With the passage of Senate Bill 140 (Lowenthal), the State Superintendent of Public Instruction (SSPI) has invited publishers of mathematics and English language arts instructional materials to submit supplemental instructional materials that bridge the gap between programs currently being used by local educational agencies and the Common Core State Standards with California additions (CCSS) adopted in 2010 by the State Board of Education (SBE). Teachers and content experts recruited by the SSPI and the SBE will review the supplemental materials for alignment to the CCSS. Once the review is complete, the California Department of Education (CDE) will post the results on this Web site. The end result will be a list of supplemental materials that are aligned to the CCSS and may serve as resources that can help school districts in their transition to the new standards.
1. Is this review process a state adoption?
No. Only the SBE has the authority to adopt instructional materials. This process is a review of supplemental materials that may bridge materials currently being used by local educational agencies to the CCSS.
2. Why is this process not a state adoption?
In order to provide school districts with greater budgetary flexibility during difficult financial times, the state legislature and governor suspended the authority of the SBE to adopt new instructional materials until after June 30, 2015. Therefore the SBE cannot conduct adoptions in any subject unless specifically authorized by law.
3. Who will benefit from this review?
This review process is a low-cost way to begin implementing the CCSS. The results of this review will help school districts understand the extent to which their currently adopted instructional materials align to the CCSS and what supplemental materials will be necessary to achieve full coverage.
4. Will school districts have to buy these materials?
No. This review is informational only and is done as a service for districts at a time when there are no statewide adoptions of instructional materials until after June 30, 2015.
5. What funds will districts have available to purchase supplemental materials?
School districts may use their proposition 20 lottery funds, unrestricted general funds, and potentially various federal funds.
6. Do publishers of currently adopted materials have to participate in this review process?
No. This is a voluntary process and no one is compelled to participate.
7. May publishers of instructional materials that have not been adopted by the SBE participate in this review process?
Yes. The CDE will be bringing an evaluation criteria to the SBE at its January 2012 meeting, which will include requirements for non-adopted publishers that wish to submit supplements that can be used with any current program aligned to the California 1997 standards.
8. Will the CDE use any specific review criteria?
Yes. The criteria will be brought to the SBE for approval at its January 2012 meeting.
9. What process will the review follow? Will it be similar to the process used for the adoption of instructional materials?
The CDE and SBE will follow the process outlined in Senate Bill 140. The process will be open, public, and transparent, and will allow for public participation at every step. For example, the CDE will publicly notice all meetings and deliberations held with the supplemental materials reviewers, and these meetings will be open to the public.
10 What is the timing of events?
By fall 2011, publishers will submit standards maps demonstrating how their currently adopted instructional materials align to the CCSS. CDE staff will verify this information and report their findings to publishers by the end of 2011.
The CDE will bring the evaluation criteria to be used in the review to the SBE at its January 2012 meeting. Thereafter, publishers will submit to the CDE new supplemental materials that are aligned to that criteria. By the end of 2012, teachers and content experts will review the supplemental materials and determine if they meet the evaluation criteria.
Once the review is complete, the SBE will take action on the SSPI’s report. The SSPI will post the results of the review on the CDE Web site. A schedule of significant events is available on the Supplemental Instructional Materials Review Web page.
11. How should digital components that do not have page references be cited on standards maps?
Digital materials should include a unique identifier that allows a reviewer to locate the content within the program from the citation provided. This can be a hyperlink, a logical description, or another piece of information that can allow the reviewer to identify which content they need to review for standards alignment.
12. How many reviewers will serve on each review committee, and when will the review committee assignments be announced?
The exact distribution of reviewers to panels will depend on the total number of programs submitted in each content area, but we estimate five to seven reviewers per panel. Each panel will include at least one content expert with an advanced degree in the subject area, if possible. The review committee assignments will be announced at the reviewer trainings in June 2012.
13. Will the review meetings have opportunities for public comment?
Yes. Generally there will be an opportunity for public comment during each day of publicly announced meetings.
14. What are the requirements for publisher submission of supplemental instructional materials?
The specific requirements, including the inclusion of bar codes that was mentioned at the July 25, 2011 publisher briefing, will be detailed in a later publisher bulletin.
15. Which materials will publishers need to submit to the Clearinghouse for Specialized Media and Translations (CSMT) for the preparation of handicap-accessible versions?
Only student materials need to be submitted to the CSMT. More details about the submission of handicap-accessible versions will be provided in a later publisher bulletin.
16. May a publisher cite materials from a different grade level of their adopted program as evidence that a certain grade-level CCSS standard is covered in their program?
No. Publishers can only cite content from the same grade level as evidence that a certain grade-level Common Core standard is covered in their program. For example, if a publisher has a kindergarten through grade six program, they could not cite their grade six textbook as evidence that a grade five Common Core standard was covered. The reason for this is that not every district may have purchased all grade levels of a particular program; a district may have only purchased kindergarten through grade five of that program, and may not have access to the grade six text. Even if they did have the grade six text, it would be unreasonable to expect districts to provide students with copies of multiple grade level textbooks to ensure full coverage of the CCSS. However, the publisher could include that grade six content in their grade five supplement.
17. Will publishers have an opportunity to submit additional materials if the review panel finds that certain standards are not covered in their supplemented program?
No. There will only be one submission of materials. However, there will be a mechanism for publishers to appeal the findings of a review panel prior to the final recommendation by the SSPI. Publishers will have the opportunity to demonstrate to the appeals panel that a given standard may be covered in places that might have been missed by the review committee.
18. Are publishers required to submit their standards maps to school districts along with their supplemental materials?
Publishers are not required to submit standards maps, but they are certainly welcome to do so. Standards maps are a useful tool, not only for formal reviews like this one, but for districts when selecting which materials best meet their local needs.
More detailed information is available on the Supplemental Instructional Materials Review Web page.