Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Curriculum topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Menands UFSD staff recommend adopting ARC Core English language arts curriculum

Menands Union Free School District Board of Education · June 11, 2024
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

District staff presented ARC Core (American Reading Company) as their recommended K–8 English language arts curriculum, citing alignment with state literacy briefs, built-in differentiation, and embedded coaching supports; assessment tools are planned for year two.

The staff member presenting to the Menands Union Free School District Board recommended that the board adopt the ARC Core English language arts curriculum (identified in the presentation as coming through American Reading Company), saying it best met the district's goals for vertical alignment, research-based instruction and diverse text representation. "The curriculum that we are hoping that the board will adopt this evening comes through American Greeting Company. It is also called ARC core," the presenter said during the opening remarks.

The presenter described the committee process used to reach the recommendation: teachers across K–5, special-education staff and the librarian reviewed materials and visited schools using three candidate programs (Wit & Wisdom, Core Knowledge, and ARC Core). The committee concluded ARC Core offered the right mix of skills instruction and engaging texts across the four-yearly units the program uses: a literacy lab, an informational/research unit, a literature unit and an argument unit. "It is aligned to Next Gen. Those are English language arts standards," the presenter said, explaining the program structure.

Staff emphasized the program's fit with the state's literacy briefs and the "big six" components of reading instruction: oral language, phonological awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary and comprehension. The district intends to phase assessment tools into year two rather than introducing them immediately; the presenter said, "So we would be okay without bringing the assessment piece on first," noting the learning curve for teachers.

Professional development was highlighted as a key feature. In response to a committee question about supports for teachers, staff said the vendor's PD model includes in-class coaching with embedded coaches working alongside teachers throughout implementation rather than only virtual modules. "Their PD is actually embedding a coach in classrooms, pushing it and working with teachers," staff said.

Staff also described how the program allows for differentiation within units (grade-level, above- and below-grade texts) so teachers can meet students where they are while continuing to build grade-level knowledge and vocabulary. The presentation stressed the curriculum's emphasis on diverse perspectives in text selection and materials that engage students.

Next steps described in the presentation included formal board consideration for adoption this evening and a phased assessment rollout in year two; staff said they will bring additional implementation details and a PD schedule to support teachers if the board moves forward. The presenter closed by asking the two teachers attending the meeting for any additional highlights from a classroom perspective.