Selecting Textbooks: The Textbook Isn't Jesus

Teacher: Oh. We don't need this training. All our curriculum and lessons are laid out for us in the new textbook. I'll send you the link that the textbook rep sent us. It's really wonderful.

Me (after picking myself off the floor from a dead faint): The textbook isn't Jesus. And you'd better meet Him.

1. The state requires that ONLY 50% of the TEKS are represented in the texts to be available for adoption. Click on the image to be taken to the source.

There is a report that will tell you what TEKS are not addressed: click here. TEA reports the required corrections: click here and here. The State Review Panel makes comments here.  Publishers can go back and make revisions and report the changes: click here and here.  And you can see samples here for 2019 ELAR in Texas.

2. Just because the textbook includes all of the TEKS in the lesson materials, does NOT necessarily mean it represents all of the recursive cycling and exposure students need to achieve mastery. Nor does their inclusion mean the lessons address the depth required by the standard or as interpreted by TEA on STAAR assessments.

3. The textbook is not a script that can bypass teacher expertise and decision making.

4. The sequence laid out in the books will not necessarily match the YAG (Year at a Glance) documents prepared by state or local entities. Teachers cannot start at the front of the book and work through it. Teachers cannot use units as they are presented in the materials without considering other elements required by their local curriculum and sequence. Teachers will still have to add lessons and resources to match those needs and requirements.

5. The sequence laid out in the books and units will not necessarily match the progressive march toward STAAR. Teachers and local curriculum must look at their local calendars and scope and sequence documents to make sure that the assessed curriculum is covered before STAAR testing dates.

6. The sequence laid out in the books and units will not necessarily match local data that reflects gaps, student strengths, student weaknesses, local benchmark timelines, remediation schedules, etc. Teachers must look at student performance and needs as they grow throughout the year to make instructional decisions. I'd caution that making the YAG the primary decision maker of when things are taught can be equally disrespectful and unresponsive to student realities. You can't put a timer or calendar on complex learning processes. You have to go with what's happening with the kid not the calendar - and sometimes you can't even go on with the lesson you've planned for that day.

7. NONE of the materials I have reviewed have adequately addressed the thinking charge in the knowledge and skills statement of each strand of our curriculum. Thinking pedagogy addresses several categories.
     A: Self-Assessment Capable Learners: How do kids monitor their learning and know what they know and don't know and what they can do about it? Example: If the teacher is stopping the kids to ask questions as texts are read aloud in class by the tape recorder, who is taking on the cognitive load of diffusing the text? Who is in charge of knowing when to stop? Who is in charge or formulating the question? Who is in charge of evaluating the answer? How does the kid know what to do when they are alone with the text?
     B: Metacognition, self-regulation, and executive behaviors: How do the materials show teachers effective pedagogy to develop these skills with and for kids?
     C: Growth Mindset and Engagement: How do we get kids to engage, participate, and persist in the learning progressions and targets?

8. When you are looking at textbooks, make sure that the work is NEW and written FOR the way Texas (and literacy experts and research) addresses literacy development and contributions.

9.  Finally, and most disconcerting of all: the quality and accuracy of how the standards are addressed in the textbook must be considered. In fact, it's such a concern that Commissioner Morath has mobilized a system to evaluate and report the quality of instructional materials. There are times that I have examined lessons and performance tasks by studying the standards they purport to address. I find egregious errors in content or pedagogy or that standards flat out aren't present in the activity. (It's kind of like believing everything you read on the internet. Just because there's a little standard number listed with the activity does NOT mean that it actually is.) And sometimes, the way the lesson or materials are designed do not match the way the skill is interpreted by TEA or applied on STAAR.

Bottom line: There is absolutely NO textbook that replaces a well informed and prepared teacher. It is critical to commit to a reasoned study of  Literacy and the best practices of our domain. We must study our standards and the domain of research from which they are derived. Ultimately, it it our job to ensure that we teach the standards - and STUDENTS - with fidelity, not blindly following a publisher, or an agency, or an assessment. The teacher in the classroom is the closest thing we are going to get to Jesus.