Content analysis of state-level review materials for K-2 core literacy curricula.

IF 2.1 3区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SPECIAL
Alisha Demchak, Katlynn Dahl-Leonard, Emily J Solari, Colby Hall, Stephanie Tatel, Katie E Wilburn
{"title":"Content analysis of state-level review materials for K-2 core literacy curricula.","authors":"Alisha Demchak, Katlynn Dahl-Leonard, Emily J Solari, Colby Hall, Stephanie Tatel, Katie E Wilburn","doi":"10.1007/s11881-025-00334-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Within the last two decades, several states have enacted literacy-related legislation with the goal of improving national literacy outcomes for students. In alignment with this legislation, some states have undertaken a core literacy curriculum review process. These processes often involve the development and implementation of an evaluation system (e.g., rubric, checklist), resulting in a list of approved, high-quality, core literacy curricula that school systems are either required or recommended to adopt. However, little is known about the materials states use to review core literacy curricula. This study sought to identify which states engage in the review of K-2 core literacy curricula and to examine the materials they use to identify high-quality curricula. A content analysis of K-2 core literacy curriculum review materials from 24 states revealed large variability across materials. Overall, there was preliminary support of evidence-based content and pedagogy reflected in the materials. At the same time, there was potential for better alignment with some evidence-based practices. Further examination of K-2 core literacy curriculum review materials and the processes in which they are used is crucial to ensure clarity and consistency for educators, policymakers, and publishers. With sustained focus on evidence-based approaches and cross-state collaboration and alignment, there exists the potential to create meaningful and lasting improvements in literacy instruction and outcomes for all students.</p>","PeriodicalId":47273,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Dyslexia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Dyslexia","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-025-00334-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Within the last two decades, several states have enacted literacy-related legislation with the goal of improving national literacy outcomes for students. In alignment with this legislation, some states have undertaken a core literacy curriculum review process. These processes often involve the development and implementation of an evaluation system (e.g., rubric, checklist), resulting in a list of approved, high-quality, core literacy curricula that school systems are either required or recommended to adopt. However, little is known about the materials states use to review core literacy curricula. This study sought to identify which states engage in the review of K-2 core literacy curricula and to examine the materials they use to identify high-quality curricula. A content analysis of K-2 core literacy curriculum review materials from 24 states revealed large variability across materials. Overall, there was preliminary support of evidence-based content and pedagogy reflected in the materials. At the same time, there was potential for better alignment with some evidence-based practices. Further examination of K-2 core literacy curriculum review materials and the processes in which they are used is crucial to ensure clarity and consistency for educators, policymakers, and publishers. With sustained focus on evidence-based approaches and cross-state collaboration and alignment, there exists the potential to create meaningful and lasting improvements in literacy instruction and outcomes for all students.

K-2核心识字课程国家级复习材料内容分析。
在过去的二十年里,几个州颁布了与扫盲有关的立法,目的是提高学生的全国扫盲成绩。为了配合这项立法,一些州已经实施了核心识字课程审查程序。这些过程通常涉及制定和实施一个评价系统(例如,大纲、核对表),从而产生一份核准的、高质量的核心识字课程清单,要求或建议学校系统采用这些课程。然而,人们对各州用来审查核心识字课程的材料知之甚少。本研究试图确定哪些州参与了K-2核心识字课程的审查,并检查他们用来确定高质量课程的材料。对来自24个州的K-2核心识字课程复习材料的内容分析揭示了材料之间的巨大差异。总体而言,材料中反映的基于证据的内容和教学法得到了初步支持。与此同时,有可能更好地与一些循证实践保持一致。进一步检查K-2核心识字课程审查材料及其使用过程对于确保教育工作者、政策制定者和出版商的清晰度和一致性至关重要。持续关注循证方法和跨州合作与协调,就有可能为所有学生创造有意义和持久的识字教学和成果改善。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Annals of Dyslexia
Annals of Dyslexia Multiple-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
8.70%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: Annals of Dyslexia is an interdisciplinary, peer-reviewed journal dedicated to the scientific study of dyslexia, its comorbid conditions; and theory-based practices on remediation, and intervention of dyslexia and related areas of written language disorders including spelling, composing and mathematics. Primary consideration for publication is given to original empirical studies, significant review, and well-documented reports of evidence-based effective practices. Only original papers are considered for publication.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信