Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Curriculum topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee recommends Fish Tank Learning as Piedmont’s elementary ELA curriculum in first reading
Summary
After a yearlong review and a pilot by 21 teachers, the board’s ELA adoption committee recommended Fish Tank Learning for K–5, citing stronger student engagement, full-length texts, and easier teacher navigation; the recommendation was presented as a first reading and implementation supports were outlined.
The Piedmont Unified School District’s ELA adoption committee on Monday presented a first‑reading recommendation to adopt Fish Tank Learning as the district’s elementary English language arts curriculum for grades K–5, to take effect in the 2025–26 school year.
Ariel Malovich, who led the adoption presentation, said the committee reviewed eight curricula and piloted two — Benchmark Advance and Fish Tank — with 21 teachers across the district. “Our ELA adoption committee engaged in an ambitious timeline,” Malovich said, describing a process that prioritized teacher voice and a rubric aligned to the district’s literacy vision. Ami Perry, a first‑grade teacher who spoke for the pilot group, summarized teacher feedback and data gathered from classroom pilots.
The committee’s central finding was that Fish Tank better supported the district’s goals for knowledge building and text complexity. Perry said Fish Tank gives students access to full‑length novels and “engages students in evidence‑based writing every day,” and teachers reported higher levels of student engagement across grade levels during pilots. By contrast, teachers who piloted Benchmark raised concerns that its foundational‑skills scope and scope‑and‑sequence were less rigorous than the district’s current phonics program.
Committee members outlined necessary implementation supports: teacher training beginning in August, identification of internal and external trainers, purchase of core and supplemental texts, and time allotted for teacher collaboration and writing supports. Malovich said the recommendation was made “with confidence” but acknowledged the significant shift Fish Tank represents.
Board members asked about differentiation, special‑education integration and measurement. The committee detailed how Fish Tank pairs with the district’s existing phonics-to-reading and spellography programs for foundational skills, and how scaffolds, sentence starters and leveled supplemental texts would support students across tiers of need. The item was presented as a first reading; staff and trustees signaled intent to bring adoption forward for action at a future meeting or place it on the consent calendar after final review.
What happens next: staff will prepare financial and implementation details for the board’s review, identify teacher trainers, and return with final recommendations for adoption and the associated budget.
