Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ela Curriculum topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District staff recommend Wit & Wisdom plus phonics program to meet Minnesota Read Act requirements
Summary
After a year-long review, district staff recommended adopting Wit & Wisdom for knowledge-building (K–5) and Functional Phonics & Morphology for foundational work; projected multi‑year professional learning costs were presented.
Robbinsdale Area Schools staff recommended on May 19 that the district adopt Wit & Wisdom as the K–5 knowledge-building (comprehension and vocabulary) English language arts curriculum, paired with Functional Phonics & Morphology for foundational phonics instruction.
Assistant Superintendent and curriculum staff, led by Matt Pletcher, presented the result of a multi-month literacy review and a literacy task force of about 50 members that included classroom teachers, special-education and EL staff, building administrators and community stakeholders. Pletcher summarized the recommendation: “We are fully aligned with the Minnesota Read Act and the science of reading,” and the recommended combination would satisfy the state’s requirements for an evidence-based literacy resource.
Pletcher described the review process: the district waited for the Minnesota Department of Education’s approved list of foundational products, convened a vendor fair, gave sandbox access to both finalists, and surveyed staff and administrators. He told the board the district’s literacy committee favored Wit & Wisdom overall for knowledge-building and representation. Pletcher said, “Our American Indian team strongly endorsed Wit & Wisdom because of its references, its materials, its literature.”
Two concerns emerged in the review. Special education staff favored EL Education for its internal scaffolds and supports; Pletcher reported special-education staff believed EL Education contained more explicit embedded scaffolding. District staff said Wit & Wisdom also includes scaffolds but implementation would require robust professional learning and coaching. Pletcher presented comparative cost figures the committee had analyzed: a four‑year professional learning and implementation package for Wit & Wisdom was presented at about $1,100,000 and a companion foundational product (Functional Phonics & Morphology) near $200,000; EL Education was estimated at about $1,600,000 in the district’s vendor proposals.
Pletcher said Bridge to Read (the district’s current foundational resource for K–3) will continue for foundational instruction; the new recommendation would add the knowledge-building resource across K–5 and the approved phonics/morphology resource to meet Department of Education requirements for state aid. He added that the district had already implemented Bridge to Read for K–3 this year and had seen “tremendous growth.”
Directors asked about scaffolding and special-education access, planning and teacher prep time, and community input. Pletcher and other administrators said the chosen vendor’s professional learning plan would provide multi-year coaching and a launch sequence intended to give teachers unit planning time during the training. The recommendation was informational at the May 19 meeting; the board did not take a formal procurement vote that night.
If the board moves forward with Wit & Wisdom and Functional Phonics & Morphology, the district plans to implement the resources in fall 2025 with a multiyear professional learning and coaching plan and to monitor implementation fidelity and outcomes.
Budget details discussed at the meeting: the district presentation estimated roughly $1.1 million for multi‑year PL for Wit & Wisdom and about $200,000 for the foundational product; EL Education’s full package estimate was presented at roughly $1.6 million. Superintendent Salo and curriculum staff said the district would return with final procurement documents and a professional learning calendar for board review prior to purchase.
