perhaps most importantly some of the key areas of reading don’t seem to follow the most current research. The way fluency, high frequency words and vocabulary were addressed were all quite problematic. The curriculum doesn’t meet many of the Instructional Materials Evaluation Tool (IMET) criteria. The article below gives a good explanation of how Anita Archer and others describe the approach that should be taken for high frequency words- this curriculum reflects that rote memorization approach discouraged by the article and Dr. Archer’s presentation for HIDOE. https://www.readingrockets.org/article/new-model-teaching-high-frequency-words   ASU Math Course Comments/Questions Grade K Mathematics in early grades has students use psychologist, Jerome Bruner’s work of concrete (objects), pictorial (drawings), then abstract (symbols). Lessons at the beginning seem to go straight to the pictorial and abstract phase. If there is a concrete portion, it seems like a last minute thought. The curriculum seems to be more focused on the writing of numbers. There are minimal amounts of the student engaging with concrete materials, if any at all. Especially at the kindergarten level, there should be lots of opportunities to use manipulatives. Questions that students are being asked are low-level questions. Students are mostly asked “how many” questions or questions that doesn’t push student thinking. Students are not given rich tasks to engage with. I am not sure how students are receiving feedback on the tasks that they are being asked to do. If students are working on activities and practicing it wrong over and over again, it becomes harder to fix. (Example: Students are being asked to count a set of objects but there is no feedback to check on the principles of counting.) Is this going to be used as a 100% distance learning option? If it is, the lesson plans are written (for kindergarten) as if the Learning Guide is there present with the student. I haven’t seen opportunities for students to construct viable arguments (at the kindergarten level) nor have I seen opportunities for critiquing the reasoning of others. Look for and make use of structure. Online tools to help with students seeing structure are used with this program (e.g., five and ten frames, rekenreks, etc.). These online tools are not helping students notice the structure of these tools with questions such as when using the five frames, “How many counters do you see?” and “How many squares in the five frames are not filled?” Or when using the rekenreks, students are just asked to represent numbers. They are not asked about what they notice about “How many white beads are 4 Last Updated: 2020-07-23 being used?”, “How many red beads are used?” and “What do you notice when numbers are 5 or more?” It seems as though these tools are just being used simply as online tools and not used to promote the Standards for Mathematical Practice. The lessons address the standards but it doesn’t address the entire list of standards that the lessons claims to address. (For example, Make Numbers to 10 - Part 1, it claims to have K.CC.2 which is counting forward beginning from any given number within the known sequence instead of having to begin at 1. The lesson has the students always beginning at 1.) This is just one example. There were others. Lessons in the first module are repetitive. Trace numbers, count and write the number in the picture, then copy the same number of dots (in order). Also, the sequencing seems inappropriate. It is easy for students to copy a picture and create the same number of dots or match the same number of dots. Writing the number (which is abstract) should be coming at the end of the learning sequence. Might there could be a more engaging way for students to have better learning experiences? More or Less lesson Part 2 has a catchy song for students to listen to. Instead of having students the quantity of one more, the song is teaching the students that if the number is to the right of another number, it is more. Same with numbers to the left of another number. The standard is asking students to “understand that each successive number name refers to a ​quantity​ that is one larger.” This is not what the video is teaching the students. The lesson requires the Learning Guide the students with their learning. Without a Learning Guide at home or in the classroom, it makes a hard to a person to set up the task for the students. Will all students have Learning Guide in their classroom or at home setting up the activity for them? More or Less activity for Part 5 has a pattern block activity for the students to engage in. However, when you click on the link, there is are virtual pattern blocks on the screen but you do not see the two groups of shapes to compare. Time is not a standard in Grade K. Starts in Grade 1. Money is not a standard in Grade K. Starts in Grade 2. Pros: (1) Text-to-speech for non-readers. (2) Video attached to show how to make a counting book. (3) Checks for understandings are good. (4) Attempts to use music and poems to make the math catchy for students. (5) Cons: (1) Many lessons states that students should be using objects to count. However, there is nothing there to ensure the student that they are doing it correctly or incorrectly. How does a student know if they are doing the task correctly? (2) Text-to-speech directions are mechanical, fast, and there are a lot of words. (3) Lesson barely has concrete objects for students to engage with and is a very small piece of the lesson. (4) Lesson is heavy with abstract and pictures early on. (5) Are these the best videos available for our students? 5 Last Updated: 2020-07-23 The video I watched had only 3 instances where it connected the numeral to the quantity. Otherwise, there were just numerals without any connection to a quantity. (6) Not all CCSSM standards listed in the lessons are found in the lesson. (7) Checks for understandings have a lot of words that I’m sure a kindergartener can read. (8) Teaching students how to write the number 5 incorrectly. (9) The lessons become redundant and the students are reviewing writing the numbers from before over and over again with no other change in the routine. (10) Concepts are being taught abstractly, not conceptually. (11) Typographical errors (Compare - Part 1, 2, and 7), (12) Grade 3 In reviewing the different modules, there seems to be a common approach to support self-directed learning similar to Grade K. Lack of concrete opportunities for students when first learning a concept. Questions that students are being asked are low-level questions. Students are mostly asked “how many” questions or questions that doesn’t push student thinking. Students are not given rich tasks to engage with. I haven’t seen opportunities for students to construct viable arguments (at the kindergarten level) nor have I seen opportunities for critiquing the reasoning of others. This curriculum (in general) tells the students to do the mathematics instead of giving them opportunities to reason, find patterns, and look for structure in the mathematics. There are interactive activities in the curriculum which takes them to a Didax webpage with a place value mat with place value discs. There are no directions about what to do with that page. No directions in the lesson plan and no directions on the Didax webpage. The first lesson in Grade 3 claims that it is addressing 3.OA.9 which has students IDENTIFYING arithmetic patterns. This lesson TELLS the students the arithmetic pattern which does not address the standard. At the very end, it has students to fill in the missing numbers which makes the student find the arithmetic pattern. Also, in Understanding Whole Numbers - Part 5, it claims that it is addressing 3.OA.9 but it doesn’t ask students to notice a pattern. A student MAY find a pattern but it doesn’t explicitly ask the students to find one so you can’t generalize that all students would get 3.OA.9 out of this lesson. Understanding whole numbers part 2 states that it addresses 3.NBT.2 and 3.NBT.3. It does not address both of these standards. Telling a student how to do the “steps” in using a number bond to add two numbers is not addressing MP7. Having students practice the “steps” is not having students recognize the structure of the numbers but instead has them following a procedure. 6 Last Updated: 2020-07-23 Chapter 6 is the first chapter in Grade 3 that addresses the concept of multiplication. The title of the chapter is: Multiplication Tables of 6, 7, 8, and 9. Where is the work for Grade 3 about multiplication for numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 0? I suspect that those multiplication facts were learned in Grade 2 with this program. Grade 3’s responsibility is multiplication and if the facts for 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 0 are not in this grade, I am not sure how the facts are taught for facts with 6, 7, 8 or 9. Commutative, associative, and distributive properties are taught conceptually in Grade 3. The students do not have to know the names of the properties but they should know how they work (by the end of Grade 3). This curriculum lists these words as some of the vocabulary words. Smarter Balanced lists these properties as vocabulary word for math in Grades 5 and 6. Standard algorithm of multi-digit looks like it has been taught in previous grade levels and students are reviewing it in Grade 3. Mastery of standard algorithm is a Grade 4 standard and generally other methods of solving addition AND subtraction problems are used in Grades 3 and below. In Understanding whole numbers - part 3, it shows a base ten model that is different from the concept that it is teaching. For example, the example shows 10 thousand blocks but it asks, “What is one more than 9,999.” Although it shows the correct answer, it doesn’t show the students what is conceptually happening when it goes from 9,999 to 10,000. In Understanding Whole Numbers unit, it seems like a missed opportunity for students not to build ten more a couple of times and not ask students what do they notice happening with the written number. This would be an easy connection to Standards for Mathematical Practice #8. It is interesting how it is taught that “add tens, then add ones.” Does it matter? Estimation is being taught as an exercise. The reason why students need to learn about estimation is not explained nor are students asked why do people estimate? Understanding Whole Numbers - Part 6 and Part 8 is in a context that is not relevant to our students. It also has bias toward children/families that can/not afford to go to amusement park. Hawaii teachers will need to change the context. In addition, contexts should be things that students either have a common experience (equity) or things that students can relate to. Chapter 1 - Numbers to 10,000: The activity on page 26 claims to be a “hands-on” activity. It is an activity but I don’t consider it a “hands-on” activity. There are no manipulatives involved. It is a paper and pencil game/activity. There are lessons in the curriculum that do not address the grade level standard. No standard is noted in the lesson. It is a scaffolding lesson but doesn’t explicitly say that. (Mental Math and Estimation - Part 1) In Mental Math and Estimation - Part 3, it lists 3.OA.8 as a standard that it 7 Last Updated: 2020-07-23 addresses. Most of the problems are NOT word problems and the last game MAYBE could be a word problem but it is not really in context...They are just numbers. Also, these are only one-step problems (not word problems) when the standard should be two-step word problems using the four operations. The activity only addresses addition. Some pages have an extraneous amount of text on the pages. Chapter 7: Multiplication. The limit to multiplication are numbers within 100. In Lesson 7.2, students are being taught how to multiply a 3-digit number by a 1-digit number. This is a Grade 4 standard. Standard algorithm is also being taught which is a Grade 5 standard. Chapter 14: Fractions. This is the first grade level that formally introduces fractions to students. Limitations of fraction denominators (as stated in the CCSSM document) are: 2, 3, 4, 6, and 8. In the introductory instruction lesson plan for teachers in Part 1 of the TE, the teacher is talking about a quilt that is in 36ths. This denominator is way beyond the scope of Grade 3. In fact, this denominator would be something Grade 5 students should be using. In Lesson 14.3, the student work page has “simplest form.” In the CCSSM, you will not find the word “simplest form” in the standards. This was by design. Sometimes, the simplest form is not the simplest form. It depends on the context. By exposing students to the wrong languaging for mathematics, we will be confusing them with their learning. In the CCSSM, Grade 3 teachers should not be using set models to teach fractions. The standard states that “...when a WHOLE is partitioned into parts.” Set models are done in Grade 4. Unit fractions are not listed as a vocabulary word. Unit fractions are important to know when learning fractions in Grade 3. Measurement conversions are being done in Chapter 15. Measurement conversions begin in Grade 4. Inappropriate content in Grade 3. In Lesson 14.1 for students (p.117), denominators in a table include 1/7, 1/9, 1/10, 1/11. 1/12. All of these fraction denominators are beyond the Grade 3 limitation. Pros: (1) Vocabulary list. (2) Let’s Explore section has an open-ended task for students to engage in. (3) Text-to-speech feature (4) Pictorial representations are used. (5) Variety of strategies to teach multiplication facts. Cons: (1) Going beyond the limitation of the standards. (2) Vocabulary lists contain words that are program-based, not necessarily mathematics content vocabulary. (3) Teaches students in “steps”(Lesson 1.3 - Comparing and Ordering Numbers page 31). (4) Lack of concrete objects used to understand concepts. (5) 8 Last Updated: 2020-07-23 Overall Feedback: ​This would not be a recommended resource to supplant mathematics curriculum, as it lacks current research in the concrete - pictorial - abstract, inquiry, or problem-based approach to support students in access to the rigor of grade level curriculum. In addition, the assessment materials lack complexity and flexibility for students to display the full continuum of the standards of mathematical practice. There is also coverage of many standards that are not in the appropriate grade level in both Grade K (not as bad in Grade K) and 3. There is also a lack of focus, coherence, and rigor (IMET criteria).   ASU Science Course Grade K Comments/Questions This seems to intend to align to NGSS for K, but I think it misses the mark in a variety of ways. I find this very hard to navigate and the reading level seems to be way above K. I have a hard time believing that a Kinder would be able to navigate and complete these modules without a substantial amount of assistance. It doesn’t seem K friendly at all. I’m not sure this would be a helpful home option – it needs more than a parent monitor or guide, it needs a parent to be a tutor or teacher. What I see is a LOT of reading about scientific vocabulary and concepts, and very little engaging in practices of science. There are some games interspersed, but what I see links out to a variety of different resources, which themselves vary in quality. I would not recommend this for K. Grade 3 Grade 6 ​(Since we don’t have access to Gr. 3) No access – blank modules Similarly to K, I think this material is intended to align to MS NGSS standards. In general, I would say that this interface seems more age-appropriate and user friendly than the K version. I do think that it might be a challenge for equitable access, because there is some degree of going in and out of the LMS to get to external links and then answering a long list of questions. For many students, it’s probably not chunked well and could lead to confusion. I do not see that this is strongly aligned to NGSS. The material is presented in a very traditional lecture and quiz style, with a few “activities” thrown in. I think they try to make it somewhat engaging and have some “real-world” scenarios, but there is still a heavy emphasis on content and vocab. Kids aren’t really engaged in the practices or in higher-order thinking. I would not recommend this for Grade 6. Overall Feedback: 9 Last Updated: 2020-07-23   ASU Social Studies Course Comments/Questions Grade K Pros:The overall topics for K are just “ok.” I am glad to see some basic concepts of social studies there e.g., temporal structures (that could also be applied to other content areas), basic economic ideas like work and jobs, and geographic and historical topics as well. There are even personal financial literacy concepts. (Thatʻs a good thing!) It is also good that the concept of voting is introduced in K. I also like that the modules link to outside sources such as “Brain Pop,” which is a really great resource in itself! I do like that there is some diversity within the topics as well. Topics such as Ramadan will have to be carefully and sensitively explained. Cons: There seems to possibly be a bias toward “American Exceptionalism” in that it definitely promotes patriotism (a good thing) but does not really even introduce the difficult times in America. Both “good” and “bad” should be recognized. For example, when learning about “Famous Presidents,” it very simply teachers that Lincoln ended slavery. This is a very complicated topic and should not be left there. True, the Emancipation Proclamation ended the formal institution of slavery ​but only in states that had seceded from the Union,​ NOT in the border states that still held slaves. It also exempted parts of the southern states that were already in Northern control. It is a great document and truly transformed the idea of the war, but the terrible Jim Crow era that follows is hopefully studied in another grade. (I know that some of these topics are too sensitive and complex for a Kinder, however, I just donʻt want to keep perpetuating a myth that “all slaves were free” and all was good for these former slaves after the Civil War ended. Also, in the module for Thanksgiving, it seems to perpetuate the Thanksgiving myth of turkeys and clothes. I call this the “textiles and tastebuds” curriculum. Some of the content is not even accurate! The best part of this module would be the Brain Pop that treats the First Thanksgiving in a much more accurate way, and at times, contradicts the ASU curriculum itself. There is a lot of emphasis on rote memorization, instead of asking why and how questions. This leads to low-level thinking. It should start with the facts and go deeper from there. Finally, it does not even use the C3 Framework or national standards in SS. Grade 3 Grade 3 Pros: It covers a very wide variety of topics. Some of the links are to good 10 Last Updated: 2020-07-23 programs e.g., “Brain Pop” etc., but then not much support is taken there. There should be a lot more “thinking” questions. There are also rubrics with some of the tasks (though they are mostly quantitative in nature, not qualitative.) Cons. As in K, the overall concepts are weak. It would take a LOT of good teaching to take these topics and actually teach them in a way that students can make meaning of them. The “topic to topic” ideas are not how good SS topics are taught; they need to be taught within a larger context that students can make meaning of today. That is even true kn K and 3! As in K, they do not even use the C3 Framework or national standards in SS. Overall Feedback: ​Overall, I think it will take a knowledgeable teacher to make sure that these topics are treated with accuracy and sensitivity.​ ​There has to be a lot of contextual understanding from the start. The assessments should go beyond “factoids” e.g. Abraham Lincoln was the 16th President.” Teachers must choose what is important and measure historical understanding. Neither grades aligns to any standards of which I am aware. Online Curriculum Review - Acellus / FLVS Thank you for your support with reviewing the elementary curriculum on two platforms, ​Acellus Learning Accelerator ​and ​Florida Virtual School​. Your feedback will help to provide valuable insight into the alignment of the curriculum to standards. Instructions: 1. Acellus Learning Accelerator ○ Review the ​Acellus Access information​ for login and access instructions. ○ Record the course and lesson title in the corresponding content area table below: Language Arts/Reading​ ​Math​ ​Science​ ​Social Studies ○ Review content and materials for 1-2 courses. ○ Provide any comments/questions and overall feedback regarding the content for those courses/lessons. 2. Florida Virtual School (FLVS) ○ Review the ​Florida Virtual School​ information for demo accounts. ○ Record the course and lesson title in the corresponding content area table below: Language Arts/Reading​ ​Math​ ​Science​ ​Social Studies 11 Last Updated: 2020-07-23 ○ Review content and materials for 1-2 courses. ○ Provide any comments/questions and overall feedback regarding the content for those courses/lessons.   Three steps to get started with Acellus: 1  Install the Acellus App  2  Setup Your Teacher Account  3  Complete the Online Acellus Teacher Certification Course  To get started with Acellus, start by installing the Acellus App on your  computer by selecting this link:  https://www.goldkeyid.com/apps/acellus/install/ After opening the Acellus App, click on "Parent/Teacher Sign-in" in the  top-right corner of the Acellus App. You will be prompted to create a PIN  and enter an email and personal phone number. To be prepared to make the most of Acellus, ensure that you complete the  online Teacher Certification course. The course can be accessed by selecting  the Teacher Development icon on My Desk in the Acellus Teacher Interface. Please do not add students or create classes. You can review content directly in the Curriculum section, play concept lesson videos, look at the different problem pools offered for each concept, read lesson notes and review special lessons for each concept. To access the Curriculum: 1. Click Curriculum 2. Select the course that you would like to access 3. Click Syllabus 12 Last Updated: 2020-07-23 13 Last Updated: 2020-07-23   Acellus Language Arts/Reading Course Comments/Questions Lesson Title Example Grade 5: Language Arts Common Core Write About a Moment Grade 2: Language Arts, Reading Common Core Characters and Setting ● Pro: ● ● ● ● ● Con ● ● ● ● ● (Videos) Videos are engaging and informative. Explicit in teaching vocabulary and skills. Most lessons provide video support to reinforce skills Multiple opportunities to practice skills Progression of the lesson easy to follow Unsure how student progress is monitored and whether students can track proficiency and areas that need more practice. Difficult to track Difficult to assess fluency online. Requires teacher monitoring. Not appropriate as it does not provide accurate data. Navigation from lesson to lesson is not intuitive. Students would need clear directions on how to move through lessons and the tools available to support them. Some of the introductory lessons appear to be a review of previous grade-level standards and are basic Irregular word reading uses an outdated approach of memorizing 14 Last Updated: 2020-07-23 words as whole. Did not see whether they ask the student to sound out and spell sight words. No video support. Poor instructional approach. Grade 4 Language Arts Reading Unit One Pro ● ● ● ● Con ● ● ● ● ● ● ● Vocabulary lessons with direct instruction Opportunities to answer questions about a book that are found in the text directly Short, clear lesson videos on many important ELA concepts. Liked the explanation of opinion writing, it was clear. Kids likely to build vocabulary and have practice reading- which is so important. I found it hard to navigate, maybe it is better on the student end. I found you couldn’t click on most things from the syllabus and had to toggle back and forth from the syllabus to problems etc. It was not intuitive. The books looked babyish (over-simplified)? Is this the remedial edition? What Lexile level are the books? Didn’t see clear evidence of the shift in Common Core to Build Knowledge or a clear emphasis on evidence and or academic vocabulary. Was this the Common Core edition? Not aligned to CCSS and many skills are below grade level. The spelling starts out very low “short and long vowel sounds”- again is this for remediation? Below grade level expectations (standards) I found the practice activities in the videos could be better contextualized to the core text of the unit. One problem asked them to memorize sight words- this goes against the research base. Outdated instructional strategy that has been proven to be ineffective. I couldn’t load some of the drills or the exam. 15 Last Updated: 2020-07-23 ● I liked that there was spelling but on the spelling sheets it said to look up unfamiliar words, would be better to provide kid-friendly definitions as looking up words often steers kids in the wrong direction Overall Feedback: ● The program most useful as a supplemental resource along with direct teaching from an instructor. Not a stand-alone program. It is not rigorous and does not address grade level standards. ● Program is not adaptive based on student performance so appears that students go through the sequence of lessons. How does this address students who need more support and practice in specific concepts and skills other than doing the lesson again? ● Overall this is better than nothing for sure but didn’t feel completely contemporary and/or well-aligned to the Common Core Shifts, so it really depends on how we are using this? That would help me respond to this question. I think for kids who have had nothing and need something during the summer, this is an okay option but it isn’t great, and our Common Core teachers may feel this really doesn’t address the shifts well and wonder why that state is supporting it. That being said for kids who are behind it is sequenced and covers a ton of ground, so I hate to let great be the enemy of good. I know this is a rush but having grade-level teachers review is really an important part of the review process. ● Acellus Learning and Florida Virtual Schools do not provide sufficient scaffolding for struggling readers. I also previewed the "special education" specific courses in Acellus and they were poor in quality. ● From OSSS- In my opinion, if we are targeting potential skill loss and the need for remediation, we should use programs that organically differentiate support for students. I also think we should strive to use programs that teachers and students are already familiar with, that we may already have licenses for, and that are evidence-based. That being said, a more logical ELA program is Achieve 3000 Literacy at Home. This program covers kids prek- 12 and most schools are already familiar with it. The program provides the option to use printable packets for families who do not have consistent access to technology. I am also a strong advocate for Lexia Learning. Central District has just implemented this program and they are getting great feedback. It is evidence-based, and was developed to provide targeted and differentiated support for struggling readers. It also has a robust progress monitoring feature.   Acellus Math Course Grade K Math/Common Core Lesson Title Introduction to Addition Addition Stories Addition Song Math Facts Math Facts Drill Comments/Questions Pros: ● Video with explicit instruction ○ Appropriate pace ○ Verbal and visual guide as part of a instructional approach ○ Use of the word “is” ○ Demonstrates multiple modes 16 Last Updated: 2020-07-23 ● of modeling representations Lessons scaffolded in a CSA (concrete, semi-concrete, abstract) and leading to desired fluency prior to student practice Cons: ● Not personalized to content of Hawaii ● Does not allow for student engagement through inquiry & discovery ● Closed captioning does not actually reflect the words being shared (disadvantage for all learners including students with learning disabilities & english language learners) ● Songs and materials somewhat outdated ○ “Adding makes bigger” and “bigger is best” ● Does not encourage explicit takeaways, learning intentions, success criteria Grade 3 Math/Common Core Fractions+ Pros: ● Lessons scaffolded in a CSA (concrete, semi-concrete, abstract) ● Visual and verbal components in a delivered in multiple modes of representation Cons: ● Not personalized to content of Hawaii ● Does not allow for student engagement through inquiry & discovery ● Spaced practice of operations disrupts fractions progressions ● Does not encourage explicit takeaways, learning intentions, success criteria ● Videos not engaging and using contemporary digital media tools in creation of videos ● No summarizing at the end of the video ● Did not reference actual vocabulary of numerator/denominator Overall Feedback: 17 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● Last Updated: 2020-07-23 In navigating through the syllabus, it was a bit tedious to start from the beginning of the syllabus list. The videos do provide sufficient explicit instruction, however, they do not maximize student engagement and learning; They also do not maximize the value of digital instruction with use of animations to enhance the explicit learning intentions and success criteria, Nor do they provide inquiry opportunities for students to access and build upon their own prior knowledge, or to build their own knowledge/understanding. We also would have preferred specific checkpoints for time slots which lead to essential understandings. Practice problems lack ability to assess the 8 standards of mathematical practice. Numeric responses were the only ones noticed to be accepted. Closed captioning does not actually reflect the words being shared (disadvantage for all learners including students with learning disabilities & english language learners). Not appropriate for students with IEPs as it does not provide formative instructional support. Would require instructional practitioners present to assist struggling students. Other online curriculum providers that you would recommend? Imagine Math - a key feature of this program is that it has live tutoring available that also matches our time zone. The activities are scaffolded and adapt to student responses. This is currently being recommended for our english language learners.   Acellus Science Course Grade 5 Science Comments/Questions Lesson Title Energy Within an Ecosystem – Part I Pros ● Instructor is enthusiastic and has a cute bunny Cons ● Overall, the skills and concepts are not aligned to NGSS (not three-dimensional, not phenomenon based, assessments are 1 dimensional, not aligned to Grade 5 PEs, little differentiation or sensemaking, few cross-content connections) ● Very vocabulary heavy ● Way below what we would want 5th grade students to be doing in some ways in terms of the activities, but also way outside the scope of 5th grade in terms of topics 18 Last Updated: 2020-07-23 ● ● Grade 2 Science How Seasons Change Navigation is not intuitive Interface and videos are not engaging Same as above, minus the cute bunny Overall Feedback: These are not very good. I think the interface is a turn off, it is difficult to navigate and it looks not much more sophisticated than something I would have used in elementary school (a very long time ago). The lessons are the drill and kill, equating science to vocabulary memorization that we are desperately trying to get away from. I understand the appeal of having an all-in-one package, and I have tried to be very pragmatic about the “sometimes something is better than nothing” approach when it comes to curriculum quality, but I can’t say that here. Other online curriculum providers that you would recommend? See Florida Virtual School review.   Acellus Social Studies Course Grade 2 Social Studies Lesson Title Your Neighborhood Comments/Questions Pros: ● The lessons are short (less than 2 minutes) ● It is easy to understand ● Lots of topics Cons: ● The teacher is a little scary! She never smiles. No facial expression. (Take a look) ● Not sure if this is aligned to any standards. I thought I saw something in another lesson where it mentioned South Carolina and Georgia? Is that correct? It has nothing to do with the C3 Framework or inquiry-based learning. ● The vocabulary is very low for a grade 2 student. Also, the assessments are mostly worksheets. (?) ● Difficult to navigate unless you know exactly what you are doing. I had to close and open the program many times. I imagine that, with practice, it would become more familiar. ● Content is very simple simple. Is not very challenging. 19 Last Updated: 2020-07-23 Grade 2 The Civil War Grade 5 The Middle East ● ● Pros: ● ● ● Cons ● ● ● Pros: The language is very simple. Cons:The content about the Civil War is very, very questionable and leaves out the major reasons we were fighting the war. The explanation of slaves failed to say anything about the conditions of slaves. This is inappropriate content for grade 2 and should not be included in The content is mostly correct The teacher speaks clearly Lots of topics The breadth of grade 5 is way, way too much! They are trying to teach everything in every grade, it seems. The entire MIddle East conflicts (Iran/Iraq war) is very simplistically explained in less than 3 minutes! There are no thought-provoking questions. Overall Feedback: ​This is very low level. The depth is ⅛ inch deep but the breadth is 10 miles wide. The Civil War does not belong in Grade 2. I donʻt know any state that does that. (Maybe SC or GA?). The instructors are hit or miss. Nice to listen to (K), scary in grade 2. It does not encourage thinking skills but rote memorization. HOWEVER, if a parent/teacher works with and supplements this work, it could be ok for remediation. The breadth in grade 5 is pretty crazy. I have never seen this kind of “coverage”for grade 5. The terms are not explained and I would be very confused studying about the Middle East Conflicts with only the background provided here. It does not take into account the background knowledge needed to understand these complex problems. It would be better for them to focus on fewer topics in depth than to try to cover a K-12 curriculum in one grade. No support for struggling students/differentiated learners. HOWEVER, if a parent/teacher works with and supplements this work, it could be ok for remediation. 20 Last Updated: 2020-07-23   Florida Virtual School Grade K-1 Courses Access this demo at ​https://flvsdemo-wkq92q7wke.agilixbuzz.com/ Demo Directions​ ​(The demo will expire on 6/5/2020) Login as a TEACHER: Username: teacher Password: tjib8kdh Login as a STUDENT: Username: student Password: y554mbkz   FLVS Language Arts/Reading Course Kindergarten 01 Comments/Questions Lesson Title Building Foundations Pro: ● ● ● ● ● Con: ● ● ● ● ● Interactive games can help students become engaged in the activity. Auditory support for letter sounds so students hear proper pronunciation Letter sound introduced in module will be embedded in each lesson within module Self-paced Individual lessons are short Multiple skills covered within a single module. Okay for review purposes but not explicit enough to support students learning a new concept/skill. Poor quality in its approach. Need for more practice/reinforcement of some of the introduced skills/concept within a module. Requires another person to be present during the lesson. Speech Tool support reads everything on page including copyright so can be confusing for K. Letter-sound lessons require students to match letter to picture. Program does not provide labels for pictures so vocabulary issues can present problems with students matching sound to picture. No reinforcement of wrong response. Students can pick incorrect answers multiple times and hear an audio (bing) however does not reinforce 21 Last Updated: 2020-07-23 ● Grade 1 v17/Module 3 Explorations Pro: ● ● ● ● ● ● Con: ● ● why selection was incorrect. Feedback and correction is important Supports phonemic awareness (phoneme or sound level) but not phonological awareness skills (rhyming, segmenting, blending) which is an essential component of beginning reading. It may appear in later lessons however should be presented before phonemic awareness. Phonological awareness skills are presented in grade 1 lessons. This is totally out of sequence in terms on instruction. Allows students to record voice while reading aloud (hear themselves reading). Renforce foundational standards (e.g., phoneme isolation) Games and videos can be engaging for students. Individual lessons are short Assigned reading passages have voice support. Nice graphics and very full of content that is important and helpful for first graders. Amount of text reading required for each lesson may require support from another person. Would need to recommend the use of the Speech Tool reads everything on page which can be confusing. More helpful if speech was provided for sections on each page so students can focus on each activity on the page. The tool also reads in a very robotic voice that may not be helpful for EL students or those working to build prosody. Some lessons need more reinforcement and support (e.g., possessive nouns). Overall Feedback: ● Students need a printer or scanner for some lessons and support materials so it may present an issue for those who do not have access. 22 ● ● ● ● ● ● Last Updated: 2020-07-23 In primary grades, there is a need for adult support to ensure skills and concepts are reinforced. Also, some of the responses require students to think of questions presented, written responses, etc. but without feedback, students may not know whether they were on track and ways to improve. Site is not intuitive so students would need support on how to navigate from lesson to next. Program would be useful as a ​supplemental ​program to reinforce learned skills. Lessons are sequenced and the program does not appear to provide additional support for those who need more reinforcement and instruction. Program seems similar to what schools are using through their iReady and STAR lesson supports. Would they have the option of using their current programs that are adaptive to their performance on lessons? There is a ton of reading for each lesson that is not at the first grade level and the text to speech tool is very robotic so kids would perhaps be turned off, it also reads every word on a page (copyright etc) and not just the directions so kids may become distracted. There is a ton of important content included for first graders including sounds vocabulary and knowledge Other online curriculum providers that you would recommend? ● Lexia ● Imagine Learning and Literacy -preferred by the EL team!! ● ● Achieve Literacy At Home Amplify K-5 Summer School   FLVS Math Course Elementary Mathematics Grade K v17 (GS) Lesson Title Module 05: Understanding Addition Comments/Questions Pros: ● Standards, learning intentions, and success criteria are clear and easily accessible ● Interactive notebook available for students work to be recorded ● Pre-test/diagnostic availability ● Assists reading of material ● Available supplemental tools ● Supplemental videos are explicit with use of animations ● Interactive activity ● Provides immediate affirmation as to correct and incorrect practices responses ● Ability to assess multiple ways via written assessment, project or audio. ● Ability to submit written responses via 23 Last Updated: 2020-07-23 ● picture/scan, audio. Printable available. Cons: ● Text to speech inconsistent intonations do not engage students in the actual purpose of messaging ● Pre-tests are multiple choice, language in some questions were not clear in directive, visuals were sometimes unusually small. ● Video resources are not tied to specific lessons as support. ● Lacks formative instruction and teacher involvement until assessment at the end. ● Lacks targeted supplemental instructional supports. Elementary Mathematics Grade 1 v17 (GS) Module 08: Addition and Subtraction Equations Pros: ● Standards, learning intentions, and success criteria are clear and easily accessible ● Interactive notebook available for students work to be recorded ● Pre-test/diagnostic availability ● Assists reading of material ● Available supplemental tools ● Supplemental videos are explicit with use of animations ● Interactive activity ● Provides immediate affirmation as to correct and incorrect practices responses ● Ability to assess multiple ways via written assessment, project or audio. ● Ability to submit written responses via picture/scan, audio. ● Printable available. ● Consistent reference to CUBES strategy as support tool, and video showing use of tool in supporting learning Cons: ● Text to speech inconsistent intonations do not engage students in the actual purpose of messaging ● Pre-tests are multiple choice, 24 Last Updated: 2020-07-23 ● ● ● language in some questions were not clear in directive, visuals were sometimes unusually small. Video resources are not tied to specific lessons as support. Lacks formative instruction and teacher involvement until assessment at the end. Lacks targeted supplemental instructional supports. Overall Feedback: ● Unpacked, this curriculum provides more supplemental resources and interactive opportunities than Acellus. ● The unpacking of the materials is not intuitive and requires some time and effort to process. ● We really enjoyed the ability for students to submit responses in a multitude of ways. ● This curriculum utilizes a routine allowing students to grow their self-directed learning. ● Explicit instruction of I do-we do-you do was much more intentional than that of Acellus. ● Students may not know if they are on track, as they are only assessed upon completion of the module. Other online curriculum providers that you would recommend? ● Imagine Math (see notes from Acellus feedback) ● Khan Academy Kids (only as a supplement for our EL and students with disabilities)   FLVS Science Course Elementary Science Grade 1 v17 (GS) Comments/Questions Lesson Title 9.02 I got it from my parents Pros ● ● ● ● ● Interface is attractive, colorful, and fairly easy to follow Built in supports for students Some variety of activities Embedded assessments This particular lesson is well aligned to a grade-level standards Cons ● Overall, the skills and concepts are not aligned to NGSS (not three-dimensional, not phenomenon based, assessments are 1 dimensional) ● Very text and picture based, missed opportunities to use digital tools in more intentional way for science (e.g. 25 Last Updated: 2020-07-23 ● Elementary Science Grade K v17 (GS) 06.03 Let's move it! lots of cartoons rather than live action videos; using drawing tools to circle things rather than draw models, etc.) Grade-level standards alignment is hit-or-miss Same as above Overall Feedback: If I were forced to choose between this and Acellus, it would be this. However, this is pretty low-level, repetitive, and text-based compared to what students should be doing with NGSS. The grade-level standards alignments are quite hit-or-miss. There is a lot of frontloading of content, with some “hands-on” activities coming later in the sequence, which is an instructional practice that we would like to get away from and that is totally doable in a virtual setting. Other online curriculum providers that you would recommend? ● Pretty much any program on this list has a digital component: ​CA Approved Curriculum ○ Of the programs on the CA list, I believe that several have other programs beyond science (e.g. STEMScopes, Amplify, Discovery Ed, NatGeo) ○ I have not personally seen all of the programs above, but I’d be happy to discuss further. Anything on the CA list cleared their state bar for NGSS alignment, so that put it several steps above either Acellus or FLVS for me. ○ I know that a good number of schools are using STEMScopes, DE Techbook, and Amplify already and would be thrilled to see those subscriptions supported via CARES. ● For supplementary materials, I like what I’ve seen from ○ BrainPOP (all content areas, including CS) ○ Twig (on the CA list but also has a huge library of resources. The parallel product for elementary is called TigTag)   FLVS Social Studies Course Elementary Social Studies Grade 1 v17 Comments/Questions Lesson Title Module 03: Learning About History Pro ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● Con ● Graphics are cute Understandable Kid-friendly Pretty easy to navigate Topics are much more appropriate than Accelus Concepts in history are appropriate May align with some standards Toolbox to assist with text Content is appropriate Not exactly aligned with Hawaii 26 Last Updated: 2020-07-23 ● ● Elementary Social Studies Grade K Good Citizenship standards Should be more opportunities to go into depth Little chance for deep discussions or inquiry Pro ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● Con ● ● ● Graphics are cute Understandable Kid-friendly Pretty easy to navigate Topics are much more appropriate than Accelus Concepts in history are appropriate May align with some standards Toolbox to assist with text Content is appropriate in breadth. Not exactly aligned with Hawaii standards Should be more opportunities to go into depth Little chance for deep discussions or inquiry, but if an adult is there to stimulate discussion, this could be mitigated (whole program.) Overall Feedback: ● I like this much better than Ascellus! I think this would be fine for remediation or even some pre-learning of topics before a regular classroom lesson. I think this is a decent supplement to a face-to-face class. Other online curriculum providers that you would recommend? ● International connections ● Discovery education. ● Supplemental programs like ○ BrainPop ○ Amplify ○ icivics (K-12) ○ Stanford History Education Group (6-12) ○ National Geographic (K-12) ○ Center for Civic Education (3-12) ○ C-SPAN Classroom ○ Everfi ○ Annenberg Learner 27