APS board accepts progress report on high‑quality instructional materials after questions about middle‑school scores

The Albuquerque Public Schools Board of Education voted Sept. 3 to accept interim progress monitoring reports for Guardrail 3.1 and 3.2, which track district progress on adopting and using high‑quality instructional materials. The motion to accept the reports passed on a roll‑call vote; the board recorded unanimous support.

Board Member Josefina Dominguez, who asked that the item be pulled from the consent agenda for discussion, said a constituent asked why the district had an outlier score of 52% at the middle‑school level in the superintendent’s interpretation of the data. “One of my constituents asked about how the superintendent and her staff explain the outlier score of 52% at the middle school level,” Dominguez said. She asked district leaders to respond publicly at the meeting.

Superintendent Dr. Blakey and Chief Academic Officer Sherry Jett explained the district’s interpretation. Dr. Blakey said the district is seeing inconsistent alignment at the middle‑school level between two elements used to determine whether instruction is supported by high‑quality instructional materials: either the materials used are high quality but not at the correct grade level, or they are at the correct grade level but do not meet the district’s high‑quality criteria. “In middle school, we’re seeing that sometimes they’re not aligned,” Dr. Blakey said, describing the source of the discrepancy.

Jett added that the district follows guidance from the Public Education Department on qualifying materials and that the state guidance includes nine criteria for high‑quality instructional materials; she said cultural and linguistic responsiveness is among those criteria. Jett described local practices to address gaps: an adoption committee that includes community members, ongoing professional conversations with school leaders and teachers, and a Guardrail 3 collaborative team created about two years ago to vet materials, suggest enhancements, and, if necessary, remove materials that do not meet standards. “Should somehow a material get through that pretty rigorous process, we also lean into the ongoing professional conversation with our school leaders and our teachers,” Jett said.

Board Member DePico asked whether high‑quality instructional materials means strictly using purchased textbooks or whether other factors apply. Jett and Dr. Blakey said the definition includes multiple qualifications beyond simply using a purchased text; those qualifications are applied during adoption and in ongoing professional practice. The district also described how LETRS training (structured literacy based on the science of reading) is used to make instruction accessible, including multilingual word study, mirroring texts to connect English phonics patterns to students’ home languages, and scaffolding tools teachers use without lowering expectations.

Board Member Heather Benavides moved acceptance of the progress monitoring reports; Josefina Dominguez seconded. A roll‑call vote followed and the motion carried unanimously.

The board approved acceptance of the reports; no specific policy change or funding action was taken at the meeting. District staff said they will continue implementation and monitoring through the Guardrail 3 collaborative processes described at the meeting.

Why it matters: Guardrail 3 is the board’s monitoring mechanism for ensuring curriculum and instruction meet the district’s standards. The board’s questions focused on alignment at middle school and on how the district ensures materials are culturally and linguistically responsive for Black, Native American and English‑learner students.

What’s next: The district will continue monitoring and refining adoption and professional learning processes; board members indicated they may follow up in future meetings if concerns persist.