Flat For Education – 5th Grade

Evaluation for 1.1a
Materials include a scope and sequence outlining the TEKS, ELPS, and concepts taught in the course.

The materials include a scope and sequence that outlines the concepts taught in the course. For example, the Scope and Sequence resource’s “Curriculum Overview and Unit Descriptions” section breaks down the curriculum, including music concepts taught across five units and quarterly lesson descriptions. The detailed content descriptions by unit and by lesson concept support educators in planning for the school year.

The materials do not include an outline of the TEKS designated for the course. For example, in the Scope and Sequence resource, the “Curriculum Overview and Unit Descriptions” section does not include the TEKS standards assigned in the unit overview or in the weekly lesson content within the quarterly descriptions. Additionally, the TEKS Alignment and Assessment Guide provides only a summary of the TEKS, without specific alignment details. The materials do not provide educators with crucial guides that show alignment with the educational standards.

Evaluation for 1.1b
Materials include suggested pacing to support effective implementation for various instructional schedules (e.g., rotational schedules) and various instructional calendars (e.g., varying number of instructional days).

The materials include a suggested pacing guide and calendar to support effective implementation. For example, the Scope and Sequence resource includes a “Scheduling Scenario Models” section that categorizes pacing and instructional calendars and recommends adjustments. The pacing guidelines support educators by providing resources to adjust and plan for learner outcomes throughout the school year.

The materials include suggested pacing to support effective implementation for rotational schedules. For example, in the Scope and Sequence resource, the “Scheduling Scenario Models” section categorizes pacing and instructional calendars and recommends adjustments to the rotational schedule, including music once every five to six school days for 40–50 minutes. The varied rotational schedule guidelines help educators manage flexible school schedules.

The materials include suggested pacing to support effective implementation across instructional calendars with varying numbers of instructional days. For example, in the Scope and Sequence resource, the “Scheduling Scenario Models” section categorizes pacing and instructional calendars, and the “Varying Instructional Days” section recommends adjustments, including varying class breakdowns (three classes, reduced as needed for testing, holidays, and events). These varied instructional schedules and calendars help educators plan a flexible daily lesson allotment for the school year.

Evaluation for 1.1c
Materials include an explanation for the rationale of unit order as well as how concepts to be learned connect throughout the course.

The materials explain the rationale for the unit order. For example, the Scope and Sequence resource’s “Rationale for Unit Order and Conceptual Connectivity Across the Course: Why This Unit Order Works” section outlines seven music units for the school year. The detailed unit order provides the educator with an overview of the unit objectives and their interrelationships.

The materials include an explanation of how the concepts to be learned connect throughout the course. For example, in the Scope and Sequence resource, the “Rationale for Unit Order and Conceptual Connectivity Across the Course” section outlines developmentally increasing concepts that are revisited throughout the year. Additionally, the “Conceptual Spiral: How Learning Connects Across the Year” section describes the process for spiraling content and skills. The materials support the educator by providing a conceptual framework for the entire course.

Evaluation for 1.1d
Materials include protocols with corresponding guidance for unit and lesson internalization.

The “Protocols for Unit and Lesson Internalization” section of the Scope and Sequence resource outlines seven protocols, each with Guidance and Why It Works statements. These protocols support educators by providing parameters and strategies for implementing the curriculum.

In the Scope and Sequence resource, the “Unit-Level and Lesson-Level Internalization Guidance” section outlines a five-step structure of engage, focus, reinforce, apply, and reflect, with a requirement of at least three points in every lesson. The materials provide educators with appropriate internalization strategies to ensure successful implementation in each lesson.

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

The “Core Resources for Effective Implementation” section of the Scope and Sequence resource outlines the program’s digital tools, templates, embedded resources, and the student digital platform. These resources support educators by providing music-learning tools for implementing the lessons.

The Scope and Sequence resource includes the “Observation and Feedback Guidance for Leaders” section, which provides educator guidance with a breakdown of look-fors and student feedback in the Progress Monitoring and Administrative Walkthrough Guide. The materials also include guidance in the “Coaching Support for New or Developing Teachers” section. These varied guidelines provide educators with appropriate instructional pathways for implementing the lessons.

Evaluation for 1.2a
Materials include comprehensive unit overviews that provide the background content knowledge and academic and discipline-specific vocabulary necessary to effectively teach the concepts in the unit.

The materials do not include comprehensive unit overviews that provide the background knowledge necessary to teach the unit’s concepts effectively. For example, in the Scope and Sequence resource, the “Curriculum Overview and Unit Descriptions” section includes a unit overview but does not provide the background content knowledge needed to teach the unit’s concepts effectively. Without a pre-check or preview strategy at the lesson and unit levels, the educator cannot adequately introduce new and unfamiliar concepts.

The materials do not include comprehensive unit overviews that provide the academic and discipline-specific vocabulary needed to teach the concepts effectively. For example, in the Scope and Sequence resource, the “Rationale for Unit Order and Conceptual Connectivity Across the Course” section does not reference vocabulary specific to each unit’s focus. Additionally, the unit overviews include a general vocabulary list integrated throughout, but do not provide a unit-specific focus. The unit overviews lack vocabulary resources, which prevent the educator from adequately planning for the development and use of music vocabulary in the course.

Evaluation for 1.2b
Materials contain supports for families in both Spanish and English for each unit with suggestions on supporting the progress of their student.

The materials include English-language support for families for each unit, with suggestions to support student progress. For example, the “Educator and Administrator Guide to Family Engagement” section in the Scope and Sequence resource provides guidance on connecting learning at home with the family. The resources provide adequate English-language materials to support the school and home community by offering ways to engage.

The materials do not include Spanish-language supports for families in each unit or suggestions for supporting student progress. For example, in the Scope and Sequence resource, the “Educator and Administrator Guide to Family Engagement” section does not provide supportive materials for families in Spanish. These supports are addressed through targeted, translated communications and curriculum materials. The materials lack sufficient accessibility for emergent bilingual learners because they fail to provide essential Spanish resources for students who need them.

Evaluation for 1.3a
Materials include comprehensive, structured, detailed lesson plans that include objectives, questions, tasks, materials, and instructional assessments required to meet the content and language standards of the lesson (aligned with the TEKS and the ELPS).

The materials include comprehensive, structured, and detailed lesson plans with clear lesson objectives. For example, in the “Excerpts” unit, the “Hambone: Student as Call Leader” lesson includes a summary of the learning goal at the start of the educator narrative. The lesson objective reinforces the lesson’s goals by providing the educator with a clear overview of the musical concepts.

The materials include comprehensive, structured, and detailed lesson plans that identify the TEKS correlations. For example, in unit 1, the “Morning Parade: March to the Beat” lesson includes the TEKS standards at the beginning of the educator narrative. The lesson aligns with Texas music education standards by clearly presenting the specific TEKS alignment and providing a comprehensive educational framework.

The materials include comprehensive, structured, and detailed lesson plans with tasks and questions aligned with the lesson objectives. For example, in unit 2, the “Brook: A Color Map of Water Motion” lesson includes a range of tasks and questions throughout the modeling, concept introduction, and student task flow. The lesson plans reinforce student learning by distributing activities across the educator and student narratives. The materials also include instructional assessments aligned with the lesson objectives. For example, in unit 3, the “Sakura Echo: Contour with Expression Labels” lesson includes varied assessments such as music annotation, symbol identification and highlighting, and guided listening activities. The materials evaluate and reinforce student learning through formative and summative assessments.

Evaluation for 1.3b
Materials include a lesson overview listing the teacher and student materials necessary to effectively deliver the lesson (e.g., equipment, supplies, technology) and the suggested timing for each lesson component.

The materials do not consistently include a lesson overview that lists the educator materials needed to deliver the lesson effectively. For example, in the “Excerpts” unit, the “A Highland Reel—Irish Music and Cultural Purpose” lesson overview references a musical score and an audio resource, but the materials do not link to them. This creates organizational and planning challenges because the lessons do not consistently include all lesson components, and educators must navigate the platform to find these elements.

In the “Composition” unit, the “Programmatic Composition: Soundtrack to a Scene” lesson overview references a musical score for the student activity. However, the lesson does not include the score. The materials pose instructional challenges because they do not consistently include all lesson components.

The materials do not consistently include a lesson overview that lists suggested timing or time allocations for each lesson component. For example, in the “Movement” unit, the “Rio Azul Waltz: Legato Travel with Gentle Turns” lesson lacks timing or time allocations for its components. The materials create time-management challenges by not providing pacing guidance or structured activity time.

Evaluation for 1.3c
Materials include guidance on the effective use of lesson materials for extended practice (e.g., homework, extension, enrichment).

In the “Etudes” unit, the “World Journey Suite: Planning the Ensemble” lesson includes a “Differentiation: Support” section featuring a Sentence Starter template. The materials support all learners by providing consistent support strategies and accommodations in every lesson.

In the “Etudes” unit, the “Folk Song and Variations: Listening Map” lesson includes a “Differentiation: Extension” section that challenges advanced students to draw a visual symbol, or “icon,” for each variation. The materials support all music learners by consistently offering extensions that challenge students and support further development in each lesson.

Evaluation for 2.1a
Materials include a variety of instructional assessments at the unit and lesson level (including diagnostic, formative, and summative) that vary in types of tasks and questions, including skills demonstration.

The materials do not include a variety of instructional assessments, such as diagnostic assessments that vary in task and question types and in skill demonstration. For example, in the Scope and Sequence resource, the “TEKS Alignment and Assessment Guide: How TEKS Standards Are Assessed” section does not include diagnostic assessments across the six different identified types (i.e., Comprehensive Teacher Rubrics, Student Self-Assessments, Live and Recorded Performance Tasks, Interactive Score Annotation, Written Reflection and Historical Analysis, and Peer Feedback). These materials do not provide educators with diagnostic assessment information, which is essential for instructional design driven by student performance and feedback. The assessment guide relies solely on formative and summative assessments (i.e., recordings, evaluations, annotations, and practice logs), and these assessments do not adequately address pre-checking or assessing students’ prior knowledge when introducing concepts.

The materials include a variety of unit-level instructional assessments, including summative assessments that vary in task and question types and the skills they demonstrate. For example, the “Excerpts: A Highland Reel” unit includes summative assessments such as class performances, recordings, and final reflections. These performance and writing assessments support student learning and retention across the musical concepts covered in the units.

The materials include a variety of instructional assessments at the lesson level, including formative assessments that vary in task and question types and in skills demonstrations. For example, the “Supplemental Material 7: Performance” lesson includes a variety of formative assessments of independent recording performance and partner two-part singing. The materials accurately assess students’ skills through the independent recording performance assessment.

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

The Scope and Sequence resource includes the “TEKS Alignment and Assessment Guide: How TEKS Standards Are Assessed” and “Comprehensive Educator’s Guide to Assessment Types” sections, which provide a rubric and a variety of assessments. However, the materials do not define assessment types (i.e., diagnostic, formative, summative) or provide clear scoring targets for performance tasks and self-checks.

In the Scope and Sequence resource, the “Universal Music Education Rubric” section clearly defines targets for scoring composition assessments and for assessing mastery of the skills. However, this rubric does not explicitly align with any specific lesson. In the “Excerpts” unit, the “Brook: Final Performance” lesson includes criteria for students to sing at the correct pitch and to focus on smooth connections. This assessment does not provide clarity or adequate guidance on how to apply and score the rubric.

Evaluation for 2.1c
Materials include teacher guidance to ensure consistent and accurate administration of instructional assessments.

The materials lack educator guidance to ensure consistent and accurate administration of instructional assessments. For example, in the Scope and Sequence resource, the “TEKS Alignment and Assessment Guide: Live and Recorded Performance Tasks” and “Interactive Score Annotation” sections offer brief explanations of instructional assessments but provide no guidance within the lessons. In the “Excerpts” unit, the “Sakura Echo: Melodic Contour Movement” lesson does not provide educators with sufficient musical parameters for assessment (i.e., specifying that students must be visible, waist-up or full-body, and that the recording must be continuous). The lesson materials limit the educator’s ability to administer assessments accurately by omitting time allocations, grouping information, and resources for effective administration.

The “Differentiation in Assessment” section of the Scope and Sequence resource provides guidance on the instructional assessments (i.e., ensuring the reliability and validity of assessment results by requiring educators to adhere to instructions, properly train test administrators, appropriately use accommodations, and follow precise scoring and reporting practices), but this guidance is not used in the units. The “5th Grade: Movement” unit includes a summative assessment but omits the skills and formative assessments that should precede it. The materials do not provide the information needed to ensure that assessment outcomes accurately reflect student learning and can effectively inform instructional decisions.

Evaluation for 2.1d
Diagnostic, formative, and summative assessments are aligned to the TEKS and objectives of the course, unit, or lesson.

The materials do not include summative assessments aligned with the TEKS or course or unit objectives. For example, in the Scope and Sequence resource, the “TEKS Alignment and Assessment Guide—Live and Recorded Performance Tasks” and “Interactive Score Annotation” sections do not sufficiently explain the specific TEKS alignment needed to implement summative assessments successfully. Instead, these resources categorize assessments by learning strands rather than by the TEKS. The materials do not align with the required educational standards for the lessons and do not enable the educator to administer any type of summative unit assessment to demonstrate student skill mastery.

The materials do not include formative assessments aligned with the TEKS or the course and lesson objectives. For example, in the “Supplemental Lessons” unit, the “Supplemental Material 1: Performance” lesson does not include a rubric with clear TEKS targets for scoring formative assessments or for assessing mastery of the vocal performance objective (i.e., sing the entire song; remember to pronounce your words clearly so the listener understands the lyrics). The materials lack alignment with the required educational standards for the lessons and do not allow the educator to conduct formative vocal assessment adequately.

The materials do not include diagnostic assessments aligned with the TEKS or the course and lesson objectives. For example, in the “Supplemental Lessons” unit, the “Supplemental Material 1: Performance” lesson lacks a rubric with clear TEKS targets for diagnostic assessments of the vocal performance objective (i.e., discussing the importance of singing consonants clearly so the audience can understand the lyrics, especially at the end of phrases like “home of the brave”). The materials do not align with the required educational standards for the lessons and do not allow the educator to conduct formative vocal assessments effectively.

Evaluation for 2.1e
Instructional assessments include TEKS-aligned items at varying levels of complexity.

The instructional assessments provided in the materials include a variety of item types (two or more). For example, in the Scope and Sequence resource, the “Progress Monitoring and Administrative Walkthrough Guide-Macro-Level Benchmark Tracking” section includes a variety of assessments, including small-group activities, reflection, and recording options. These varied assessment formats provide students with differentiated activities and evaluations that offer feedback to guide educator instruction.

The instructional assessments in the materials do not include TEKS-aligned items that assess varying levels of complexity. For example, in the Scope and Sequence resource, the “TEKS Alignment and Assessment Guide: How TEKS Standards Are Assessed” section does not provide a consistent range of assessment complexity levels (e.g., student self-assessments, live and recorded performance tasks, interactive score annotation, written reflection and historical analysis, and peer feedback). The guide offers formative and summative assessments with unclear connections to the TEKS and fails to address specificity and complexity across the courses. The materials use the same level and variety of evaluation throughout the curriculum. Additionally, the materials do not contain clear TEKS-alignment criteria.

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

The materials provide scoring guidance to help educators accurately assess instructional materials. For example, in the Scope and Sequence resource, the “Progress Monitoring and Administrative Walkthrough Guide–Daily and Weekly Monitoring—Teacher Summative Rubrics” section includes a detailed scoring rubric (the Universal Music Education Rubric) for assessing performance. The rubric guides educators in applying a standard-score criterion to complete formative and summative assessments accurately.

The materials do not provide guidance for interpreting student performance on instructional assessments. For example, in the Scope and Sequence resource, the “Progress Monitoring and Administrative Walkthrough Guide-Macro-Level Benchmark Tracking (Quarterly Milestones)” section includes a general assessment rubric (the Universal Music Education Rubric). However, this rubric does not clearly outline the guidance and criteria for interpreting instructional assessments and student performance data. The materials do not provide educators with the guidance needed to use the data correctly. The educator cannot adequately use the information to interpret student evaluations.

Evaluation for 2.2b
Materials provide guidance for the use of included tasks and activities to respond to student trends in performance on assessments.

The materials outline a process for students to use self- and peer feedback from a performance, along with a comparison chart, to improve a second performance. However, the materials offer no guidance for the educator on how to respond to student trends. Educators are not given information on identifying common trends in weak performances across the class or on integrating activities and tasks to strengthen those skills. If students have fundamental misconceptions about the skills, their second attempts will be less successful without targeted remediation.

In the “Etudes” unit, the “River Rondo: Performance Critique” lesson includes instructional assessments. However, the materials lack specific activities and tasks educators can use to respond to trends in student performance, such as providing additional practice on low-performing skills identified in an assessment. The lesson also lacks adequate strategies to guide student assessment and to provide feedback that further informs learning trends.

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

The student resources adequately support students in tracking their progress across the various materials provided. For example, in the “Etudes” unit, the lessons regularly use resources for student practice, including practice logs, lesson goals, self-reflection prompts, and self-evaluation rubrics.

The materials include tools that help educators track student progress and growth. For example, the Scope and Sequence resource includes the “Progress Monitoring and Administrative Walkthrough Guide—Daily and Weekly Monitoring” and “Macro-Level Benchmark Tracking” sections, which provide data analysis tools and resources for manipulating data, including spreadsheets, grade export, and growth and progress data. The materials help educators interpret and use student assessment data to inform growth.

Evaluation for 3.1a
Materials include teacher guidance for differentiated instruction, activities, and/or paired (scaffolded) lessons for students who have not yet reached proficiency on content and skills in the course TEKS.

In the Scope and Sequence resource, the “Comprehensive Differentiation Guide: Performance and Movement Scaffolding” section suggests modifications for specific instructional strategies, including changing the tempo, isolating musical sections, adjusting movement demands, and using physical props. These practical lesson modifications help educators differentiate instruction for students at every level by aligning music concepts and activities with student needs.

In the “Composition” unit, the “Texture and Layering: Texture Layers Project” lesson includes a “Differentiation” section with clear support guidance, such as providing introductory sample measures of analysis in the lesson’s music template. The score modifications enable the educator to differentiate instruction and support successful mastery of music concepts and analysis.

Evaluation for 3.1b
Materials include pre-teaching or embedded supports for unfamiliar vocabulary and references in text (e.g., figurative language, idioms, academic and discipline-specific language).

The materials include pre-teaching or embedded supports for unfamiliar vocabulary such as academic and discipline-specific language. For example, within the Specially Designed Instruction (SDI) resource, the “Instructional Support #2: Language and Vocabulary Support” and “SDI-Infused Lesson: Sakura Echo” sections provide embedded vocabulary supports, such as graphic organizers, sentence starters, and self-check reflection rubrics with supportive language. These English Language Arts and Reading (ELAR) accommodations and independent practice strategies help the educator differentiate instruction for students who need support with reading comprehension and writing.

The materials do not include pre-teaching or embedded supports for unfamiliar references such as figurative language and idioms. For example, in the “Supplemental Lessons” unit, the “Supplemental Material 5: Research and Response” lesson lacks consistent pre-teaching and embedded supports for new concepts. The student task flow requires students to research the history of the song “Are You Sleeping?” without any reference links, which may make it difficult for students who struggle with research methods. The lesson also does not define or explain the term partner song, for students who might need an introduction to the style’s characteristics.

Evaluation for 3.1c
Materials include teacher guidance for differentiated instruction, enrichment, and extension activities for students who have demonstrated proficiency in content and skills in the course TEKS.

In the Scope and Sequence, the “Comprehensive Differentiation Guide: Extensions for Advanced Learners” section offers guidance and strategies for extensions such as vocal independence, kinesthetic complexity, compositional constraints, and higher-level prompts. These enrichment and extension strategies help educators differentiate instruction for students who meet or exceed the instructional level by introducing higher-level music activities.

In the “Excerpts: Brook” unit, the “Color Map of Water Motion” lesson includes educator guidance in the “Differentiation” section that extends advanced note identification. The extensions challenge advanced students with intervallic identification activities that require advanced musical analysis skills and promote strong music-reading comprehension and independent musicianship.

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

The materials include guidance for educators on providing SDI to students receiving special education supports and services. For example, within the SDI resource, the “Three Dimensions of SDI in Flat for Education Music” section offers guidance on supportive services, categorized by differentiation in content, methodology, and instructional delivery. The materials also include recommendations for lessons that support alignment with students’ individualized education plans (IEPs) by engaging resource educators, IEP team members, and special education instruction teams. The materials provide educators with resources and recommendations to align instruction with the needs of students who may require specific accommodations.

In the SDI resource, the “Implementing SDI with Flat for Education 5th Grade Music” section provides guidance on supportive services within an SDI-Infused sample lesson, in which a student receives various levels of accommodation. The sample lesson resource includes exemplars for educators and instructional leaders that reference the student’s IEP. The SDI and overall program guide music educators by aligning instruction with the needs of students who may require specific accommodations.

Evaluation for 3.2a
Materials include explicit (direct) prompts and guidance to support the teacher in modeling and explaining the concept(s) to be learned.

In the “Excerpts” unit, the “Brook: A Color Map of Water Motion” lesson includes direct language in the notation-highlighting activity within the “Second Listen (Modeling)” section. The modeling includes clear scripting for the educator, such as “The piano uses broken, flowing notes (arpeggios), so it sounds like rippling water. Mark it Blue.” This explicit guidance supports the lesson objective by giving students imagery and guided active listening as they learn new music concepts.

The “Supplemental Material 7: Swing Low, Sweet Chariot and All Night, All Day” lesson includes direct educator prompting and modeling in the Concept Introduction. The scripting for the musical heritage focus includes an oral discourse for the class that states, “Explain that this piece combines two famous melodies.” These direct prompts help the educator achieve the lesson objective by highlighting cultural connections and drawing students into discussion of African American spirituals.

Evaluation for 3.2b
Materials include teacher guidance and recommendations for effective lesson delivery and facilitation using a variety of instructional approaches.

The materials do not include educator guidance and recommendations for effective lesson delivery and facilitation, nor do they present a variety of instructional approaches within the lesson. For example, in the Scope and Sequence, the “Protocols for Unit and Lesson Internalization” section includes a variety of instructional approaches, including teaching protocols that vary across all units, including music experience, background, single music focus, and mode shifting (Hear-Move-See-Do). In the “Excerpts” unit, the “Brook: A Color Map of Water Motion” lesson lacks a consistent variety of instructional approaches. The score analysis activity includes educator modeling in the “Implementation-Second Listen (Modeling)” section, including highlighting, labeling, and circling. These instructional approaches are of the same type and do not use at least three different strategies.

In the “Movement” unit, the “Rio Azul Waltz: Traveling Waltz Circle and Partner Mirroring” lesson lacks varied approaches, as the primary strategy in the “Concept Introduction” section is whole-group instruction and mirroring. These approaches offer only group practice and do not include at least two other strategies.

Evaluation for 3.2c
Materials support multiple types of practice (e.g., guided, independent, collaborative) and include guidance for teachers and recommended structures (e.g., whole group, small group, individual) to support effective implementation.

The materials consistently support multiple practice types (e.g., guided, independent, collaborative) throughout the lessons. For example, in the “Etudes” unit, the “City Street Groove: Annotating Syncopation in the Score” lesson includes guided practice with group music analysis and notation, as well as independent work, in the “Implementation Steps” section. These varied practice formats allow students to learn through different activities and at different music levels.

The materials include guidance for educators and recommended structures (e.g., whole-group, small-group, individual) to support effective implementation. For example, in the “Etudes” unit, the “Festival March and Trio: Small Ensemble Workshop Live (Two-Part Collaboration)” lesson provides educator guidance for flexible group assignments with varying roles, along with the “Teacher Modeling and Procedure: Setup and Guided Rehearsal” sections. Flexible group activities and assignments promote student engagement and role differentiation, benefiting all learners.

Evaluation for 3.3a
Materials include teacher 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 and discipline-specific language.

The materials do not include educator guidance on providing linguistic accommodations for students at various language proficiency levels, designed to engage students in using increasingly academic and discipline-specific language in lessons. For example, the SDI resource’s “Support for Emergent Bilingual Students” section includes specific, high-quality supports for discipline-specific musical language acquisition, embedded in the lessons’ multisensory framework to support linguistic goals. However, these supports are not included in the lessons. In the “Excerpts” unit, the “Brook: A Color Map of Water Motion” lesson does not include the embedded English Language Proficiency Standards (ELPS) strategy referenced in the “Differentiation” section (i.e., providing a vocabulary bank to help students who struggle to recall terms). The lesson does not explicitly outline any ELPS strategies beyond support for students with learning needs or accommodations.

The materials do not include educator guidance on providing linguistic accommodations for various levels of language proficiency to engage students in using increasingly academic and discipline-specific language, differentiated by proficiency level, in the lessons. For example, the SDI resource’s “Support for Emergent Bilingual Students-Linguistic Accommodations by English Language Proficiency Levels” section includes specific, high-quality supports for varying linguistic levels (Beginning, Intermediate, Advanced, and High), along with linguistic accommodations and samples. However, the lessons do not provide these supports. In the “Excerpts” unit, the “A Highland Reel: Irish Music and Cultural Purpose” lesson does not include ELPS support in the Student Task. The strategy does not include sufficient writing support, as students would benefit from ELPS strategies, such as additional or simplified rubrics and one- to two-sentence responses.

Evaluation for 3.3b
Materials include implementation guidance to support teachers in effectively using the materials in state-approved bilingual/ESL programs.

The materials include implementation guidance to help educators use them effectively in state-approved bilingual/ESL programs. For example, the “Support for Emergent Bilingual Students-Implementation Guidance for Bilingual and ESL Programs” section of the SDI resource provides guidelines for coordinating with ESL educators, leveraging bilingual curriculum content, using translation tools, and varying assessment types. The resources direct educators to the strategies and personnel needed to support all emergent bilingual learners in the lessons.

In the web browser settings, the materials include Google Translate compatibility, allowing students to translate content into a wide range of languages. Additionally, the materials enable students to respond to writing prompts and music text annotations in their native language as part of an ESL/ELPS plan.

Evaluation for 3.3c
Materials include embedded guidance for teachers to support emergent bilingual students in developing academic and discipline-specific vocabulary, increasing comprehension, building background knowledge, and making cross-linguistic connections through oral and written discourse.

While the “Support for Emergent Bilingual Students-Building Academic Language, Comprehension, and Background Knowledge” section of the SDI resource includes embedded guidance for emergent bilingual students through oral and written discourse, this guidance is not consistently integrated throughout the curriculum and lessons. For example, the “Developing Academic and Discipline-Specific Vocabulary” section references academic and discipline-specific vocabulary strategies (e.g., pre-teaching, multisensory methods, bilingual vocabulary walls, leveraging cognates), but the lessons do not explicitly include these strategies. In the “Excerpts” unit, the “Brook: A Color Map of Water Motion” lesson does not include the embedded bilingual strategy referenced in the “Differentiation” section (i.e., providing a vocabulary bank to help students who struggle to recall terms). The “Increasing Comprehension” section references several comprehension strategies, including chunking instructions, visual and auditory redundancy, and peer activities that support linguistic development, but the lessons do not explicitly include them. In the “Excerpts” unit, the “A Highland Reel: Irish Music and Cultural Purpose” lesson does not include emergent bilingual supports in the “Student Task” section (where students write a paragraph connecting sounds to the image of dancing) and the “Differentiation” section (where educators provide sentence stems, such as “The music is fast because . . . “ or “The repeated patterns help the dancers . . . ”). The strategy does not include sufficient writing support, as emergent bilingual students would benefit from additional or simplified expectations, such as writing one to two sentences.

Within the materials, the “Building Background Knowledge” section references strategies for building background knowledge, including drawing upon student cultural connections, prior knowledge activation, and supplemental cultural research lessons, that are not explicitly included in the lessons to support emergent bilingual learners. In the “Excerpts” unit, the “Hambone: Music Made with the Body” lesson does not include the emergent bilingual supports in the Concept Introduction, which introduces the topic, saying, “folk tradition: Define this as music passed down orally through communities, often changing slightly with each person, rather than being written down in a book.” This strategy does not provide sufficient support, as the lesson could further elaborate on students’ cultural connections or include additional cultural research components in the “Differentiation” section. The “Making Cross-Linguistic Connections Through Oral and Written Discourse” section references cross-linguistic connections, including musical terminology language connections, bilingual lyric resources, bilingual reflections, and research, that are not explicitly included in the lessons. While the “Supplemental Material 3: El Rancho Grande” lesson includes bilingual resources, it does not include language development strategies, such as allowing students who are struggling with Spanish pronunciation to sing entirely in English.

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

This guidance is not applicable because the program is not designed for dual language immersion (DLI) programs.

Evaluation for 4.1a
Materials include guidance for teachers to provide explicit (direct) instruction in discipline-specific artistic literacy in alignment with the course TEKS.

Although educator guidance is included, it does not clearly support the development of artistic literacy skills or explicitly connect instruction to the TEKS. For example, in the “Excerpts” unit, the lesson “Brook: Melody vs. Accompaniment” includes educator guidance, but the educator modeling and Concept Introduction sections lack explicit, TEKS-aligned instruction. Guidance such as highlighting the vocal line and identifying note durations (e.g., “The voice holds longer notes—quarter and half notes.”) focuses on procedural tasks rather than providing direct instruction in the discipline-specific vocabulary, concepts, and skills required by the TEKS. Additionally, the lesson does not address all components of the relevant TEKS.

In the “Excerpts” unit, the lesson “World Journey Suite – Score-Based Vocabulary Annotation” provides educator guidance but lacks explicit instruction that develops discipline-specific artistic literacy aligned with the TEKS. For example, guidance that encourages students to discuss “everything they see, not just the notes” and to review the “Big Buckets” of music words does not directly teach the artistic vocabulary, concepts, and analytical skills outlined in the TEKS. Although the lesson includes educator-directed activities, it does not clearly connect instruction to the TEKS or adequately support students’ development of discipline-specific artistic literacy.

Evaluation for 4.1b
Materials explicitly connect new discipline-specific artistic literacy to prior learning across lessons and units within the course and across courses as applicable.

The materials do not explicitly link new discipline-specific artistic literacy to prior learning across lessons and units within the course or across courses, as applicable. Although the Scope and Sequence includes sections such as “Conceptual Spiral: How Learning Connects Across the Year” and “Protocols for Unit and Lesson Internalization” that emphasize building on prior learning, the instructional materials do not consistently reflect these connections. The Scope and Sequence does not accurately reflect the connections among the course materials, even though it explicitly states that they are related and build on one another. The themed sub-units in the “Excerpts” unit overviews do not adequately connect to the spiraled concepts, and the lessons do not provide references, such as an introductory review component in a new sub-unit.


The materials also do not explicitly connect new discipline-specific artistic literacy to prior learning across courses. For example, the “Excerpts” unit overview identifies Conceptual Spiraling goals and centers instruction on four cultural and stylistic pillars: Hambone, The Brook, Sakura Echo, and A Highland Reel. However, the materials do not explicitly explain how artistic literacy developed in previous courses supports learning in this unit, nor do they show how concepts introduced in the unit build toward future learning. As a result, the materials lack a coordinated, coherent progression of discipline-specific artistic literacy across the course sequence. They also do not provide sufficient guidance and organization across units, concepts, themes, and lessons to build discipline-specific artistic literacy.

Evaluation for 4.1c
Materials consistently provide opportunities for students to develop and use discipline-specific artistic literacy vocabulary.

The materials consistently give students opportunities to use discipline-specific artistic literacy vocabulary. For example, in the “Excerpts” unit, the “World Journey Suite: Score-Based Vocabulary Annotation” lesson offers vocabulary opportunities, including self-reflection and music annotation activities (i.e., students will demonstrate comprehensive musical literacy by annotating one full section of the World Journey Suite with at least five accurate vocabulary labels). The materials support music literacy vocabulary through written discourse in activities that allow students to demonstrate their understanding of music vocabulary.

The materials do not consistently provide students with opportunities to develop discipline-specific artistic literacy vocabulary. For example, in the “Excerpts” unit, the “Brook: Analytical Listening and Musical Vocabulary” lesson lacks sufficient vocabulary opportunities, as it provides no consistent terminology support or clarification, such as “complete 5 journal entries identifying a musical event, such as a dynamic change or a texture change; write 4–5 concluding sentences.” The materials do not support students in developing music literacy vocabulary because they do not explain the terminology used in activities.

Evaluation for 4.1d
Materials include activities and tasks that require students to demonstrate understanding of discipline-specific artistic literacy in alignment with the course TEKS.

In the “Supplemental Lessons” unit, Supplemental Material 1: The Star-Spangled Banner does not include a student demonstration of literacy or connect to the assigned educational standards or the TEKS. The musical literacy activity does not align with the designated 2B standard (i.e., read, write, and reproduce extended pentatonic and diatonic melodic patterns using standard staff notation), as the music labeling and analysis activity does not address diatonic melodic patterns with appropriate terminology (i.e., highlight two large melodic leaps—where the notes jump far apart, like on “rock-ets’ red glare”). The materials lack the resources and support students need to demonstrate their musical understanding.

In the “Composition” unit, the Rhythm Composition: Syncopation Lab includes neither a student demonstration of musical literacy nor a connection to the assigned educational standards or the TEKS. The musical literacy activity does not align with the designated 1D standard (i.e., identify and label small and large musical forms, such as AB and ABA, presented aurally in simple songs and larger works). The composition activity does not address aural presentation. The materials do not include an aural identification component, such as a listening activity, and lack the necessary resources and support for students to demonstrate their musical understanding as it pertains to the 1D standard.

Evaluation for 4.2a
Materials include guidance for teachers to provide explicit (direct) instruction in discipline-specific artistic skills at developmentally appropriate levels and in alignment with the course TEKS.

In the “Excerpts” unit, the “Hambone: Mirror the Pattern” lesson lacks TEKS-aligned instruction. The materials provide educator guidance on body percussion but do not sufficiently support discipline-specific artistic skills or the 1C standard. The materials do not reference music symbols, rhythm patterns, or any explicit rhythm strategy in the rote percussion lesson.

In the “Excerpts” unit, the “A Highland Reel: Accents That Make You Dance” lesson lacks TEKS-aligned instruction and guidance for educators to support varied skill levels. For example, the body percussion performance activity does not correctly use the 1C TEKS (i.e., use known music symbols and terminology referring to . . . meter, including simple and compound . . . to explain musical sounds). The materials provide guidance for educators on body percussion. However, they do not sufficiently support discipline-specific artistic skills and the 1C standard, as the rote percussion lesson makes no explicit reference to compound (duple) meter. The materials also lack an explanation of the objective’s main learning principle, which affects students’ comprehension and development as they apply it to practice and performance.

Evaluation for 4.2b
Materials explicitly connect new discipline-specific artistic skills to prior learning across lessons and units within the course and across courses as applicable.

The materials do not explicitly connect new discipline-specific artistic skills to prior learning across lessons and units within the course. For example, in the Scope and Sequence resource, the “Rationale for Unit Order and Conceptual Connectivity Across the Course” and “Why This Unit Order Works” sections reference prior learning across units, but the materials do not do this consistently. The Scope and Sequence does not accurately indicate connections among the course materials. For example, “The Morning Parade” lesson does not reference prior units and does not consistently connect lessons.

While the “Excerpts” unit overview includes the Conceptual Spiraling goals, the lessons do not provide explicit, coordinated connections across the course materials. For example, in unit 2, the “World Journey Suite: Meter Identification and Highlighting” lesson references the TEKS for previously known skills, but the lesson guidance for students and educators does not include diagnostic assessment or connect to prior knowledge. The materials lack sufficient guidance and organization across units, concepts, themes, and lessons to build discipline-specific artistic literacy.

Evaluation for 4.2c
Materials provide opportunities for students to develop discipline-specific artistic skills through performing, exhibiting, or presenting artistic works at developmentally appropriate levels and in alignment with the course TEKS.

The “Supplemental Material 5: Performance” lesson does not include the appropriate level of musical skill for singing in rounds, which is assigned to the 3E standard (i.e., perform simple two-part music, including rhythmic and melodic ostinati, rounds, partner songs, and counter melodies). The materials do not reinforce the layered group-singing skill required for rounds, and recordings do not support the singing technique (i.e., students use headphones to practice singing along with the Flat playback). Additionally, the materials incorrectly label the lesson assignment as “Performing a Four-Part Round: Vocal Assessment.” While the lesson includes a vocal recording and self-evaluation, the materials lack the resources and support students need to demonstrate their musical understanding related to the 3E standard.

In the “Excerpts” unit, the “Brook: Performing the Melody” lesson does not provide the appropriate level of musical skill for using musical phrases, which is assigned to the 3F standard (interpret music symbols and terms referring to . . . phrasing and dynamics through performance). The materials do not reinforce musical phrases by using legato slurs or by explaining the function of slurs. Additionally, the materials do not use dynamics in the music score as referenced in the activity (“demonstrate one phrase; show how to “grow” the volume slightly toward the middle and taper at the end-dynamic shaping”). The materials lack the resources and support students need to demonstrate their musical understanding as it pertains to the 3F standard.

Evaluation for 4.2d
Materials provide opportunities for students to refine discipline-specific artistic skills through activities and tasks that progressively increase in rigor and complexity over lessons and units within the course.

The materials do not provide opportunities for students to refine discipline-specific artistic skills through activities and tasks across lessons and units within the course. For example, the Scope and Sequence resource’s “Unit 6 (Composition): Independent Musical Decision-Making” section provides a framework for introducing composition skills. However, the materials do not include opportunities for students to refine their artistic skills. The “Composition” unit consists of 10 progressive modules with varied concepts, including foundational rhythmic elements and complex formal structures. The composition unit fails to develop a specific musical element by not refining it and gradually increasing its complexity as each lesson presents a new musical aspect.

The materials do not provide opportunities for students to refine discipline-specific artistic skills through activities and tasks that progressively increase in rigor and complexity across lessons and units. For example, in the Scope and Sequence resource, the unit 1 “Etudes” overview includes a bank of lessons that do not develop skills through increasing rigor. These lessons function as score-study vehicles, with a repetitive framework of single-period, stand-alone activities. The materials do not sufficiently refine and build upon skill mastery, failing to create a true skill progression.

Evaluation for 4.2e
Materials include activities and tasks that require students to demonstrate mastery of discipline-specific artistic skills through performing, exhibiting, or presenting artistic works at developmentally appropriate levels and in alignment with the course TEKS.

In the “Etudes” unit, the “River Rondo: Full Performance” lesson lacks a performance activity that allows students to adequately demonstrate two-part singing, as referenced in the 3E standard (i.e., perform simple two-part music, including rhythmic and melodic ostinati, rounds, partner songs, and counter melodies). The learning goal focuses on independent singing along with an accompaniment (a drum ostinato) rather than on two-part music, such as a vocal duet. The materials do not sufficiently address the 3E standard and do not allow a student to demonstrate mastery of two-part music.

In the “Etudes” unit, the “A Highland Reel: Playing Fast With Clarity” lesson lacks a performance activity that allows students to adequately demonstrate their ability to play instrumental recordings at varied tempi, as referenced in the 3E standard (i.e., interpret musical symbols and terms referring to tempo through performance). The learning goal sets clear tempo-based performance criteria but does not include the appropriate language for accurate performance. The materials misrepresent the 3E standard by not requiring students to accurately demonstrate the ability to maintain tempo with a click track, including varied tempos not included in the assignment, such as slow (Largo, 60 bpm) or fast (Allegro, 120 bpm).

Evaluation for 4.3a
Materials provide opportunities for students to explore a variety of discipline-specific art forms (e.g., variety of media, variety of performance genres and styles).

The “Historical and Cultural Research Guide” section of the Scope and Sequence resource offers targeted guidance for historical and cultural studies. For example, the “Supplemental Lessons” unit connects music with history, civics, and culture. The materials support diverse art forms by incorporating multicultural perspectives on the musical content; students investigate the repertoire’s origins, languages, and historical contexts.

In the “Composition” unit, the “Cultural and Historical Style: Culture-Inspired Composition” lesson includes a culturally infused composition project that demonstrates understanding of musical style and cultural characteristics by analyzing a genre selected by the educator from American Folk, West African, or Asian Pentatonic. The student-choice composition activity supports musical learning in multicultural musical traditions by challenging students to compose in diverse musical styles.

Evaluation for 4.3b
Materials provide opportunities for students to create, adapt, or extend discipline-specific artistic works for performance, exhibition, or presentation (in line with appropriate fair use and copyright).

In the Scope and Sequence resource, the “How Educators and Administrators Can Actively Assist Families: Host a Digital Composition Showcase” section includes student composition portfolios. However, the parameters are too general and insufficient: “consider hosting a digital showcase or sending home digital links to student portfolios.” The materials do not adequately address expectations for quality, performance, or presentation for a digital showcase. Additionally, a digital composition presentation does not align with any performance TEKS standards, as the expectation for such an event is based on in-person, live music performance, such as a concert. The suggested exhibition does not meet the guidelines because the materials do not provide a sufficient, credible performance opportunity.

In the “Etudes” unit, the “River Rondo: Compose Your Own D-Section Duet” lesson does not provide a sufficient performance or presentation opportunity for the rondo music project, which has students compose a 4-measure “D Section” in 6/8 meter that stylistically matches “River Rondo.” The student-choice composition lesson does not specify whether the completed work will be used in any final showcase, portfolio, or concert. The lesson does not go beyond a typical composition activity, as it does not require students to present.

Evaluation for 4.3c
Materials include guidance for teachers on promoting student agency in making or selecting discipline-specific artistic works for study, performance, exhibition, or presentation.

In the “Etudes” unit, the “City Street Groove: Recording a 4-Measure Syncopated Phrase” lesson guides students to select their own portion of the music score to rehearse and record. The materials support student choice and agency by providing explicit guidance for completing the recording assignment.

In the “Supplemental Lessons” unit, the “Turning Founding Phrases Into Melody” lesson guides students to select a political theme or phrase from the US or Texas founding documents and set it to a short melody. The materials promote student choice and offer explicit guidance for completing the recording assignment effectively, with varied criteria for thematic content and melodic creation.

Evaluation for 5.1a
Materials include guidance for teachers to provide explicit (direct) instruction in interpreting, evaluating, and responding to discipline-specific artistic works of other artists at the level of depth and complexity required by the course TEKS.

In the “Etudes” unit, the “River Rondo: Critical Listening and Comparison” lesson does not provide sufficient instruction for analyzing contrasting musical scores that satisfy the 6E standard (evaluating a variety of compositions and formal or informal musical performances using specific criteria). The lesson does not provide the level and depth required by the standard, as 6E is intended to engage with exemplary artistic works rather than simple children’s tunes such as “River Rondo” or “Lightly Row.” The materials lack the depth and complexity required by the TEKS standard and do not provide high-quality artistic works for a score-analysis activity.

The “Supplemental Material 2: Performance” lesson does not provide sufficient instruction for evaluating musical scores, and its self-evaluation does not satisfy the 6E standard (evaluating a variety of compositions and formal or informal musical performances using specific criteria). The lesson does not allow students to evaluate musical performances of high-quality artistic works, as stipulated by the TEKS. Rather, the assignment asks students to perform an American folk classic, record their performance, and evaluate their own singing. The materials lack the depth and complexity needed for the 6E standard because they do not provide high-quality artistic works for a music performance analysis activity.

Evaluation for 5.1b
Materials emphasize the use of discipline-specific vocabulary in interpreting, evaluating, and responding to artistic works.

In the “Excerpts” unit, the “The Brook: Text Painting In Action” lesson does not emphasize appropriate music vocabulary in the text painting writing assignment. The student task flow does not accurately reference or provide the desired music vocabulary. Instead, the task flow uses general descriptors, such as “notes get faster and higher” rather than music terminology, such as tempo and ascending. The materials do not support the student’s use of music vocabulary in this score-response activity because guidance on musical terminology is inadequate, and the terminology is neither provided nor explained.

In the “Etudes” unit, the “World Journey Suite: Timbre Detective” lesson does not emphasize the appropriate music vocabulary in the instrument-timbre analysis writing assignment. The student task flow provides minimal examples of music vocabulary. These materials do not include enough instrumental information for the assignment, such as instrument names or common music vocabulary for describing timbre. The students are asked to write several paragraphs on more than 8 instruments but are not given the appropriate vocabulary to do so.

Evaluation for 5.1c
Materials provide opportunities for students to practice interpreting, evaluating, and responding to discipline-specific artistic works of other artists through activities and tasks that progressively increase in rigor and complexity over lessons and units within the course.

The “Excerpts” unit overview does not include the correlation and interpretation of musical works across lessons and units because it is organized into four independent sub-units. The unit centers on four distinct cultural and stylistic pillars—Hambone, The Brook, Sakura Echo, and A Highland Reel—to build a coherent, spiraling progression of rhythm, expression, and analytical listening across the year. The sub-units have varied lessons that focus on a single music example, which is analyzed, recorded, and performed, but they do not connect to other sub-units that use different musical components. The materials do not give students opportunities to develop a varied musical repertoire when they explore and examine only a single work in each sub-unit.

In the Scope and Sequence resource, the “End of Quarter 3 Learning Outcomes” section outlines student skills that are not consistently addressed in the student lessons, e.g., “by the end of Week 27, students demonstrate . . . listening analytically and identifying specific musical details with supporting evidence . . . describing melodic contour, phrasing, and phrase contrast using precise vocabulary.” However, the music analysis does not show increased rigor from the unit “The Brook” to the unit “Sakura Echo.” The lessons differ only in content: “The Brook” is a two-part vocal piece with multiple phrases, and “Sakura Echo” is an eight-measure pentatonic folk melody. While the lesson content changes, the materials do not progress sufficiently across lessons and units, as they do not consistently increase the rigor or musical skill required of the artistic works.

Evaluation for 5.2a
Materials include guidance for teachers to provide explicit (direct) instruction in giving and receiving feedback on discipline-specific artistic works to self and other students.

The materials include guidance for educators on providing explicit (direct) instruction in giving feedback on discipline-specific artistic works, both for themselves and for other students. For example, in the “Excerpts” unit, the “Hambone: Performance with Self Reflections” lesson includes explicit self-evaluation of the song, with individual recordings, as well as lesson extensions for peer reviews. The task flow provides clear criteria and reflection questions after students actively listen to themselves, such as “What is one thing you did really well?” “What was the hardest part?” and “What would you fix if you did it again?” The lesson also provides explicit extensions for advanced students to conduct a peer review in which they watch a partner’s video and provide feedback using the same rubric. The materials include guidance for explicit instruction in preparing students for self-evaluative and peer feedback by providing criteria and reflective questions.

The materials do not consistently guide educators in delivering explicit instruction on how to give and receive feedback on discipline-specific artistic works from other students. For example, in the “Etudes” unit, the “City Street Groove: Peer-Feedback Accuracy Challenge” lesson includes explicit peer feedback on the unit song, with recordings and peer evaluations. Educators assign a Peer Feedback Checklist that includes the following: correct pitches, steady beat, clear tone, syncopation accuracy, and notes by measure. However, the lesson does not clearly present an evaluative document with explicit guidelines beyond stating that feedback should be specific, kind, and actionable. The skills for teaching peer evaluation and feedback are not adequately developed. Additionally, the materials do not include the specific supplementary “Etude” lesson in the general course roadmap.

Evaluation for 5.2b
Materials provide opportunities for students to give feedback on discipline-specific artistic works created by other students.

The Scope and Sequence resource includes the “TEKS Alignment and Assessment Guide: Peer Feedback,” which provides clear guidance for student feedback on student-created artistic works and explains that peer feedback sessions develop evaluative listening and vocabulary application. The course units include lessons in which students provide peer feedback on student-created performance recordings, such as the peer performance evaluations in “Festival March and Trio—Small Ensemble Workshop: Live Two-Part Collaboration” and “City Street Groove: Peer-Feedback Accuracy Challenge” in the “Etudes” unit. The materials also include peer evaluation opportunities for musical works through student performances and recording-feedback activities.

In the “Etudes” unit, the “City Street Groove: Peer-Feedback Accuracy Challenge” lesson offers a peer-feedback opportunity for students to evaluate the unit song. Students deepen their evaluative listening skills by providing specific, actionable peer feedback using a structured accuracy checklist, then apply that feedback to revise and re-record a 16-measure melodic performance. The task flow includes explicit guidelines and sentence starters for students to follow in their evaluations (e.g., “The Golden Rule”: explain that feedback helps us grow; it must be specific, kind, and actionable; “Your beat slowed down in measure 6. Try using a metronome there.”). The materials also include opportunities for peer evaluations of “City Street Groove” recordings, with explicit guidelines and criteria for peers to use when providing feedback.

Evaluation for 5.2c
Materials provide opportunities for students to receive feedback on their discipline-specific artistic works from teachers and other students.

The materials give students opportunities to receive feedback on their discipline-specific artistic works from peers. For example, in the “Excerpts” unit, the “Festival March and Trio Small Ensemble Workshop: Live Two-Part Collaboration” lesson includes student feedback on ensemble playing during the rehearsal activity for the unit song, in which students demonstrate musical independence and collaboration by rehearsing and performing “Festival March and Trio” in small chamber groups of 3–5 students. The lesson focuses on rotating leadership roles during rehearsal to reinforce practice techniques and balance. For example, the leader keeps tempo and gives the count-off while the melody plays louder and the countermelody plays softer. The coach listens and gives feedback on balance. The materials include lessons that support peer evaluation by providing criteria and roles for student feedback.

The materials do not provide students with opportunities to receive feedback from educators on their discipline-specific artistic work. For example, in the “Etudes” unit, the “River Rondo: Performance Critique” lesson includes feedback in the learning goal; students record a second performance of the A Section after reviewing feedback, then complete a side-by-side comparison chart to evaluate their progress. However, the lesson focuses on feedback from student or peer evaluations, not educators. The materials do not provide sufficient opportunities for students to receive educator feedback, relying instead on student growth from self-evaluations, reflective questions, and peer feedback.

Evaluation for 5.2d
Materials include guidance for teachers to provide feedback to students to refine their discipline-specific artistic works.

In the “Etudes” unit, the “City Street Groove: Peer-Feedback Accuracy Challenge” lesson does not include refinement guidance for educators on the unit’s peer performance evaluation of the song (i.e., explaining that feedback helps us grow and must be specific, kind, and actionable). The concept introduction does not include educator feedback; instead, it models peer feedback examples, including both poor examples (“It was bad”) and strong examples (“Your beat slowed down in measure 6. Try using a metronome there”). The materials do not sufficiently prepare the educator to guide students in refining musical concepts and work. The lesson materials require the educator to supplement them with additional music development strategies.

In the “Etudes” unit, the “River Rondo: Performance Critique” lesson does not provide refinement guidance for educators in the unit song’s performance self-evaluation (i.e., have students re-read the feedback they received on their first attempt (self-evaluation or peer feedback)). The concept introduction does not include educator feedback but instead reemphasizes the objective with examples and general recommendations (i.e., explain that the second attempt isn’t just about playing it “again”—it’s about playing it better based on specific goals, such as “I need to fix the rhythm in measure 3”). Additionally, the instruction does not consistently reinforce musical skills and vocabulary, such as using specific note names and articulation terms (e.g., “Is the Tone clear and steady?”, “Are the long and short notes accurate?”, “Are the slurs smooth and staccatos crisp?”). The materials do not sufficiently enable the educator to refine music concepts and work. The educator must supplement with additional music development strategies.

Evaluation for 5.2e
Materials provide opportunities for students to engage in self-reflection or self-evaluation to refine their discipline-specific artistic works.

In the “Etudes” unit, the “Folk Song and Variations: Performance Self-Assessments” lesson includes a self-evaluation criterion to refine the performance of the unit song, in which students are directed to evaluate their own performance of the “Theme and Variations” by identifying specific strengths and areas for improvement, using appropriate musical vocabulary to articulate their critique. The educator models positive, constructive feedback using the Sandwich Method so that students can give a quality response with appropriate vocabulary (i.e., name one thing you played correctly, such as the notes or the rhythm; name one feeling you showed well, such as loud dynamics or smooth legato; name one thing you want to fix next time). The materials reinforce student self-evaluation by providing opportunities for refinement through a performance rubric and quality standards.

In the “Excerpts” unit, the “Brook: Performing The Melody” lesson includes a self-evaluation criterion to refine performance of the unit song. Students demonstrate vocal technique and expressive understanding by performing the melody of “The Brook” and then writing a reflection on their performance choices. The educator models positive, constructive feedback so students can respond effectively using appropriate vocabulary (e.g., “After recording, write 3 sentences explaining: where the melody moves by step, where you had to sustain your tone, and how you made it sound expressive”). The materials support student self-assessment by providing opportunities for improvement through a performance rubric and quality standards.

Evaluation for 6.1a
Materials include guidance for teachers to provide explicit (direct) instruction on cross-curricular connections within and across the fine arts disciplines and between fine arts and core academic subjects (e.g., literacy, math, social studies, science) as applicable.

In the “Composition” unit, the “Cross-Curricular Composition: Pattern Piece” lesson guides students in making connections within the fine arts and across core academics. The materials include a composition assignment that links music to mathematical concepts. Students explore the intersection of math and music by composing an 8- to 12-measure piece (rhythmic or melodic) that follows a strict, identifiable structural pattern, such as ABAB, AABB, or a growing pattern, demonstrating how organization creates predictability and coherence in composition. The materials provide appropriate guidance for making cross-curricular connections between the fine arts and math by linking music to mathematical elements.

In the “Supplemental Lessons” unit, the “Songs of Texas and the Nation: Listening for History, Pride, and Purpose” lesson guides educators in integrating the fine arts with core academics. The materials include a patriotic musical comparison assignment that references political and literary elements. Students compare lyrics from a United States patriotic song and a Texas song to identify shared democratic ideals, connect those ideals to excerpts from founding documents, and explain how these musical works foster patriotism and civic responsibility. The materials also provide clear guidance for integrating music by incorporating patriotic and historical elements into the fine arts.

Evaluation for 6.1b
Materials provide opportunities for students to explore cross-curricular connections within and across the various fine art disciplines and between fine arts and core academic subjects (e.g., literacy, math, social studies, science) as applicable.

In the Scope and Sequence resource, the “Historical and Cultural Research Guide” section connects the fine arts to core academics. The materials clearly link music to historical and cultural studies. The “Supplemental Lessons” unit specifically bridges music with history, civics, and culture, outlining the standardized research protocols educators use to help students investigate the origins, languages, and historical contexts of the varied repertoire. The materials provide the necessary guidance for making cross-curricular connections in the fine arts by linking music to historical elements.

In the “Etudes” unit, the “World Journey Suite: Timbre Detective” lesson connects the fine arts to the core academic subjects. The project includes an instrument-and-timbre comparison study that links music to various folk traditions. Students analyze how specific instrument choices and timbre shape cultural style by identifying instruments in the “World Journey Suite,” describing their sound quality, and explaining how they establish each section’s cultural context. The materials provide essential guidance for integrating the fine arts by incorporating historical elements through music.

Evaluation for 6.2a
Materials include guidance for teachers to provide explicit (direct) instruction on relevant discipline-specific historical and cultural context in alignment with the course TEKS.

In the “Excerpts” unit, the “A Highland Reel: Irish Music and Cultural Purpose” lesson examines Irish folk culture, in which students identify specific stylistic characteristics of Celtic folk music and write about how these musical elements serve the cultural function of Irish dance. However, the Concept Introduction references the cultural context without further exploration, stating that, in Irish culture, this style of music was built for social dancing. The materials partially align with the TEKS by identifying and introducing general concepts, such as the 5A standard. However, the lesson does not further examine the musical style as required by 5B (examine the relationships between music and events in history and culture). The materials lack TEKS-aligned guidance and student connections to the cultural musical context of Irish culture. Instead, the lesson relies on generalized introductions to Irish folk traditions without a detailed understanding of Ceili, Reels, and Jigs.

In the “Excerpts” unit, the “Hambone: Music Made with the Body” lesson includes an African American folk cultural study in which students explore the historical and cultural origins of Hambone, or “Juba,” identify it as a folk tradition born of necessity, and demonstrate understanding by performing the rhythm and explaining why the body became the primary instrument. However, the Concept Introduction solely references the cultural context without further exploration; that is, it explains that Hambone, originally “Juba,” developed among enslaved Africans in the United States when drums were forbidden by slaveholders because they could be used to communicate, and people used their bodies to keep the rhythm and tradition alive. The materials partially align with the TEKS by introducing general concepts, such as the 5A standard. However, the materials do not further examine the style (i.e., 5B examines the relationships between music and events in history and culture). The materials lack TEKS-aligned guidance and connections to the cultural context of African American music, offering only generalized introductions to folk traditions and failing to detail the significance of Juba dancing, social gatherings, and regional developments within this style.

Evaluation for 6.2b
Materials provide opportunities for students to explore a variety of discipline-specific artistic works and traditions (e.g., variety of historical and contemporary artistic works, artistic traditions from diverse cultures).

In the Scope and Sequence resource, the “Rationale for Unit Order and Conceptual Continuity” section outlines coursework that explores various styles, traditions, and concepts. The “Curriculum Overview and Unit Descriptions” section outlines the diverse unit songs that anchor the year’s music: the excerpts unit is organized around four musical excerpts of “Sakura Echo,” “Hambone,” “The Brook,” and “A Highland Reel,” each examined from multiple analytical and expressive angles. The materials provide varied opportunities for musical exploration by including artistic works from diverse cultures, styles, and periods.

The “5th Grade Supplemental Lessons” unit overview outlines the coursework, which explores various styles, traditions, and concepts. The materials offer a range of cultural and contemporary selections through supplemental lessons featuring six “Repertoire Triads” built around historical and cultural works, including “The Star-Spangled Banner,” “Home on the Range,” “El Rancho Grande,” “Dona Nobis Pacem,” “White Coral Bells,” and traditional partner songs and rounds. The unit overview offers a varied repertoire for musical exploration, including works from diverse cultures, styles, and periods.

Evaluation for 6.2c
Materials include activities and tasks that require students to demonstrate understanding of relevant discipline-specific historical and cultural context in alignment with the course TEKS.

In the “Supplemental Lessons” unit, the “Supplemental Material 3: Research and Response” lesson includes a Mexican folk music research activity on the sub-unit song in which students examine the provided score of “El Rancho Grande” and conduct safe online research to answer questions about the song’s historical origins, cultural style, and specific musical features. The cultural research includes a score analysis of the musical style and text of “El Rancho Grande,” as well as the general historical background (i.e., how knowing a song’s cultural background, such as the energetic Mariachi style, helps musicians perform it with the correct feeling and respect). The materials provide cultural and historical connections that align with the attached 5A, 5B, and 6B standards. The Mexican folk music lesson explores cultural context through a folksong analysis and research project.


In the “Supplemental Lessons” unit, the “Songs of Texas and the Nation: Listening for History, Pride, and Purpose” lesson includes a patriotic-themed music research activity within the sub-unit on songs. Students compare lyrics from a United States patriotic song and a Texas song to identify shared democratic ideals and connect them to excerpts from founding documents. The research includes a score-based analysis of the lyrics of “America the Beautiful” and “Texas, Our Texas,” linking the text to patriotic beliefs and ideals found in the constitutional preambles. Students examine the “Founding Phrases,” such as “Establish Justice,” and find a line in both the U.S. and Texas songs that matches one of those phrases. The materials provide historical and lyrical connections that align with the attached 5A, 5B, and 6E standards. This patriotic-themed lesson explores historical context through lyrical analysis and a constitutional research project.