Biliteracy para todos: Preview-View-Review 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).

The Biliteracy para todos: Teaching for Language Connections Developing Biliteracy Preview-View-Review Teacher Resource Book does not include an explanation of the stated purpose under “The Purpose of Preview-View-Review.” The materials instead describe how the program supports different bilingual program models and do not clearly explain how it supports the English Language Arts Texas Essential Knowledge Skills (TEKS). The materials do not clearly define the overall purpose of the supplemental program for core reading instruction.

The materials describe general strategies for different learners without stating whether the focus is extra practice, support, or enrichment. For example, the first box in the chart states, “Purposes for students when the View is in English.” The materials only provide an explanation of which language programs the resource can be used for, including Transitional, One-Way Dual Language, or Two-Way Dual Language, rather than clearly defining the overall purpose of the supplemental program for core reading instruction.

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 do not include clear guidance on how to appropriately use the supplemental program. In the Preview-View-Review Teacher Resource Book under the heading “The Purpose of Preview-View-Review,” the materials explain the rationale for certain teaching structures and connect these structures to different bilingual program models. However, they do not explicitly explain how or when these strategies should be implemented in alignment with the core curriculum. The materials include instructional rationale and organizational context but do not include explicit guidance for integration with core instruction.

The materials include guidance on how to supplement different bilingual programs such as Transitional, One-Way Dual Language, and Two-Way Dual Language. In “The Structure and Sequence of a PVR Lesson,” the materials describe the lesson structure for bilingual settings rather than explaining how the supplemental program aligns with or supports core reading and language arts instruction.

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 Teacher Resource Book includes TEKS alignment for each lesson and includes a scope and sequence outlining the skills taught. For example, the Developing Biliteracy Teacher Resource Book provides a “Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills Alignment” listing 18 sets of books, and each set includes a list and explanation of targeted TEKS to show the specific skills addressed through the lessons and book sets.

In the Teacher Resource Book, the materials provide a chart, and each set and lesson includes TEKS correlations from different grade levels, including grades 2 and 3, such as TEKS 3.6h. However, the materials do not provide a rationale explaining the design of the scope and sequence.

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

The materials do not include time requirements, the duration of each lesson, or the suggested pacing for effective implementation. For example, in the Developing Biliteracy Teacher Resource Book under “How Often Should I Conduct a PVR Lesson?,” the materials include general guidance for implementing the lessons.

Also in the Developing Biliteracy Teacher Resource Book, in the section titled “How Often Should I Conduct a PVR Lesson?,” the materials state, “Based on the teacher's observation of the progress of the students and the information from the reading assessment, the teacher decides on how often to meet with the students.” However, the materials do not provide the duration of each lesson or pacing information for individual lessons.

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

The materials include an explanation of the Preview-View-Review strategy that is used in the program, which supports educators to help build students' background knowledge. However, the materials do not include resources to help educators with the implementation of the materials. The materials do not provide additional explanation of the key features of each part of the lesson to effectively use the program with students.

The materials direct teachers to vocabulary anchor charts and sentence stems and explain how assessments inform grouping and instructional focus. However, the materials do not include educator resources and guidance for implementation. The Developing Biliteracy Teacher Resource Book provides no explanation for how assessments inform grouping and instructional focus.

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 supports for families in either Spanish or English. The materials do not offer resources for educators to use in guiding families on how to support the progress of their students at home. Neither the English nor Spanish materials provide a family letter. The Teacher Resource Book only provides guidance to educators and is intended for classroom implementation, with instructional supports for developing language skills 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).

The materials include appropriate instructional assessments for the stated purpose of the supplemental program by providing reading assessments that monitor students’ decoding, fluency, and comprehension skills. For example, in the Developing Biliteracy Teacher Resource Book, the “Assessment” section explains, “A reading assessment (Assessing Reading: Decoding, Comprehension, Fluency) is a tool used to assess a student’s reading, fluency, and comprehension skills. It provides a snapshot of the student’s reading behaviors. An individual student’s reading assessment should be taken at regular intervals so that the teacher can gather information to support targeted reading and language instruction. The teacher can use the information from the reading assessment to plan for their future instruction.”

The materials provide guidance for educators to use ongoing assessment data to monitor student literacy performance and inform targeted instructional decisions aligned with the supplemental program’s purpose. This guidance supports educators in collecting ongoing student reading data to inform targeted instruction and monitor student progress. However, the materials do not include summative assessments that evaluate student performance on literacy skills developed across the lesson set or instructional sequence.

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

The materials include a definition for each instructional assessment and identify its intended purpose of monitoring student literacy development and informing instructional planning. For example, in the Developing Biliteracy Teacher Resource Book, the materials define the reading assessment as follows: “A reading assessment (Assessing Reading: Decoding, Comprehension, Fluency) is a tool used to assess a student’s reading, fluency, and comprehension.” The materials further explain that the assessment provides “a snapshot of the student’s reading behaviors.”

In “Assessment,” the materials state that educators can use assessment results to “plan for their future instruction.” Additionally, the materials state that reading assessments should be conducted at regular intervals so educators can gather information to support targeted reading and language instruction and plan future instruction based on student performance data.

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

The materials include guidance to support the consistent and accurate administration of instructional assessments. The materials contain a reading assessment that evaluates decoding, comprehension, and fluency skills. The assessment guidance explains that the assessment provides “a snapshot of the student’s reading behaviors” and should be administered “at regular intervals.” Educators gather information to support targeted reading and language instruction and use assessment results to plan future instruction.

At the top of each assessment tool, under the title of the book and grade level, the materials state, “Read the title to the student. Ask the student to read the text. Mark the decoding errors on this transcript. Write the total number of errors on each page.”

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

The instructional assessments include items at varying levels of complexity through decoding, fluency, comprehension, and language analysis tasks. The “Assessing Reading: Decoding, Comprehension, Fluency” assessments require students to read connected text while educators record decoding errors and observe reading behaviors in both English and Spanish. The materials further extend assessment complexity by guiding educators to evaluate meaning-making, cross-linguistic transfer, pronunciation patterns, and oral language development for emergent bilingual students. The materials include instructional supports such as translanguaging, sentence stems, and extended wait time to support students as they engage with increasingly complex literacy tasks across languages.

The materials include instructional assessments evaluating varying levels of complexity. For example, the materials include comprehension questions that address literal, inferential, and critical thinking skills rather than a single skill area. These question types require students to demonstrate understanding at multiple levels of comprehension. However, the materials do not include guidance for educators on how to interpret data collected from the comprehension portion of the assessment. Moreover, the assessments do not include a variety of item types beyond the provided comprehension questions.

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

The instructional assessments and scoring information provide guidance for interpreting student performance through decoding accuracy measures and performance indicators. For example, the instructions for each assessment include a “Decoding Accuracy” table that identifies the number of decoding errors, corresponding accuracy percentages, and associated levels of difficulty. The materials also provide an “Accuracy Score” formula educators can use to calculate students’ reading accuracy percentages. These scoring tools support educators in determining student decoding performance and identifying levels of reading difficulty based on assessment results.

Once the accuracy calculations have been made, the materials do not include guidance for interpreting student performance data. There is no guidance for identifying performance trends, strengths, areas of need, or recommendations for instructional next steps.

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

The assessment materials include directions for administering and scoring assessments, such as marking decoding errors and recording the total number of errors on each page. However, the materials do not provide guidance for using the supplemental program to respond to student trends in performance on assessments.


The materials do not include guidance for analyzing assessment trends, identifying student strengths or areas of need, or adjusting instruction to provide targeted intervention or support based on student performance data. Additionally, the materials do not provide intervention strategies, targeted instructional recommendations, or procedures for responding to patterns identified in student assessment data.

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.

The materials do not include tools for educators to track student progress and growth over time. For example, the assessment materials provide directions for educators to mark decoding errors and record the total number of errors per page during administration. The materials also include general suggestions for considering instructional decisions based on assessments in students’ dominant and additional languages. However, the materials do not provide progress monitoring tools, data tracking systems, growth charts, or structured resources for documenting, monitoring, or analyzing student progress and growth across multiple assessments or instructional periods.

The materials do not provide tools for students to monitor their own progress over time. The materials include assessment administration procedures and scoring information. However, the materials do not include progress-monitoring charts, student tracking forms, data collection systems, goal-setting tools, or structured resources for documenting and analyzing growth across multiple assessments. Additionally, the materials do not provide student-facing tools that support self-monitoring, reflection, or goal tracking based on assessment performance.

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 do not include educator guidance for differentiated instruction or activities for students who have not yet reached proficiency in grade-level skills. In the “After Reading” section, the materials direct educators, “Promote discussions by choosing questions that are appropriate for your students.” For example, this direction tells educators to select questions but does not specify which questions are appropriate for students who are struggling, nor does it provide guidance on how to adjust or scaffold questions based on student needs.

Rather than offering guidance for differentiated instruction, the materials provide guidance on the language structure used to deliver instruction. For example, in the Preview-View-Review Teacher Resource Book, the materials state that English Language Arts educators should present the Preview in Spanish, the View in English, and the Review in Spanish. This guidance describes how instruction is organized across languages but does not provide recommendations for differentiating instruction for students who are performing below grade level. The materials do not include targeted supports such as small-group instruction, additional scaffolds, modified activities, sentence stems, graphic organizers, or other lesson-specific recommendations to support students who have not yet reached proficiency in grade-level skills.

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.

In the Preview-View-Review Teacher Resource Book, the “Target Language” chart describes the purpose of instruction when the View is presented in English for emergent bilingual students. The chart provides guidance related to language acquisition and instructional language use. However, the guidance does not include recommendations for extending learning or increasing the complexity of instruction for students who have already demonstrated grade-level proficiency.

Rather than offering guidance on differentiated instruction, the materials provide guidance for determining the level of linguistic support needed for emergent bilingual students. For example, the materials state, “When working with emergent bilinguals, consider if the independent level is a reflection of the student’s language development or reading development to help you decide the extent of linguistic support.” The materials do not provide recommendations for extending learning for students who have already demonstrated proficiency in grade-level skills. The materials do not include lesson-specific enrichment opportunities, accelerated tasks, advanced application activities, or other differentiated supports designed for students who have mastered grade-level content.

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

The materials do not include educator guidance on providing specially designed instruction (SDI) for students receiving special education services. Instead, the program provides a structured Preview-View-Review lesson format used when the target language is English. In this structure, the Preview is conducted in Spanish and includes background knowledge and vocabulary development. The View is presented in English and includes activities such as word study, text introduction, and reading instruction, followed by a Review discussion. The materials describe the sequence and language of instruction but do not provide recommendations for adapting instruction to meet the individualized needs of students receiving special education services.

The materials do not include educator guidance on providing SDI for students receiving special education services. The materials state, “Preview-View-Review supports the systematic development of language and reading across both languages of instruction.” The materials do not include guidance for adapting instruction to meet the individualized needs of students receiving special education services. The materials do not include recommendations for instructional modifications, accommodations, specialized intervention strategies, adjusted lesson delivery, or other supports that guide educators in providing specially designed instruction.

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 materials include prompts and guidance to support educators in modeling and explaining academic vocabulary and language skills. For example, in the Preview-View-Review Teacher Resource Book, the “Preview” section under “Activate Prior Knowledge” directs the educator to read the introduction aloud to students. Specific questions to support discussion including, “What do rescue workers do?” and “What are rescue workers trained to do?” The lesson also includes discussion prompts and sentence starters that support modeling academic language and guide students in using complete comparative responses.

The “View” section found in “Academic Language: Vocabulary” guides educators to model and explain skills. For example, the educator introduces the vocabulary words superhero, rescue worker, and firefighter and guides students in comparing the terms. The materials provide specific questions, including, “How are these people similar? In what ways are they different?” The lesson also includes sentence stems such as “_____ is similar to _____ because _____” and “The difference between _____ and _____ is _____.”

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 “Target Language: English Lesson Framework” in the Preview-View-Review cycle outlines instructional components that support lesson implementation. The framework includes opportunities for activating prior knowledge, academic vocabulary instruction, word study, book introduction, during-reading support, discussion activities, language connections, writing and oracy activities, and reading review. For example, the materials identify instructional components such as “Academic Vocabulary: Word Study,” “Introduce the Book,” “During Reading,” “Talking About the Book,” “Language Connections,” and “Academic Language: Writing and Oracy.”

The materials include guidance and recommendations for effective lesson delivery and facilitation using a variety of instructional approaches. For example, in Set 3 of the Preview-View-Review Teacher Resource Book, the materials provide scripted educator directions and prompts that guide educators in discussion. Following the reading, students participate in a collaborative discussion activity in which they share and discuss their writing with peers. The materials include lessons with a “Review” activity, in which students respond to educator-generated statements by choosing to agree or disagree and moving to the corresponding side of the room.

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

The materials do not include clear educator guidance on recommended instructional structures to support effective implementation. While the materials include lesson activities and instructional routines, they do not consistently identify whether those activities should be implemented in whole-group, small-group, partner, or individual settings. For example, the Preview-View-Review Teacher Resource Book outlines the sequence of lesson components and provides guidance on language use within different bilingual program models.

The Preview-View-Review Teacher Resource Book includes a section titled “The Structure and Sequence of a PVR Lesson.” This section explains which language should be used during each component of the lesson based on the type of bilingual program. However, the guidance focuses on language allocation and does not identify recommended instructional structures for implementing the lesson components. Moreover, the materials do not provide explicit recommendations regarding instructional grouping for lesson delivery. As a result, educators must determine the instructional structure for implementation based on their own interpretation rather than following clear guidance provided within the materials.

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 materials do not include educator guidance for providing linguistic accommodations differentiated by English Language Proficiency Standards (ELPS) proficiency levels. The materials do not reference proficiency level descriptors or provide recommendations for adjusting instruction based on students’ language proficiency needs. As a result, the materials do not include structured guidance that supports students in using increasingly more complex academic language across varying levels of language development. However, the materials include language supports for multilingual learners. For example, throughout the “Academic Vocabulary” section, academic vocabulary is presented in both English and Spanish to support comprehension and cross-linguistic connections. While this support promotes vocabulary development, the materials do not provide educator-facing guidance for differentiating linguistic accommodations by proficiency level or for increasing the complexity of students’ academic language based on ELPS expectations.

In the guidance for working with emergent bilingual students, educators are directed to “consider if the independent level is a reflection of the student’s language development or reading development” and to use that information to “help you decide the extent of linguistic support.” This guidance encourages educators to consider student language needs when selecting supports. However, the materials do not include specific linguistic accommodations, language supports differentiated by proficiency level, or guidance aligned to ELPS proficiency level descriptors.

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 materials include implementation guidance to support educators in effectively using the materials in state-approved bilingual programs. Within the Preview-View-Review framework, the materials provide guidance for implementation across different bilingual program models and student populations. For example, the materials distinguish between emergent bilingual students whose home language is Spanish in Transitional Bilingual Education, One-Way Dual Language, and Two-Way Dual Language programs, as well as emergent bilingual students whose home language is English in Two-Way Dual Language programs. The implementation guidance identifies the language used during each lesson component and explains the instructional purpose of the Preview, View, and Review phases.


The “Target Language: English” chart provides guidance for implementing instruction with emergent bilingual students. The chart describes how the framework supports vocabulary development, comprehension, biliteracy, language development, and sheltered instruction across bilingual instructional settings.

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 materials include resources that outline opportunities to address metalinguistic transfer between English and Spanish. For example, the Teacher Resource Book explains that cross-linguistic connections occur across levels of language, including phonology, morphology, syntax, and grammar. The materials explain how the program can be used to help students transfer knowledge and skills across languages.

The materials include resources that outline opportunities to address metalinguistic transfer between English and Spanish. Within the English “View” component, the “Language Connections: Semantic Level Anchor Chart” activity prompts students to compare vocabulary across languages using the sentence frame, “In Spanish you say ____, but in English you say ____.” Similarly, within the “Vista/Lección” component, the “Conexiones de lenguaje: nivel semántico” activity prompts students to compare vocabulary using the sentence stem, “En inglés se dice ____, pero en español se dice ____.” These language connection activities require students to identify and discuss relationships between English and Spanish vocabulary, supporting the transfer of linguistic knowledge across languages.

Evaluation for 8.1a
[English reading language arts] Materials include opportunities for students to read high-quality, grade-level, complex texts as appropriate for the program's stated purpose, in a variety of text types (e.g., literary, informational). [Spanish reading language arts] Materials include opportunities for students to read high-quality, grade-level, complex authentic or transadapted Spanish texts as appropriate for the program's stated purpose, in a variety of text types (e.g., literary, informational).

The materials provide opportunities for students to read high-quality grade-level texts in both literary and informational forms. In Set 7, students read the literary text “The Kingdom of Bloom” alongside the informational text “Protect the Oceans: Act Locally” through a structured sequence of before-, during-, and after-reading instruction. During reading, students read connected text independently while educators provide linguistic and comprehension support through echo reading, choral reading, partner reading, and targeted questioning. Students analyze cause-and-effect relationships, discuss environmental problems and solutions, and respond to literal, inferential, synthesizing, and critical-thinking questions using evidence from the text and illustrations. The lessons also integrate vocabulary, writing, and oral presentations across both texts.

The materials provide opportunities for students to read high-quality grade-level texts in both literary and informational forms. In Set 10, students read the informational text “The Great Railroad Race” and the literary text “The Legend of Jimmy Drake” through a structured sequence of before-, during-, and after-reading instruction. During reading, students read connected text independently while educators provide linguistic and comprehension support through echo reading, choral reading, partner reading, and strategic rereading to monitor understanding. Students interpret informational features, including diagrams; analyze historical events and characters; and respond to literal, inferential, synthesizing, and critical-thinking questions using evidence from the text and illustrations. The lessons also integrate vocabulary, informational writing, and oral presentations across both texts.

Evaluation for 8.1b
Materials include a variety of high-quality texts at different levels of complexity.

The Developing Biliteracy materials include a variety of high-quality texts across informational, narrative, historical fiction, environmental, and realistic fiction genres. Students read paired texts such as “To the Rescue” and “Super Sam,” “You Can Make a Difference!” and “Save the Sea Otters!,” “My Soccer Journal“ and “The Leaping Lions,” “Protect the Oceans: Act Locally!” and “The Kingdom of Bloom,” and “The Great Railroad Race” and “The Legend of Jimmy Drake.” The material incorporates multiple text structures, including chronological order, factual recounts, cause-and-effect, problem-and-solution, and narrative story elements. Informational texts include features such as photographs, captions, headings, tables of contents, and diagrams, while literary texts develop characters, settings, dialogue, and plot.

The Developing Biliteracy materials include high-quality texts at varying levels of complexity that increase through knowledge demands, vocabulary, and text structure. For example, in “Target Language: English” Set 3, students read “My Soccer Diary,” an informational text about teamwork and athletics, before reading “The Leaping Lions,” a narrative that analyzes characters’ actions, teamwork, and problem-solving. Students progress to more content-rich texts in “Target Language: English” Set 10, where they read “The Great Railroad Race,” an informational text about the construction of the transcontinental railroad and vocabulary such as railroad tracks, railway cart, and transcontinental. The paired narrative, “The Legend of Jimmy Drake,” connects historical events with character actions and motivations through a historical narrative.

Evaluation for 8.1c
Texts include content that is relevant, engaging, and authentically reflects students' diverse backgrounds and experiences.

The materials include texts with content that is relevant and engaging by focusing on topics and experiences that are meaningful. Across the Developing Biliteracy units, students read paired narrative and informational texts about rescue workers and superheroes (“To the Rescue” and “Super Sam”), protecting the environment and sea otters (“You Can Make a Difference!” and “Save the Sea Otters!”), and teamwork through youth sports (“My Soccer Journal” and “The Leaping Lions”). The texts present real-world topics, relatable characters, real-world situations, and authentic problems such as responding to emergencies, protecting wildlife, and learning to cooperate as a team.

The materials include texts that authentically reflect diverse backgrounds and experiences while introducing students to new perspectives and community roles. Across the Developing Biliteracy sets, students encounter narratives and informational texts featuring rescue workers, firefighters, park rangers, environmental stewards, athletes, coaches, and children working together to solve problems. The texts explore experiences in homes, schools, communities, natural environments, and recreational settings while highlighting civic responsibility, environmental conservation, collaboration, and perseverance.

Evaluation for 8.2a
Materials activate or supply background knowledge.

The materials consistently activate students’ background knowledge before reading by prompting them to connect their own experiences and prior knowledge to the topic of each text. During the Preview lessons, educators ask students to discuss experiences such as describe how a sea otter looks, discuss experiences on various teams, and discuss gardens. Before reading “To the Rescue, “ students share what they know about rescue workers. Similarly, before reading “The Balloon Adventure,” students discuss whether they would ride in a hot air balloon. Before reading “The First Flight,” students discuss the fairness of trying new inventions on animals. .

The materials consistently supply background knowledge by explicitly introducing the topic, setting, and key concepts before students begin reading. Each “Antes de la lectura”/”Before Reading” section provides educator guidance to explain the purpose of the text and establish conceptual understanding prior to reading. For example, before reading “The Great Railroad Race,” students learn that the story explains the transcontinental track and how one track was built across the whole country. Before reading “Salamander Surprise,” educators have students talk with partners about pets they have or would like to have, including uncommon pets.

Evaluation for 8.2b
Materials include pre-teaching of unfamiliar vocabulary in texts.

The materials consistently provide pre-teaching of unfamiliar vocabulary before students read each selection through dedicated “Academic Vocabulary: Vocabulary” sections. Prior to reading, educators introduce text-specific vocabulary such as hummingbirds, hover in the air, helmet feeder, bird feeder, sugar syrup, standstill, and flapping using vocabulary anchor charts that preview words students will encounter in the text. The materials provide student-friendly explanations and structured discussion prompts where students talk about the words before reading, preparing them to access the meaning of the text.

The materials include explicit educator guidance for pre-teaching unfamiliar vocabulary using multiple instructional supports before reading begins. Each lesson incorporates picture-supported vocabulary anchor charts, student-friendly definitions, oral discussion, and opportunities for students to apply vocabulary in meaningful contexts prior to reading. The vocabulary charts are intentionally revisited throughout the lesson, including during language connections activities and after-reading discussions, allowing students to reinforce word meanings across both English and Spanish.

Evaluation for 8.2c
Materials include explicit (direct) instruction on using contextual analysis to determine the word meaning of unfamiliar vocabulary in texts in alignment with grade-level TEKS as appropriate for the program's stated purpose.

The materials do not include explicit instruction on using contextual analysis to determine the meaning of unfamiliar vocabulary in connected text. Each lesson contains an “Academic Vocabulary: Vocabulary” section that introduces unfamiliar words such as salamander, lizard, species, amphibians, pet, pure bred, vivarium, predator, damp space, and water fountains through vocabulary anchor charts, student-friendly explanations, and discussion before reading. However, the materials do not explicitly teach students how to use surrounding words, phrases, examples, sentence structure, or other context clues within the text to determine the meaning of unfamiliar vocabulary during reading. Instead, word meanings are provided directly prior to reading.

The materials do not provide educator guidance for modeling or explicitly teaching contextual analysis as a vocabulary strategy. Although lessons include vocabulary previews, discussion prompts, and opportunities to revisit vocabulary during language connections and after-reading activities, they do not include think-alouds, explanations of context clue types, or guided practice demonstrating how to infer the meaning of unfamiliar words from the surrounding text. Students are given vocabulary definitions rather than taught how to determine meaning through contextual analysis.

Evaluation for 8.2d
Materials include opportunities for students to practice using contextual analysis to determine word meaning of unfamiliar vocabulary in texts in alignment with grade-level TEKS as appropriate for the program's stated purpose.

The materials do not include opportunities for students to practice using contextual analysis to determine the meaning of unfamiliar vocabulary in connected text. Each lesson begins with an “Academic Vocabulary” section that explicitly introduces target words and phrases (e.g., superhero, rescue worker, and firefighter; ranger, habitat, and wetland; or coach, referee, and teamwork) before students read the text. Vocabulary instruction focuses on previewing and discussing the words prior to reading rather than requiring students to infer their meanings from surrounding words, sentences, or paragraphs encountered during reading.

The materials do not provide student practice activities that require contextual analysis to determine word meaning. During and after reading, students respond to comprehension questions, discussion prompts, writing activities, and language connection tasks that focus on understanding the text, making inferences, summarizing, and using previously taught vocabulary. However, the lessons do not include tasks in which students determine a word’s meaning based on context, identify the textual clues that support an inferred meaning, choose the most accurate meaning of a word as used in the passage, or complete context-based vocabulary exercises. The materials do not include opportunities to practice contextual analysis.

Evaluation for 8.3a
Materials include systematic and explicit (direct) instruction on reading comprehension skills at multiple levels (i.e., literal, inferential, evaluative) in alignment with grade-level TEKS as appropriate for the program's stated purpose.

The materials provide systematic instruction on reading comprehension by following a consistent instructional sequence that develops comprehension from literal to inferential and evaluative thinking across each lesson. While reading, students first answer literal questions that focus on recalling explicit information and identifying key details from the text. After reading, discussion prompts progress to inferential questions requiring students to explain character actions, determine causes and effects, synthesize ideas, and make predictions using textual evidence. The material includes critical-thinking questions that ask students to justify opinions, evaluate characters’ decisions, or consider alternative outcomes. However, the materials do not include explicit instruction on reading comprehension skills at multiple levels.

The materials include systematic instruction in reading comprehension skills at multiple levels, as appropriate for the program’s stated purpose. For example, the “Review” section asks students to compare ideas across two texts by responding to the questions “What do you know about rescue workers?” and “What do you admire about rescue workers?” and provides sentence stems to support discussion. However, the materials do not include explicit educator guidance that models or teaches the comprehension strategy required to compare, analyze, or evaluate information across texts before students respond. Instead, students are prompted to answer the discussion question without instructional supports such as think-alouds, modeled reasoning, or guided practice that explicitly demonstrates how to apply the comprehension skill.

Evaluation for 8.3b
Materials include opportunities for students to practice reading comprehension skills at multiple levels (i.e., literal, inferential, evaluative) with a variety of grade-level texts in alignment with the grade-level TEKS as appropriate for the program's stated purpose.

The materials include consistent opportunities for students to practice reading comprehension at multiple levels through educator-guided questions embedded before, during, and after reading. For example, in Developing Biliteracy “Target Language: English” Set 3, after reading “The Leaping Lions,” students respond to the literal question, “At the beginning of the story, why didn’t the Leaping Lions listen to their coach?,” followed by the inferential question, “Why did the Leaping Lions change how they played as a team?” Students then answer the synthesizing question, “What did the Leaping Lions learn about teamwork?” and conclude with the critical-thinking prompt, “Do teams that work hard, play as a team, and improve their skills always win? Explain your answer.” Similarly, in Set 10, after reading “The Legend of Jimmy Drake,” students answer the literal question “Why did most of the workers stop looking for the trapped men?,” the inferential questions “What sort of person was Jimmy Drake? What personal qualities did he show?,” and the critical-thinking prompt “Do you think this sort of story could have actually happened? Why do you think so?”

The materials provide opportunities for students to practice comprehension skills using a variety of grade-level literary and informational texts through paired-text instructional sets. For example, students read informational texts such as “To the Rescue,” “Save the Sea Otters!,” and “Looking After Ostrich Chicks” alongside narrative texts including “Super Sam,” “You Can Make a Difference!,” and “Father Ostrich and the New Chicks.” In these paired lessons, students respond to literal, inferential, and evaluative comprehension questions; discuss ideas using evidence from the text; and compare information across both text types.