Biliteracy para todos: Cross Linguistic Connections Developing

Evaluation for 1.1a
Materials include an explanation of the stated purpose of the supplemental program (e.g., additional instruction and/or practice, targeted remediation or acceleration).

In the Developing Biliteracy Teacher Resource Book, “What is Biliteracy para todos?” includes an explanation of the stated purpose for the supplemental program. For example, the materials support students across three developmental stages of biliteracy: Early Biliteracy, Developing Biliteracy, and Advanced Biliteracy. The stated purpose of the material is to embrace students’ language practices and culture, connect the two languages of instruction, and empower educators and students through biliteracy practices.

The materials include a program described as a standalone, stating that it functions to provide additional instruction and practice that build directly on prior learning. Specifically, the Cross Linguistic Connections (CLC) lessons support access to biliteracy by connecting language and literacy skills previously developed in Spanish or English during the initial language arts block.

Evaluation for 1.1b
Materials include guidance on how to appropriately use the supplemental program to support an existing core reading and language arts program.

The materials include flexible options for targeted instruction through the “Pacing Guide for Cross Linguistic Connections.” For example, the pacing guide indicates that educators can select which aspects of language to emphasize throughout the year based on student needs. An educator may choose to focus exclusively on phonology for several weeks or incorporate a combination of language components such as morphology, syntax, and grammar, depending on the areas in which students need additional instruction.

The materials include specific guidance in the “Lesson Overview,” which outlines a three-step interdependent process for educators to follow. During the initial instruction phase, the educator provides language and literacy instruction in either Spanish or English during the regular language arts block. In the CLC instructional space, students work in bilingual pairs while the educator facilitates discussions that help students connect the literacy skills learned in one language to the other language by exploring similarities and differences. Students then apply the language and literacy skills from the CLC lesson across content areas, demonstrating metalinguistic awareness in both languages.

Evaluation for 1.1c
Materials include a scope and sequence outlining student expectations, skills taught, and a rationale for the design of the scope and sequence.

The materials provide a “Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills Alignment” chart located at the end of the guide, which serves as the program’s scope and sequence. This comprehensive chart clearly identifies the student expectations addressed across all 10 text sets included in the program. For example, CLC Set 1 includes the titles for the weekly student readers and the TEKS explanation for the skills taught in English and in Spanish.

In the “Pacing Guide for Cross Linguistic Connections,” the materials include the lessons taught divided into sets. Each set is divided into four weeks, and each week lists a different skill covered. For example, if the educator is focusing on three aspects of language using the same set, the instructional sequence emphasizes phonology during weeks 1 and 2, transitions to grammar in week 3, and concludes with syntax in week 4.

Evaluation for 1.1d
Materials include guidance on time requirements (e.g., duration, frequency) and suggested pacing for effective implementation.

The “Pacing Guide for Cross Linguistic Connections,” includes guidance on time requirements and provides detailed guidance for implementing the 40 CLC lessons. For example, educators may teach a complete lesson in one 30-minute session that includes an introduction, minilesson, student investigation, and review.

The materials include guidance on an alternative option for lesson pacing. For example, the educator may provide 15 minutes of instruction each day over two lessons. Day 1 can include the introduction and the minilesson, while day 2 can include the student investigation and the review.

Evaluation for 1.1e
Materials include resources and guidance to support educators with implementing the materials as designed.

The materials include scripted, step-by-step lesson plans for 10 sets of instruction in both Spanish and English that address phonology, morphology, grammar, and syntax. For example, in Developing Biliteracy Set 3, each lesson is organized into four structured phases: the introduction, the minilesson, the student investigation, and the review. The materials provide guidance through educator scripts that detail what to say, such as, “We are going to learn about one way to form plurals in English and Spanish. Singular means one of something, and plural means more than one of something.” The materials also provide questions to ask, such as, “What animal is it talking about? How many are there?” as well as anticipated student “Partner Talk” responses.

The Developing Biliteracy materials include the structure of the lesson with educator guidance. The “Assessment” section includes directions for the use of rubric assessments, which are intended to be used at the end of a series of minilessons. The educator can use the rubric to record biliteracy behaviors such as the level of language, the focus of the mini lesson, and whether the student is not aware, partially aware, or fully aware of similarities or differences in metalinguistics.

Evaluation for 1.1f
Materials contain supports for families in both Spanish and English with suggestions on supporting the progress of their student.

The materials do not include support for families in either English or Spanish. There are no materials to be sent home and no guidance for families on how to support students in making cross-linguistic connections. The materials do not provide guidance on how to communicate student progress in their linguistic repertoire. The Teacher Resource Book includes only materials intended for classroom implementation, with instructional supports focused on educator and student use.

Evaluation for 2.1a
Materials include appropriate instructional assessments for the stated purpose of the supplemental program (e.g., diagnostic placement assessments for targeted remediation or acceleration).

In the Teacher Resource Book, under “Repaso,” the materials include appropriate formative and summative assessment opportunities for the stated purpose of the supplemental program. For example, the educator tells the students that they are going to think and write what they have learned from the lesson. The students then are given a sentence frame: “En español y en inglés, los sustantivos plurales se forman al agregar ____ o ___ al ___ de la palabra. Sin embargo, hay ciertos sustantivos que son irregulares y no siguen estas reglas.” The sentence frame serves as a formative assessment when used during instruction to monitor students’ understanding of complete sentences and punctuation in both languages. It may also function as a summative assessment when used at the end of the lesson to evaluate students’ mastery of the skill.

The Developing Biliteracy materials include formative assessment opportunities that are consistently embedded throughout the CLC lessons to support the development of students’ metalinguistic awareness. The materials integrate assessment into instructional routines during student investigations. Educators observe students as they work in bilingual pairs to apply cross-linguistic skills by sorting words, writing examples, and editing sentences, which allows educators to monitor students’ understanding during instruction. Additionally, each lesson concludes with a review (repaso) activity in which students independently reflect and write in their journals using provided sentence stems to summarize their learning. For example, in Set 1 “Phonology,” students distinguish between long and short vowel sounds in English and Spanish by sorting words into categories labeled “English short vowel,” “English long vowel,” and “Spanish vowel sound.” At the end of the lesson, students complete a journal reflection using sentence stems comparing vowel sounds between both languages and providing examples to demonstrate understanding. These embedded activities provide educators with ongoing opportunities to assess students’ language development and understanding of cross-linguistic concepts throughout instruction.

Evaluation for 2.1b
Materials include the definition and intended purpose for the instructional assessments included.

In the Developing Biliteracy Teacher Resource Book, the materials include the definition and intended purpose for the instructional assessments included. For example, under “Repaso,” the material states the purpose is to model the writing by explaining the sounds in the vowels that have been learned during the minilesson.

In the “Assessment” section, the materials include the definition and intended purpose of the “Record of Biliteracy Behaviors” rubric used within the program. The materials explain that the purpose of the rubric is to “facilitate teachers’ data collection about students’ metalinguistic awareness processes.” The materials also include guidance on how educators should collect assessment data by observing students’ reading behaviors and language use in both oral and written forms and analyzing student performance holistically across both languages. The materials also provide guidance for when the rubric should be used, stating that it is intended for administration at the end of a series of minilessons targeting the same standard at varying levels of rigor and complexity. The materials provide a clear explanation of the purpose and use of the specific assessment rubric included in the program.

Evaluation for 2.1c
For instructional assessments administered by educators, materials include guidance to ensure consistent and accurate administration of instructional assessments.

The materials explain that the “Record of Biliteracy Behaviors” rubric is intended for use at the end of a series of minilessons targeting the same standard at varying levels of rigor and complexity. The materials also identify when educators should gather assessment data during the lesson cycle, specifically during the minilesson and student investigation phases of instruction. The materials provide consistent procedures for grouping students and administering observational assessments. Educators are directed to organize students into bilingual pairs for cross-linguistic discussions while they monitor students’ academic conversations and language use. The materials also include resources to support consistent administration, such as sentence stems for student discussions, anchor charts to reinforce learning, and the reproducible “Record of Biliteracy Behaviors” rubric for documenting observations.

In the Teacher Resource Book, under “Assessment,” the materials include guidance for instructional assessments. For example, materials guide educators to record the name of the student, the aspect of language, the focus of the lesson, the extent of metalinguistic awareness, and a description of the student’s behaviors during the cross-linguistic discussion. This rubric is intended to be used at the end of a series of minilessons.

Evaluation for 2.1d
Instructional assessments include items at varying levels of complexity.

In the Developing Biliteracy Teacher Resource Book, under “Assessment,” the materials include a rubric that is intended to be used at the end of a series of minilessons targeting the same standard at different levels of rigor and complexity. For example, in September, students may target phonology through a minilesson on hard c, but in October, students may target phonology for a minilesson of the letter i. The materials explain that the “Record of Biliteracy Behaviors” rubric is designed to evaluate students’ understanding after a series of minilessons taught at different levels of rigor and complexity. Additionally, the lessons gradually increase in cognitive demand as students move from guided observation activities to independent application and written synthesis.

The materials state that the “Record of Biliteracy Behaviors” rubric should be used after teaching a set of lessons on the same concept. In the program, the lessons become more difficult, and the vocabulary used becomes more complex. Therefore, as educators continue to use the rubric to assess students, the complexity of the tasks will vary. For example, many of the lessons at the beginning of the book address grade 1 and grade 2 TEKS, whereas those at the middle and end of the book address more grade 3 TEKS.

Evaluation for 2.2a
Instructional assessments and scoring information provide guidance for interpreting student performance.

The Developing Biliteracy materials include scoring guidance to support consistent and reliable evaluation of instructional assessments. The primary assessment tool, the “Record of Biliteracy Behaviors” rubric, provides explicit criteria for evaluating students’ metalinguistic awareness by categorizing student understanding as “Not aware,” “Partially aware,” or “Fully aware” of cross-linguistic similarities and differences. Exemplar “Partner Talk” responses support educators in evaluating students’ oral language and metalinguistic understanding during instruction. For example, in a Set 2 “Morphology” lesson focused on comparative adjectives, the materials include a model student response explaining how comparative adjectives are formed differently in English and Spanish using examples such as warmer and más caluroso. These scripted exemplar responses function as scoring guides, showing educators what a complete and accurate contrastive analysis should include.

In the Teacher Resource Book, under “Assessment,” the materials include a rubric for each aspect of language that educators can use to track students’ understanding during CLC activities. The purpose of this tool is to facilitate educators’ data collection about students’ metalinguistic awareness process. Data can be collected through observing students’ reading behaviors and language use and should be analyzed holistically across the two languages. The rubric is intended to be used at the end of a series of minilessons targeting the same standard at different levels of rigor and complexity.

Evaluation for 2.2b
Materials provide guidance for the use of the supplemental program to respond to student trends in performance on assessments.

In the Teacher Resource Book, under “Pacing Guide for Cross Linguistic Connections,” the materials include ways for educators to teach lessons depending on student needs in the aspect of language. The materials explain that after data is gathered from the rubric, educators can employ a set that meets individual student needs. The materials include an example in which, if a student is in need of three aspects of language, the educator can use a single set containing materials on phonology, grammar, and syntax.

The materials include the “Record of Biliteracy Behaviors” rubric to collect data on students’ metalinguistic awareness and evaluate whether students are “Not aware,” “Partially aware,” or “Fully aware” of targeted cross-linguistic connections. For example, the materials include a “Pacing Guide for Cross Linguistic Connections” that provides flexibility for responding to student performance trends and instructional needs. The materials include guidance for educators to select which language aspects to teach throughout the school year based on assessment data and observed student needs. The materials include an example in which, if students demonstrate difficulty with phonology concepts, educators may adjust instruction by focusing on phonology lessons across multiple sets over an extended instructional period to provide additional targeted support and practice.

Evaluation for 2.2c
Materials include tools for educators to track student progress and growth, and tools for students to track their own progress and growth.

In the Developing Biliteracy Teacher Resource Book, under “Assessment,” the materials include a rubric for each aspect of language that educators can use to track students’ understanding during the CLC program. For example, the educator can track the level of language phonology, morphology, grammar, and syntax by date with the focus of the lesson. The educator can also track if the student is “Not aware” or “Partially aware” of similarities or differences between languages.

The assessment rubric called “Record of Biliteracy Behaviors” allows educators to track the progress of students over time on critical skills developed in the program. Educators can use this rubric to monitor the progress of each student in their language skills. However, there are no materials or tools available for students to track their own progress. The students are able to write their summary of what they learned in each lesson in their student notebook. However, there is no guidance telling educators to check or provide feedback on this student notebook. Therefore, students are not able to use this notebook to determine how they are making progress in their skills.

Evaluation for 2.2d
If applicable for the stated purpose of the supplemental program, materials include guidance for entry and exit criteria.

This guidance is not applicable to the program because the program has a stated purpose of additional instruction and/or practice, not targeted remediation or acceleration.

Evaluation for 3.1a
If applicable for the stated purpose, materials include educator guidance for differentiated instruction and activities for students who have not yet reached proficiency in grade-level skills.

The materials in the Developing Biliteracy Teacher Resource Book include educator guidance for differentiating the delivery of instruction for students who have not yet demonstrated grade-level proficiency. The materials include an anchor chart that educators can use to support students in using coordinating conjunctions in English and Spanish. Also, the “Repaso” section at the end of the lesson asks students to write about what they have learned and provides sentence stems to support students in this activity.

The materials include instructional scaffolds within Set 1 “Syntax” using the paired texts “Las olimpíadas de serpientes”/”The Snake Olympics.” For example, during the minilesson phase, students work in bilingual pairs while examining English and Spanish texts to identify how dialogue is punctuated in each language. The materials include sentence stems for “Partner Talk” activities. For example, students use prompts such as, “I notice that in English, dialogue is shown by using quotation marks, but in Spanish, dialogue is shown by using a (raya o guión largo).” The materials include a “Syntax Anchor Chart” for dialogue sentences that visually summarizes the punctuation rules and examples for English and Spanish side by side. During the Review phase, the educator revisits the anchor chart with students before students complete independent journal reflections using a provided sentence frame such as, “In English, we use ____ to show that characters are speaking, but in Spanish, we use ____ to show dialogue.”

Evaluation for 3.1b
If applicable for the stated purpose, materials include educator guidance for differentiated instruction and activities for students who have demonstrated proficiency in grade-level skills.

The Developing Biliteracy material does not include explicit educator guidance for differentiated instruction or enrichment activities designed specifically for students who have already demonstrated proficiency in grade-level skills. The materials include an explanation stating that the CLC program is designed for whole-class instruction to support students’ metalinguistic awareness and biliteracy development through shared instructional experiences. The material includes the “Record of Biliteracy Behaviors” rubric to evaluate whether students demonstrate mastery of targeted cross-linguistic concepts. The materials do not provide guidance for how educators should extend instruction, increase rigor, or modify instructional tasks for students who have already achieved proficiency. The materials include lessons that follow an instructional structure in which all students participate in the same student investigation activities, partner discussions, and review tasks. The same sentence stems, reflection prompts, and instructional activities support all students across lessons and sets.

The materials do not include separate acceleration tasks, advanced application activities, or alternative assignments specifically designed for students who have already demonstrated proficiency with the targeted skill.

Evaluation for 3.1c
Materials include educator guidance for providing specially designed instruction (SDI) for students receiving supports and services through special education.

The material does not include educator guidance for providing specially designed instruction for students receiving special education services. The materials explain that the CLC program is designed for whole-class instruction and may be used with newcomers and bilingual learners in different program settings. The materials do not include guidance for adapting lesson content, instructional methods, or delivery to address individualized special education needs. The materials do not reference accommodations, modifications, or instructional supports specifically intended for students with disabilities.

The materials include instructional activities, bilingual pair discussions, and sentence stems for all students. However, the materials do not include guidance for modifying these activities or supports for students receiving special education services.

Evaluation for 3.2a
Educator-led supplemental programs include explicit (direct) prompts and guidance to support the educator in modeling and explaining the skill(s) to be learned.

The Developing Biliteracy Teacher Resource Book includes explicit prompts for educators to use when modeling and explaining the concepts taught in the program. For example, all statements intended for educator delivery are presented in italics. These scripted prompts support educators in clearly explaining the differences between English and Spanish letter sounds in the lesson. The materials also provide discussion questions that educators can use to facilitate student conversations.

The materials include explicit prompts and guidance to support educators in modeling and explaining the skills being taught. Scripted lessons guide educators through the explanation of cross-linguistic concepts. During the minilesson, the materials include “Say”/“Diga” and “Ask”/“Pregunte” prompts that provide educators with specific language for modeling concepts and guiding student understanding. For example, in the Set 1 “Morphology” lesson using “Amazing Snakes”/“Serpientes asombrosas,” students learn about compound words. The materials direct the educator to have students work in bilingual pairs and examine the words rattlesnake and blindfold. The educator is then prompted to model the concept by stating, “These words are made up of two words joined together (rattle + snake and blind + fold).” The lesson continues with a Spanish-language example, in which the educator explains, “The words lavaplatos and rompecabezas are made up of two words joined together (lava + platos and rompe + cabezas).” The materials include a follow-up question for the educator to ask: “How are compound words formed in English and Spanish?”

Evaluation for 3.2b
Educator-led supplemental programs include educator guidance and recommendations for effective delivery and facilitation using a variety of instructional approaches.

The Developing Biliteracy materials include educator guidance and recommendations for effective lesson delivery through instructional approaches such as collaboration, visualization, and student discourse. In the Set 6 “Morphology” lesson focused on cognates, structured opportunities support students in working collaboratively while analyzing similarities between English and Spanish vocabulary. The lesson directs educators to organize students “in bilingual pairs” and provides facilitation guidance that incorporates visualization by having students create a T-chart on their dry-erase boards to record cognates identified in the texts. The materials also include scripted educator language and discussion supports to facilitate student discourse. For example, the educator is directed as follows: “Say: In partners, find other examples of cognates throughout the English and Spanish books.” To support student conversations, the lesson provides a “Partner Talk” example: “(Astronaut) and (astronauta) are cognates because they share the (same) meaning, sound similar, and have (similar) spelling.”

In the Set 1 “Syntax” lesson focused on dialogue sentences, the materials provide structured opportunities for students to apply their understanding of dialogue punctuation in English and Spanish. The lesson includes a performance task in which the educator prepares sentences on a chart without dialogue punctuation and asks students to apply the targeted skill by adding the appropriate punctuation marks. To facilitate the activity, the materials include scripted educator language: “Say: Look at these sentences and add the dialogue marks.” Additionally, the lesson incorporates student discourse through “Partner Talk” activities supported by sentence stems. For example, students are guided to discuss their observations using the response, “Partner Talk: To show dialogue in English we added (quotation marks), while in Spanish, we added a (raya o guión largo).” The “Syntax Anchor Chart” also serves as a support for students, visually comparing English and Spanish dialogue conventions side by side.

Evaluation for 3.2c
Materials include guidance for educators on recommended structures (e.g., whole group, small group, individual) to support effective implementation.

The Developing Biliteracy materials include guidance on recommended instructional structures to support effective lesson implementation. The program overview explains that the CLC program is “designed for whole-class work,” while also noting that the lessons may be used with newcomers and students in different bilingual program settings. Additionally, the materials outline a lesson structure that identifies how students should be grouped throughout each phase of instruction. During the introduction and review phases, instruction is conducted in a whole-class setting, with the educator guiding discussion and facilitating the co-construction of anchor charts to summarize learning. During the minilesson and student investigation phases, the materials direct educators to organize students into bilingual pairs to engage in collaborative language analysis and academic discussions. The lesson structure also includes opportunities for independent work during the review phase, where students are encouraged to reflect on their learning and write “by themselves in their journals.”

In Set 1, “Phonology” provides guidance on the implementation of whole-class, partner, and individual instructional structures during different phases of instruction to support effective lesson delivery. For example, in the lesson using “Amazing Snakes”/“Serpientes asombrosas,” the materials direct educators to use a bilingual pair structure during the minilesson: “In bilingual pairs, have the students look at and say the following words from the Spanish and English books and write them on a chart.” During the student investigation, students work together to analyze language patterns and complete the task: “With your partner, sort words from the sentences into three groups.” The materials also include guidance for transitioning students to independent work. In the Set 2 “Morphology” lesson using the texts “Living Near a Volcano”/“Vivir cerca de un volcán,” students begin by working with bilingual partners but later move to an individual structure during the review. The lesson directs the educator, “Have students reflect in their journals using the sentence stems.”

Evaluation for 3.3a
Materials include educator guidance on providing linguistic accommodations for various levels of language proficiency [as defined by the English Language Proficiency Standards (ELPS)], which are designed to engage students in using increasingly more academic language.

The Developing Biliteracy materials do not include explicit educator guidance for providing linguistic accommodations differentiated by language proficiency levels such as Beginning, Intermediate, Advanced, or Advanced High. While the program references the ELPS and emphasizes the development of academic conversations and biliteracy skills, the instructional supports are provided as universal scaffolds for all emergent bilingual students rather than as differentiated accommodations aligned to specific proficiency levels. The materials incorporate supports such as bilingual partner discussions, anchor charts, and sentence stems to help students engage in academic language. However, the lessons do not include Proficiency Level Descriptors (PLDs), differentiated language expectations, or tiered supports for listening, speaking, reading, or writing based on students’ language proficiency levels. Instead, all students participate in the same instructional activities and use the same language supports. The material does not include guidance to differentiate the linguistic support based on whether a student is a beginner or advanced English speaker.

The materials do not include educator-facing guidance that provides linguistic accommodations differentiated for two or more levels of language proficiency, such as beginning, intermediate, or advanced learners. While the program references the ELPS and emphasizes the development of academic language, the materials do not use PLDs to differentiate instructional supports or language expectations. Instead, the CLC program is designed for whole-class instruction and provides the same language supports to all students. Instructional scaffolds such as bilingual partner discussions, “Partner Talk” routines, anchor charts, and sentence stems are implemented as universal supports for all emergent bilingual learners rather than differentiated accommodations based on proficiency level. For example, in the Set 2 “Syntax” lesson on “Volcano Alert!”/”¡Alerta volcánica!,” the lesson introduction states that there are “no corresponding English TEKS; however, this lesson supports ELPS necessary to develop complex language and biliteracy development.” Despite this reference to the ELPS, the lesson does not include differentiated supports for varying proficiency levels. All students are expected to analyze the same imperative sentences and complete the same journal writing activity using the sentence stem, “In English and Spanish, imperative sentences.” The materials do not provide alternate sentence frames, modified language expectations, or tiered supports aligned to different levels of English language proficiency.

Evaluation for 3.3b
Materials include implementation guidance to support educators in effectively using the materials in state-approved bilingual and English as a Second Language (ESL) programs.

The Developing Biliteracy materials do not include explicit educator-facing guidance for integrating instruction into specific state-approved bilingual or ESL program models such as dual language immersion, transitional bilingual, or ESL programs. While the introductory materials explain that the CLC program was developed through work with bilingual educators in various instructional contexts and may be used with newcomers and other bilingual learners in different program settings, the guidance remains general in nature.

The materials do not provide differentiated implementation recommendations, pacing adjustments, or instructional modifications aligned to specific bilingual program models. Instead, the program provides a single implementation approach intended for all instructional contexts. Students receive language and literacy instruction in either English or Spanish during the language arts block and then participate in CLC lessons to compare and contrast features of both languages. Additionally, the unit lessons follow a consistent instructional format designed for whole-class implementation. Students participate in the same instructional routines, bilingual partner discussions, and cross-linguistic activities regardless of the program model being used.

Evaluation for 3.3c
If designed for dual language immersion (DLI) programs, materials include resources that outline opportunities to address metalinguistic transfer from English to the partner language.

The Developing Biliteracy materials include activities and resources that support metalinguistic transfer between English and Spanish through the program’s CLC approach. The materials explain that CLC is designed to help bilingual learners connect, access, and apply concepts and skills from English to Spanish and from Spanish to English. Opportunities for cross-linguistic transfer are embedded throughout the lessons as students compare language structures and vocabulary across both languages. For example, in the Set 6 “Morphology” lesson focused on cognates, students examine academic vocabulary in English and Spanish texts side by side, including words such as space/espacial, special/especial, and station/estación. During the student investigation, students use a T-chart to identify and record cognates and discuss how words such as astronaut and astronauta share the same meaning, similar pronunciation, and similar spelling.

In the Set 1 “Syntax” lesson focused on dialogue sentences, students compare how dialogue is represented in English and Spanish by analyzing parallel sentences from both texts, such as “‘They’ll never find me,’ said the python” and “—Nunca me encontrarán —dijo la serpiente pitón” Students discuss how English uses quotation marks to indicate dialogue, while Spanish uses the raya or guión largo (dash). The materials include sentences in both languages without punctuation, and students apply their cross-linguistic understanding by editing the sentences and adding the appropriate language-specific dialogue marks.

Evaluation for 5.1a
Materials include explicit (direct) instruction on specific vocabulary using multiple strategies for teaching word meaning (e.g., student-friendly definitions, synonyms and antonyms, examples and non-examples, categorization and classification, images).

The materials include explicit instruction on academic vocabulary within the morphology lessons.
For example, in Set 1 “Morphology: Compound Words (Palabras compuestas),” students learn academic vocabulary such as compound words through multiple instructional strategies. The materials include a student-friendly definition in which the educator explains that compound words are single words formed by joining two words together to create a new meaning. The materials also include morphological breakdown and examples, where the educator models how to separate words into meaningful parts, explaining that rattlesnake is formed from rattle + snake and blindfold from blind + fold. Additionally, the materials include oral and written applications, in which students complete a sentence frame such as “The words (sunflower/girasol) are compound words because they are two words joined together to make a new word.”

The materials include explicit instruction for teaching word meaning of specific vocabulary words using multiple strategies. For example, in Set 3, the “Introduction” section includes explicit instruction on the meaning of sufijo derivativo with a student-friendly definition provided for the educator to use. In the same lesson, the minilesson includes opportunities for students to examine pages from their student books to identify examples of words containing the suffixes -mente and -ly, supporting categorization of vocabulary structures. Additionally, students engage in partner discussions to explain how suffixes change word meaning, reinforcing oral language development. Finally, in the “Repaso” section, students apply their understanding by writing about the meaning of suffixes in English and Spanish using sentence stems, supporting written expression of vocabulary knowledge.

Evaluation for 5.1b
Specific vocabulary selected for explicit (direct) instruction includes high-utility tier 2 and tier 3 academic vocabulary.

The materials include direct instruction on high-utility tier 2 words across multiple subjects and content areas. For example, in Set 4 “Morphology,” the “Introduction” section includes educator guidance for explicitly defining what a root word is and explaining how it helps determine the meaning of a word. In the same lesson, the “Mini-Lesson” section includes examples such as powerful, worker, and hunting, and students are prompted to discuss how root words help clarify word meaning. Students also apply this understanding in both English and Spanish through structured practice opportunities. Additionally, in the “Review” section, students write about how root words help clarify the meaning of a word, reinforcing their understanding through written expression.

The Developing Biliteracy materials include explicit instruction on high-utility tier 3 academic vocabulary. For example, in Set 6 “Morphology: Cognates (Cognados),” students learn the specialized term cognates through direct instruction. The educator states, “We are going to learn about cognates in English and Spanish. Cognates are words that have the same origin and meaning,” and further explains, “Cognates are words in two languages that share a similar meaning, spelling, and pronunciation because they come from the same origin.” Similarly, in Set 9 “Phonology: Diphthongs (Diptongos),” students receive explicit instruction on the term diphthong. The educator explains, “In Spanish, each vowel in the vowel team has its own sound. For example, in a diphthong, the strong and weak vowel sounds are heard,” and reinforces the concept through an anchor chart that states, “A combination of a strong vowel (a-e-o) and a weak vowel (i-u) or two weak vowels is called a diphthong.”

Evaluation for 5.1c
Materials include repeated opportunities for students to practice using specific vocabulary in multiple contexts.

The materials include repeated opportunities for students to practice using specific vocabulary. The lesson structure introduces vocabulary during the minilesson, reinforces it through structured “Partner Talk” during the student investigation, and concludes with written application during the review phase. For example, in Set 6 “Morphology: Cognates (Cognados),” students repeatedly use the term cognates during “Partner Talk” by completing sentence stems such as, “(Astronaut) and (astronauta) are cognates because they share the same meaning, sound similar, and have similar spelling.” In the Review phase, students further apply the vocabulary in writing by completing sentence frames such as, “____ and ____ are cognates. These words are similar in ____ and ____.” Similarly, in Set 1 “Morphology: Compound Words (Palabras compuestas),” students repeatedly use the term compound words during discussion by explaining that words such as sunflower/girasol are compound words because they contain two words joined together to make a new word. Students then reinforce this understanding during the review by writing about how compound words function in English and Spanish.

The materials provide opportunities for students to use vocabulary words multiple times within and across different lessons. For example, in Set 3 “Morphology,” students are taught the definitions of singular and plural. In the minilesson, students identify singular and plural nouns in a text they have read and discuss with a partner how to form singular and plural nouns while using the terms singular and plural. The materials also include opportunities for students to apply this vocabulary in writing in the “Modeled Writing” section. Additionally, students revisit and apply the same vocabulary in Set 4 “Morphology,” where they again use the terms singular and plural to discuss and write about how to form singular and plural nouns.

Evaluation for 5.2a
Materials include explicit (direct) instruction on using morphemic analysis to determine word meaning in alignment with grade-level TEKS as appropriate for the program's stated purpose.

The Developing Biliteracy materials include explicit instruction on using morphemic analysis to determine word meaning in alignment with grade-level TEKS. Throughout the “Morphology” lessons, instruction follows a gradual progression in which the educator models how to analyze word parts, students practice the skill collaboratively during the student investigations and then apply the strategy independently during the review activities. For example, in Set 1 “Morphology: Compound Words,” the educator explicitly models morphemic analysis by explaining, “These words are made up of two words joined together (rattle + snake and blind + fold).” Students then work in bilingual pairs to analyze and create compound words such as (gira) + (sol) and (sun) + (flower) before independently completing the journal prompt, “In English and in Spanish, compound words are ____.” Similarly, in Set 3 “Morphology: Suffixes (-ly/-mente),” the educator models how suffixes affect word meaning by explaining that adding -ly or -mente means “in this manner,” using the example “quickly/rápidamente means in a rapid manner.” Students practice adding suffixes to base words such as different/diferente to determine how the meaning changes and then independently summarize their understanding by completing the journal prompt, “In English and Spanish, the suffixes ____ and ____ mean ____.” These lessons provide a clear progression from educator modeling to guided and independent application of morphemic analysis.

The materials include explicit instruction on using morphemic analysis to determine word meaning in alignment with grade-level TEKS. Throughout the “Morphology” lessons, instruction follows a gradual progression in which the educator models how affixes change word meaning, students practice the skill collaboratively during the student investigations and then apply the strategy independently during the review activities. For example, in Set 8 “Morphology: Common Suffixes,” the educator explicitly models the meanings of common suffixes by explaining, “Some suffixes include -ion (act of), -ly (a certain way), -ous (full of).” Students then practice morphemic analysis by identifying words such as gently, directions, and building, writing them on their boards and isolating the suffixes. During the review, students independently complete the sentence frame, “Suffixes are ____ at the ____ of the word. Some suffixes include ____.” Similarly, in Set 10 “Morphology: Derivational Suffixes,” the educator models how derivational suffixes create new words by explaining, “The new word is derived from the base word, for example adding -able to the word value creates a new word: valuable.” Students then work in bilingual pairs to analyze words such as longer, utilizable, and protección, explaining that “the derivational suffix (-er) changes the base word (long) to (longer).” The lesson concludes with independent practice as students complete the journal prompt, “For example, the English word ____ adds the derivational suffix ____ and changes to ____.”

Evaluation for 5.2b
Materials include opportunities for students to practice using morphemic analysis to determine word meaning in alignment with grade-level TEKS as appropriate for the program's stated purpose.

The materials provide multiple opportunities for students to use morphemic analysis, or word parts, to understand the meaning of words. For example, in Set 2 “Morphology,” the students learn that in English and Spanish, most singular nouns are made plural by adding -s or -es to the end. In the minilesson, the educator provides multiple examples from the books read in class to show students to add an -s or -es at the ends of words to make them plural. In the minilesson, students are then guided in practicing this same skill by identifying singular and plural nouns in sentences from the books and discussing how to add an -s or -es at the ends of words to make them plural. In the student investigation, students are given sentences from the books they have read in English and Spanish and are asked to identify the words with past tense suffixes. They discuss how these suffixes change the meaning of the word to past tense with a partner. In the “Review” section, students write about the meaning of past tense inflectional suffixes in English and Spanish.

The materials provide multiple opportunities for students to use morphemic analysis, or word parts, to understand the meaning of words. For example, in Set 5 “Morphology,” students learn that using the ending of a verb can tell them if a verb is in the past or present. The educator shows students that -ed verbs in English and -ó/ía verbs in Spanish are in the past tense. Students then practice this same skill by discussing the ending of verbs that they find in the texts. In the student investigation, students identify the past tense verbs in sentences and discuss them with a partner. In addition, in the “Review” section, students write about how adding suffixes at the end of words can change them into past tense.

Evaluation for 5.2c
Materials include explicit (direct) instruction on using contextual analysis to determine word meaning in alignment with grade-level TEKS as appropriate for the program's stated purpose.

The materials do not provide explicit instruction on how to use contextual analysis to determine word meaning. There are no opportunities provided for the educator to explain or model how to use the surrounding context within or beyond a sentence to determine the meaning of an unknown word. In Set 2 “Grammar,” students learn about conjunctions, but students are never explicitly taught how conjunctions (or other parts of a sentence) can help them understand the meaning of a different unknown word within the text. While the morphology of individual words and sentence structure are often taught, there is no direct instruction on how to use nearby clues such as words and phrases or sentence structure to help determine meaning of unknown words.

The Developing Biliteracy materials do not include explicit instruction on using contextual analysis to determine word meaning. While the CLC program includes direct instruction on determining the meanings of unfamiliar words, that instruction focuses on morphemic analysis through the study of roots, prefixes, suffixes, compound words, and cognates rather than teaching students to use context clues within the surrounding text. Instead, the “Morphology” lessons emphasize analyzing word parts to infer meaning, and the program’s CLC approach centers on comparing phonology, morphology, grammar, and syntax across English and Spanish. The materials do not include educator modeling, think-alouds, or guided practice that explicitly teaches students to use nearby words, sentence structure, examples, contrasts, or other contextual clues to determine the meanings of unfamiliar vocabulary.

Evaluation for 5.2d
Materials include opportunities for students to practice using contextual analysis to determine word meaning in alignment with grade-level TEKS as appropriate for the program's stated purpose.

The materials do not provide opportunities for students to use contextual analysis to determine word meaning. Students do not receive opportunities to use the surrounding context within or beyond a sentence to determine the meaning of an unknown word. In Set 2 “Grammar,” students learn about conjunctions, but the materials do not ask students to use conjunctions (or other parts of a sentence) to help understand the meaning of a different unknown word within the text. While the morphology of individual words and sentence structure are often taught and practiced, there is no direct instruction or opportunities for students to practice how to use nearby clues such as words and phrases or sentence structure to help determine meaning of unknown words.

The materials do not include opportunities for students to practice using contextual analysis to determine word meaning. Vocabulary development is centered on morphemic analysis within the CLC framework, where students determine word meanings by analyzing roots, prefixes, suffixes, compound words, and cognates across the domains of phonology, morphology, grammar, and syntax rather than by using surrounding text as context. The materials do not include student activities or educator guidance that requires students to determine word meanings from context, identify context clues, select meanings based on surrounding sentences, or complete vocabulary tasks using contextual evidence. Instead, students consistently practice analyzing word structure to infer meaning during the morphology lessons. Because the program focuses on structural language analysis rather than contextual analysis, there are no unit lessons that provide explicit opportunities for students to practice using context clues as a vocabulary strategy.