Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Curriculum Process topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board debates curriculum-adoption process; members press for clearer evidence-based criteria
Summary
At a work session the Anoka-Hennepin board discussed an updated curriculum-adoption process (social studies example). Some directors urged stronger, explicit incorporation of evidence-based instruction and clearer definitions of 'minimal compliance' in the rubric; staff said AIR-aligned rubrics, study committees and pilots are in place.
District staff presented an update to the curriculum adoption process on April 13 and used social studies as a working example of the steps the district follows: analyze need, convene a study committee, evaluate materials against a rubric, pilot finalists, and bring proposals to the board.
"We were asked by this board to bring to you an updated process," Sarah Hunter, executive director of learning and achievement, told the board, describing training given to study-committee members and alignment of the district rubric with the American Institutes for Research criteria.
Several board members urged stronger, explicit use of evidence-based research at the 'analyze the need' stage. "I will continue to say the rubric will not be sufficient because I don't think we've gone back to that foundational piece to say we're using evidence-based instruction here," said a board director who objected to moving forward without clearer evidence-based filters embedded in the process.
Other directors acknowledged the work already completed — vendor presentations, committee training and an open review in 'Room 157' — and asked staff to ensure materials brought forward for pilot or board consideration clearly show how they address both standards and literacy priorities. Staff said the social studies rubric had been honed to center disciplinary literacy, teacher supports and accessibility, and that two finalists will be presented for board review before pilot; the committee plans to bring those materials to the board in two weeks for review.
Directors also sought clarification of how the district will judge "minimal compliance" and how UBDs (understanding by design) and teacher training will be phased in to ensure materials are implemented effectively. Staff responded that pilots, teacher teams and UBD writing will follow selection and that UBDs will be brought to the board before implementation.
The discussion did not produce a vote; board members asked staff to return with clearer documentation of the rubric's evidence base and a description of how chosen materials will explicitly support district literacy priorities in secondary courses.
The process remains on track for continued review, pilot selection and future board decisions ahead of required standard implementation.
