Teachers, ELD representatives and parents urge MCPS to replace or heavily revise Amplify CKLA

Multiple teachers, ELD representatives and parents told the Montgomery County Board of Education on April 10 that the district’s recently adopted Amplify CKLA (Core Knowledge Language Arts) curriculum is failing students with limited English proficiency, students with disabilities and many primary‑grade readers. Speakers described lessons that rely heavily on long informational texts, limited phonics instruction, assessments “above students’ grade level” and a lack of usable differentiation or language supports.

Jocelyn Stewart, a special education teacher with 32 years in Montgomery County Public Schools, said the district promised a curriculum that would close literacy gaps but “after two years of waiting…80% of teachers surveyed said that CKLA does not provide differentiation in its instruction, content, or activities.” She urged the district to require ELA, ELD and special‑education offices to produce agreed guidelines and to allow teacher teams paid time to create differentiated lessons.

Anita Prince, an English language‑learner teacher for 21 years, told the board that CKLA’s content is “way above students’ grade level” and that language‑studio materials purchased for multilingual learners are “often disconnected from what the kids are studying at the time.” Kira Mikkelsen, a second‑grade teacher, said an informal survey of 100 teachers found 78% agreed CKLA “does not teach students how to read” and that lessons lack systematic phonics and developmentally appropriate small‑group instruction.

Teachers listed concrete fixes they want the district to consider: resubscribing to a phonics program (teachers suggested Really Great Reading), creating K–2 consumable texts with picture supports, assembling an approved library of read‑alouds, reducing or making optional certain CKLA assessments, and paying teachers to redesign pacing guides and assessments over the summer.

Jackie McCluskey, a second‑grade teacher, described writing instruction gaps and proposed that MCPS pay teacher teams to develop four writing projects per grade and search for a research‑based writing curriculum aligned to Maryland standards. Emmett Tesler, a first‑grade teacher and EML advocate, said 70% of surveyed teachers found CKLA assessments “do not provide any usable data to inform instruction” and asked MCPS to reduce required assessments, beginning with “thumbs up/thumbs down” quizzes.

Alicia Drain, the elementary ELD representative with the Council for Teaching and Learning, said 215 ELD teachers she surveyed reported 69% believe CKLA is not effective for multilingual learners and 80% said they spend considerable time scaffolding materials to make lessons accessible.

Speakers repeatedly called out three problems: (1) insufficient systematic phonics instruction and small‑group practice in early grades; (2) texts and assessment items that are above students’ current reading levels; and (3) inadequate, misaligned supports for emergent multilingual learners and students with disabilities. Several asked the district to either replace CKLA or commission parallel materials specifically built for multilingual learners and students with disabilities while teachers redesign pacing and assessment.

Board members said they had heard the testimony and asked staff for follow‑up data. Board Vice President Natalie Zimmerman requested DIBELS and CKLA curricular assessment results and an accounting of how much class time (as a percentage) is spent on CKLA assessments based on district pacing guides. Superintendent Monifa Taylor acknowledged the concerns and said staff will return to the board with more analysis and next steps.

Ending: Teachers asked MCPS to move quickly. Speakers requested a district audit of CKLA implementation, paid summer work for teacher teams to produce usable materials, clearer formative assessment tools and a systematic plan to ensure multilingual and special education students can access core reading instruction. The board directed staff to provide follow‑up information and data.