Higley launches 60‑day public review for K–5 ELA adoption; phonics programs among top recommendations

HIGLEY, Ariz. — Higley Unified officials opened a 60‑day public review on Dec. 9 for recommended kindergarten‑through‑Grade‑5 English/language‑arts instructional materials, presenting staff evaluations and next steps before a final recommendation to the board in March.

The process and criteria: District staff described a multi‑phase adoption process that included a steering committee, a district review committee of teachers and administrators, and mandatory training on the science of reading and Arizona standards. Staff emphasized statutory requirements for K–3 core phonics and the "move‑on‑when‑reading" expectations and noted vendor materials must be supported by ADE where applicable.

Recommended programs: For K–3 core phonics the review committee selected three top programs (including a program described as "Really Great Reading," "95% Core Phonics" and "Foundations by Wilson"). For K–5 comprehensive core materials, staff recommended Amplify (CKLA), McGraw Hill—s Emerge (a newer product with temporary ADE approval pending efficacy reporting), Wonders (McGraw Hill) and Wit & Wisdom (Great Minds). Staff said each top selection showed substantial evidence for systematic, explicit instruction and included decodable reader sets and multisensory supports.

Public review logistics and vendor engagement: The district will host materials and access codes in the boardroom for integrity of review (staff said remote access is restricted to avoid outside feedback leakage). The public review runs Dec. 10 to Feb. 10, with vendor presentations near the review—s end. Staff said some vendors are willing to work with districts on content alignment and that questions from the public will inform vendor Q&A sessions during presentations.

Key board questions and clarifications: Board members asked whether cursive/handwriting components are included (staff said Foundations includes handwriting in its Grade‑3 kit) and whether digital components will be accessible for review (staff said most packages include both print and digital materials and the district will arrange access in person to protect code integrity). One board member also asked whether vendors would accommodate requests to remove ideologically contested material; staff said vendors that work with districts and states often provide alignment and editing options and that the public review period is an opportunity to raise those concerns.

Next steps: Vendor presentations and community feedback will feed into the steering committee—s final analysis; staff will return to the board with a final recommendation for a vote on March 3.