Concord schools choose EL Education program for K‑5 literacy adoption

Concord school leaders and a volunteer literacy committee recommended adopting the EL Education (Expeditionary Learning) K‑5 literacy curriculum after a yearlong review of three programs, district staff told the Concord School Committee on [date of meeting]. The committee chose EL based on a rubric assessing alignment with the science of reading and district priorities, staff said.

The recommendation matters because the district intends the program to align foundational skills (phonics, decoding) already in use with a stronger, research‑based emphasis on comprehension through knowledge building, staff said. Administrators said they expect a two‑year adoption process beginning with an early adopter cohort this fall and broader implementation in 2026–27.

Shelly (role/title not specified), who led the curriculum review, told the committee that the review team compared EL Education, Witten/Written Wisdom (later Arts & Letters), and Fish Tank and conducted site visits to districts using EL, including Northborough, Arlington and Boston Public Schools. She said committee members used a pre‑defined rubric and “ranked programs and the committee, unanimously chose EL.”

Dr. Hunter (role/title not specified) said the adoption is focused on the comprehension side of the “science of reading,” which the presenters described as phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary and comprehension. “We’re planning 2 years of adoption for the fall,” Dr. Hunter said, adding that volunteers among K‑5 teachers will form the early adopter cohort.

District staff described the planned implementation schedule: a June 17, 2025 six‑hour module launch day for the early adopters, ongoing summer prep and continuing professional development through August and the following school year. Shelly said EL scored highest on the committee’s rubric — “an average score of 69 compared to the others that were about 62” — and cited EL’s professional learning supports and text‑set model as reasons teachers favored it.

Administrators said the district budgeted for initial professional development and materials for the early cohort and will phase in additional purchases (teacher guides, student text sets) for subsequent years. Shelly said the program uses an open‑source distribution model for teacher materials, with one‑time purchases of printed student text sets and vendor printing options for professional copies.

Committee members asked about evaluation metrics and timing. Staff recommended multiple indicators — STAR assessment data, MCAS and classroom measures — and said meaningful evaluation will likely require two to three years to show outcomes, given the implementation learning curve and staggered rollout.

The presenters stressed that foundational skill instruction (Heggerty, Wilson and current decodable materials) will continue as the district adopts EL for the comprehension and knowledge‑building component of the literacy block. Staff also said special education services and IEP‑required interventions would continue; scheduling and push/pull models will be reviewed with principals and special education staff.

Next steps include finalizing contracts and training schedules, public webinars for families in fall 2025, and continuing communication with teachers, principals and the middle school about scope and sequence. The committee did not vote on final adoption at the meeting; staff said this session was intended as a discussion and update before implementation preparations continued.