Skip to Content
Skip to Content

High-Quality Instructional Materials

Learn more about how Rhode Island is performing on High-Quality Instructional Materials in the Elementary Reading policy area.
Go to a policy lever Licensure Tests High-Quality Instructional Materials Preparation Program Approval Professional Learning Teacher Preparation Standards
Select a state Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

Rhode Island's Performance

Strong
NCTQ evaluates whether states effectively use this policy lever by examining if they require districts to select certain core curriculum materials and publish the curriculum they are using, whether they provide districts with guidance or tools to aid in the selection of high-quality supplemental materials for English Learners and struggling readers, among other criteria. Explore the key actions below to learn more about how Rhode Island is implementing High-Quality Instructional Material policies to improve Elementary Reading.

Why does this matter?

Curricula—often called instructional materials—are the core materials that teachers use to deliver instruction. They are designed to be used by teachers to give students access to grade-level content standards and support a coherent sequence and progression of grade-appropriate knowledge and skills. “High-quality” curricula have been vetted by the state or a designated partner against a set of standards. This process includes evidence that the curriculum aligns with the state’s student standards, helps build content knowledge, and reflects the existing body of research on reading. High-quality curricula boost student outcomes.1 In fact, the difference in impact on student learning between high- and low-quality curricula can be greater than the difference between a new teacher and one with three years of experience.2

Why does Rhode Island stand out?

Rhode Island requires districts to select reading core curricula materials from an identified list. The state also provides guidance and/or evaluation tools to districts to aid in the selection of high-quality supplemental materials for both English Learners and struggling readers. Additionally, districts are required to publish the curricula they use, and the state provides online access to district-level curriculum information. Rhode Island also allocates funds for reading curriculum materials.

Rhode Island (RIDE) created a “Curriculum Visualization Tool” that pulls in information from EdReports to determine a quality rating for each curriculum. The tool allows users to drill down by local education agency (LEA) or school to see what the curriculum is in math and English language arts at each grade and whether it meets the expectations set by EdReports, is locally developed, or has not been rated. This makes it easy to scroll through and see, for example, the one district in the state that is using a curriculum that “does not meet expectations for high quality.”

What are the key actions Rhode Island should take?

  • See what these exemplars are doing in this policy area:

    Key Resources

    State of the States 2024: Elementary Reading

    Explore five policy actions states can take to strengthen implementation of the science of reading.

    State Reading Policy Action Guide

    Discover how states can implement and sustain strong reading instruction.

    Teacher Prep Review: Reading Foundations

    Learn more about how over 700 elementary teacher preparation programs are preparing educators to teach reading.

    More than just words: 7 Approaches to monitoring the implementation of reading laws

    Dive into how states are turning policy into practice.

    References
    1. Jackson, K., Makarin, A. (2018). Can online off-the-shelf lessons improve student outcomes? Evidence from a field experiment. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 10(3), 226-254. Retrieved from https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/pol.20170211
    2. Kane, T. (2016). Never judge a book by its cover—use student achievement instead. Brookings. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/never-judge-a-book-by-its-cover-use-student-achievment-instead/
    3. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Educational Statistics (2022). Table 203.72: Public elementary and secondary school enrollment, by locale and state: Fall 2021. Digest of Educational Statistics. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d22/tables/dt22_203.72.asp
    4. TNTP. (2018). The opportunity myth: What students can show us about how school is letting them down—and how to fix it. https://tntp.org/assets/documents/TNTP_The-Opportunity-Myth_Web.pdf