Flat For Education – Music III (Grade 8)

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, in the Scope and Sequence resource, the “Lesson Sequence Overview” section provides a breakdown of the 82 lessons distributed across the four major units. The detailed descriptions of the content by unit and by lesson concept support the educator 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 “TEKS Integration Guide: 8th Grade Music” section does not provide explicit alignment with TEKS standards. Instead, this resource includes only a brief reference to standards. The materials do not provide educators with clear guidance on alignment with 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 “Pacing Guidance for Multiple Instructional Schedules and Calendars” section with pacing and instructional calendars for a Standard Three-Day Weekly Schedule (approximately 105 days), along with recommended adjustments. The materials also provide additional pacing and differentiation in the “Implementation Guide: Adapting Instruction for Diverse Classrooms.” 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 across rotational schedules. For example, the Scope and Sequence resource includes a “Pacing Guidance for Multiple Instructional Schedules and Calendars” section with rotational schedule guidelines, such as the Two-Day Rotational Schedule (approximately 70–80 days) and the Alternating-Day (A/B) Block Schedule. These varied rotational schedule guidelines help educators by providing flexible school schedule options.


The materials include suggested pacing to support effective implementation across instructional calendars with varying numbers of instructional days. For example, the Scope and Sequence resource includes “Pacing Guidance for Multiple Instructional Schedules and Calendars,” which covers Reduced-Calendar Models (Charters, Magnet Programs, Year-Round Variants), Extended-Year or Expanded-Period Models, and General Principles for Pacing Adjustments. These varied instructional schedules and calendars help educators plan flexible daily lesson allotments 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 includes a “Rationale for Unit Order and Conceptual Connectivity Across the Course” section that outlines four 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 explain how the concepts connect throughout the course. For example, the Scope and Sequence resource’s “Rationale for Unit Order and Conceptual Connectivity Across the Course” section outlines curriculum connections throughout the school year, focusing on sight-reading, cultural literacy, technical and artistic complexity, independence, and supplemental composition skills. The materials also provide a conceptual framework for the entire course to support the educator.

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

The materials include protocols and corresponding guidance for unit internalization. For example, the Scope and Sequence resource’s “Protocols for Unit and Lesson Internalization” section outlines six steps for unit internalization. These protocols support educators by providing parameters and strategies for implementing the curriculum.


The materials include protocols with corresponding guidance for lesson internalization. For example, the Scope and Sequence resource’s “Protocols and Guidance for Unit and Lesson Internalization” outlines seven steps for lesson protocols. The materials support educators during lesson implementation by providing appropriate internalization strategies.

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

The materials include resources for instructional leaders to support educators in implementing the materials as designed. For example, the Scope and Sequence resource includes a “Resources and Guidance for Instructional Leaders” section with rubrics, pacing calendars, performance tasks, sample responses, observation tools, and assessments embedded in the digital platform. These resources support educators by providing music-learning tools to implement the lessons.


The materials include guidance for instructional leaders to support educators in implementing the materials as designed. For example, the Scope and Sequence resource includes a “Resources and Guidance for Instructional Leaders” section that breaks down five criteria: support planning, modeling, pacing, assessment alignment, cultural integrity, and performance calibration. The 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 include comprehensive unit overviews that provide the background knowledge needed to teach the unit’s concepts effectively. For example, in the Scope and Sequence resource, the “Lesson Sequence Overview” section breaks down the 82 lessons across the four major units. The educator can prepare for the unit and course by referencing the document and using the unit overviews in the digital program.


The materials lack comprehensive unit overviews that provide the academic and discipline-specific vocabulary needed to teach the concepts effectively. For example, the unit 3 “Macumba (Senhô)” lesson overview includes a general vocabulary list that does not align with the unit’s specific focus. The materials also don’t consistently use music vocabulary and lack sufficient terminology, often resorting to general descriptors like up or down instead of the discipline-specific term melodic contour.

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 Scope and Sequence resource includes a “Family and Caregiver Guide: Engaging with the Musical Journey” section that offers guidance on connecting learning at home, including tracking student progress. 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 “Family and Caregiver Guide: Engaging Communities in Musical Growth” section does not provide Spanish-language support for families or address target-language communications through translated curriculum materials. The materials lack sufficient accessibility for English-language learners and other non-native speakers because they do not 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 “Composition” unit, the “Composition 3” lesson presents the learning goal at the start of the educator’s narrative (i.e., students will apply their understanding of musical form and ensemble texture by composing a 16-measure piece). The lesson objective reinforces the lesson’s goals by giving the educator a clear overview of the musical concepts.


The materials include comprehensive, structured, and detailed lesson plans that identify TEKS correlations. For example, in unit 4, the “Dark Cedars: Historical Research” lesson incorporates the TEKS standards at the outset of the educator’s narrative. The materials align with Texas music education standards by clearly presenting the specific TEKS alignment, thereby ensuring 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 the “Supplemental Lessons” unit, the “Health” lesson includes a range of tasks and questions throughout the modeling, concept introduction, and student task flow, prompting students to identify practical strategies for protecting their auditory health as musicians, engage in class discussion on health habits, and write a reflection on daily habits. The lesson plans reinforce student learning by breaking down varied activities across the educator and student narratives. The materials include comprehensive, structured, and detailed lesson plans with instructional assessments aligned with the lesson objectives. For example, in unit 2, the “Dressed in White: Dynamics, Expression and Articulation” lesson includes a variety of assessments, such as highlighting articulations, writing musical comments, and annotating musical scores. The materials evaluate and reinforce student learning by incorporating both formative and summative assessments throughout the lessons.

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 (e.g., equipment, supplies, technology). For example, in unit 2, the “Dressed in White: Practice Log 1” lesson overview references a log assignment that the educator must create because no template is provided. The materials present organizational and planning challenges because they do not consistently include all lesson components, and educators must navigate the platform to supplement them effectively.


In the “Supplemental Lessons” unit, the “Health Concepts 2: Written” lesson does not include all components of the hearing health concepts needed to complete the assignment. It is missing the Decibel Thermometer, a display chart for Safe Minutes, and an explanation of the Safe Listening math equation. The materials pose music health challenges for students because they do not consistently include and explain all necessary 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 unit 3, “Macumba: Pitches and Rhythm” does not include lesson timing and pacing in either the student activity or the educator narrative. The materials pose time-management challenges because they lack pacing guidance and 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).

The materials include guidance on using lesson materials effectively for extended practice. For example, in the “Supplemental Lessons” unit, the “Skill-Builder 4: The Summit’s Echo” lesson includes a Differentiation Support that provides a visual chart highlighting the differences among staccato, tenuto, and accents to help students identify them correctly in the score. The materials support all types of learners by providing consistent support strategies and accommodations for every lesson.

In unit 1, the “Llwyn On: Peer-Assessment” lesson includes a Differentiation Extension that challenges advanced students to offer a specific practice strategy to their peers. The materials support all music learners by consistently providing extensions to 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, including diagnostic assessments that vary in task/question types and skill demonstration. For example, in the Scope and Sequence resource, the “Assessment Guide: Utilizing, Adjusting, and Tracking Student Growth” section does not include diagnostic assessments across the six assignment types (i.e., Timed Sight-Reading Assessments; Score Analysis and Annotation; Practice Logs and Timeline Reflections; Rubric Generation, Self-Evaluation, and Peer Review; Historical Research and Live Recording Evaluations; Final Performance Assessments). The assessment guide relies solely on formative and summative assessments, such as recordings, evaluations, annotations, and practice logs, which 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, such as skills demonstrations. For example, in unit 2, the “Dressed in White” unit includes summative assessments across the lessons, such as performance recordings, hybrid technical/expressive practice logs, self-evaluation, and peer evaluation. These assessments support student learning and retention of the musical concepts covered in the unit.

The materials include a variety of instructional assessments at the lesson level, including formative assessments that vary in task and question types, such as skills demonstrations. For example, in unit 2, the “Dressed in White: Final Performance” lesson includes a range of formative assessments, such as grading criteria, reflection, and extension activities. The materials accurately evaluate 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.

In the Scope and Sequence resource, the “Assessment Guide: Utilizing, Adjusting, and Tracking Student Growth” section does not provide specific parameters and rubrics for successfully administering and completing the six assignment types, which include Timed Sight-Reading Assessments; Score Analysis and Annotation; Practice Logs and Timeline Reflections; Rubric Generation, Self-Evaluation, and Peer Review; Historical Research and Live Recording Evaluations; and Final Performance Assessments. The materials do not define assessment types (i.e., diagnostic, formative, summative) and do not include clear scoring targets, such as performance tasks and self-checks.


In the Scope and Sequence resource, the Universal Music Education Rubric clearly defines targets for scoring composition assessments and evaluating skill mastery. However, the rubric is general and does not explicitly align with any specific lesson. In unit 1, the “Llywn On: Final Performance” lesson includes final-performance recording criteria, under which students record their song and complete a self-reflection. This evaluation does not provide adequate guidance for an educator to assess students’ work using the rubric.

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

The “Professional Learning Resources for Leaders” section of the Scope and Sequence resource lacks clear guidance on the various assessment types. The materials include rubric categories and scoring expectations based on the Universal Music Education Assessment Rubric. However, the materials do not provide educators with directions for administering the assessments and analyzing the data.


In unit 4, the “Dark Cedars: Sight Read” lesson lacks educator guidance for analyzing the student self-reflection and the performance rubric. The materials do not sufficiently support students and educators with specific, skill-based evaluation beyond the Universal Music Education Assessment Rubric, which is intended for use across all aspects of recording, evaluation, annotation, and other assessments.

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 course TEKS or course or unit objectives. For example, in the Scope and Sequence resource, the “TEKS Integration Guide: 8th Grade Music” section does 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 allow the educator to administer any type of summative unit assessment to demonstrate mastery of the skills.


The materials do not include formative assessments aligned with the TEKS or the course and lesson objectives. For example, in unit 1, the “LLwyn On: Sight-Read” lesson lacks a rubric with clear TEKS targets for scoring formative assessments or for assessing mastery of the vocal performance objective. Instructions say, “Record one full pass from start to finish.” The materials do not align with the required educational standards for the lessons and do not allow the educator to conduct formative assessments of vocal performance adequately.

The materials do not include diagnostic assessments aligned with the TEKS or the course and lesson objectives. For example, in unit 1, the “LLwyn On: Sight-Read” lesson lacks clear TEKS targets for diagnostic assessments that pre-assess vocal performance. The materials mention students should highlight the most important technical elements for the final grade: accurate pitch, steady rhythm, clear articulation, and good breath support. The materials do not align with the required educational standards for the lessons and do not enable the educator to assess vocal performance adequately.

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 unit 4, the “Dark Cedars: Sight-Read” lesson includes a variety of assessments, such as sight-reading guided practice and performance recordings. These varied assessment formats give students differentiated activities and evaluations that provide feedback to guide instruction.

In unit 2, the “Dressed in White: Final Performance” lesson does not include varied assessment levels because it uses the same rubric type and score (i.e., the Universal Music Education Assessment Rubric). The materials do not include specific criteria and administrative guidance intended for use across all aspects of recording, evaluation, annotation, and other assessments. As a result, the educator cannot assess students at varying levels.

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, the Scope and Sequence resource includes a detailed scoring rubric in the “Assessment Guide: Utilizing, Adjusting, and Tracking Student Growth” section for evaluating performance (i.e., the Universal Music Education Rubric). 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 unit 2, the “Dressed in White: Sight-Read” lesson references a general assessment rubric (i.e., the Universal Music Education Rubric). However, the rubric does not clearly address the guidance and criteria for interpreting instructional assessments and student performance data. The materials do not provide the educator with the guidance needed to use the data correctly and therefore cannot be used 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 limited in success without targeted remediation.

The Specially Designed Instruction (SDI) resource includes the “Refining Instruction: Adjusting SDI Based on Data” section, which features data analysis tools and resources. However, the materials do not include the tools and resources needed to manipulate the data. The “Dressed in White” unit includes independent formative and summative assessments, but the materials lack specific activities and tasks that educators can use to respond to trends in student performance; in this lesson, students design their own performance rubrics, performance and hybrid technical/expressive practice logs, and self- and peer-evaluations. The unit does not provide adequate strategies throughout the lessons 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 materials include tools to help students track their own progress and growth. For example, in unit 2, the “Dressed in White” lesson includes resources to help students track their progress. The student resources adequately support students in tracking their own progress through practice logs, goal-setting, reflection sheets, and self-evaluation rubrics.

The materials include tools that help educators track student progress and growth. For example, the SDI resource includes a “Tracking Growth: Progress Monitoring with Flat for Education” section with data analysis tools and resources for manipulating data (e.g., spreadsheets, grade export, data growth, and progress). The materials support educators in interpreting and using 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 unit 2, the “Dressed in White: Peer Evaluation” lesson includes a “Differentiation” section with clear support guidance, such as a comment bank with prescribed feedback phrases like “Good use of dynamics” and “Try to smooth out the phrase”. The writing and student feedback prescriptions enable the educator to differentiate instruction and support students who struggle with the writing objectives.

In unit 1, the “Llwyn On: Dynamics, Expression, and Articulation” lesson includes a “Differentiation” section with clear guidance and support, including a glossary of unfamiliar vocabulary. These vocabulary and symbol accommodations enable the educator to differentiate instruction and support students who need language and reading supports to master the music objectives.

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 in text (e.g., academic and discipline-specific language). For example, in unit 3, the “Macumba: Historical Research” lesson includes embedded vocabulary supports such as definitions of new terms in the “Classroom Procedure: Vocabulary Check” section. The vocabulary check supports the educator in differentiating instruction for students who need assistance with new vocabulary or struggle with specific vocabulary comprehension skills.

The materials do not consistently include pre-teaching or embedded supports for unfamiliar references in the text (e.g., figurative language, idioms). For example, in the “Supplemental Lessons” unit, the “Text Responses National Ideals Through American Patriotic Songs” lesson lacks consistent textual supports. It requires students to use research techniques without any links for reference or guidance; students are merely instructed to use the internet to learn about Iroquois history and how Indigenous music is played today. The materials do not provide the tools and resources students need if they struggle with research methods.

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 unit 4, the “Dark Cedars: Dynamics, Expression, and Articulation” lesson includes a Differentiation: Extension that guides students to use notation-highlighting tools for additional music analysis (e.g., “Use the Green tool to mark sub-phrases that are not written in the score but are stylistically appropriate.”). These extensions challenge students by promoting higher-level music analysis and advanced score annotation, and by prompting them to interpret performance practices.



In unit 2, the “Dressed in White: Historical” lesson includes a Differentiation: Extension that introduces students to advanced music history research methods, prompting them to find a folk song from a different culture that has undergone a similar modern transformation and to compare the two. The music history connection and the compare-and-contrast extensions promote advanced research methods for music students that will benefit them in a variety of academic fields.

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, the “Three Dimensions of SDI in Music Instruction” section of the SDI resource offers guidance on supportive services, categorized by differentiation in content, methodology, and instructional delivery. The SDI resource also includes recommendations for lessons that support alignment with students’ individualized education plans (IEPs) through the use of resource educators and members of special education teams. The materials provide educators with resources and recommendations to align instruction with the needs of students who may require specific accommodations.

The “Lesson Walkthrough: Sight-Read Llwyn On” sample lesson in the SDI resource provides guidance on supportive services, with a sample student receiving accommodations at multiple levels. Later in the sample lesson, the “Case Study: Designing SDI for Daniela” section includes exemplars for educators and instructional leaders that reference the student’s IEP. The SDI and overall program benefit 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 unit 2, the “Dressed in White: Dynamics, Expression, and Articulation” lesson includes direct language for modeling musical expression and annotation in the “Class Procedure: Model” section. The procedures provide educators with explicit instructions and prompts, guiding them to mark it with colors and add one interpretive text note, such as “Grow louder here to show excitement.”


In the “Supplemental Lessons” unit, the “Skill-Builder 4: The Summit’s Echo” lesson provides guidance for educators and classroom procedures. Educators are directed to explain that “The Summit’s Echo” is an expressive solo etude and that students must “carry the room” without accompaniment, making every nuance visible and audible. The lesson plan offers step-by-step guidance that supports the educator’s task flow and highlights content-specific references and terms.

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

The “Classroom Strategies That Strengthen Access for All” section of the SDI resource includes a variety of instructional approaches within the implementation cycle, such as score display, color highlighting, modeling annotation, independent practice, and class review. These approaches are outlined in the “Multi-Sensory Notation: Learning Through Annotation” section. However, the materials do not consistently provide this information across lessons. In Unit 1, the “Llwyn On: Pitches and Rhythms” lesson begins with whole-group instruction, followed by individual work annotating a score and answering a written question. The lesson does not incorporate small-group instruction, think-pair-share, kinesthetic movements, or other activities to support all types of learners.

In the “Supplemental Lessons” unit, the “Supplemental Sight-Reading 2” lesson lacks a consistent variety of instructional approaches. The lesson includes music analysis, cross-curricular connections, and kinesthetic musical movement in the “Classroom Procedure: Contour Mapping” section. However, it does not incorporate small-group instruction, think-pair-share, kinesthetic movements, or other activities to support all types of learners.

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 support multiple types of practice (e.g., guided, independent, collaborative) during lessons. For example, in unit 3, the “Macumba: Dynamics, Expression and Articulation” lesson includes guided practice for annotation and independent notation work in the “Classroom Procedure: Guided Practice and Independent Annotation” section. Individual and group collaboration in music activities helps students learn through a variety of activities and at different musical levels.


The materials consistently include guidance for educators and recommended structures (e.g., whole-group, small-group, individual) to support effective implementation. For example, in the “Supplemental Lessons” unit, the “Self-Governance, Leadership, and Free Enterprise Through Ensemble Decision-Making” lesson includes educator guidance on interpreting small-group scores, reflections, role assignments, and recording the project in the “Classroom Procedures: Group Work” section. The various small-group assignments promote engagement and role differentiation, benefiting learners of all types.

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 “Support for Emergent Bilingual Students” section of the SDI resource offers specific, high-quality supports for discipline-specific musical language acquisition, embedded within the lessons’ multisensory framework to support linguistic goals. However, the materials do not consistently embed these supports in the lessons. In Unit 1, the “Llwyn On: Historical Research” lesson does not include an embedded ELPS strategy in the independent research activity within the “Differentiation: Support” section, where educators are prompted to provide a curated list of 2–3 reading-level-appropriate websites so students do not have to search the open web. The lesson also lacks cross-curricular resources, links, or information on the history of Welsh folk music, and it does not provide language support for historical research or sentence stems to guide the student task flow.

The “Support for Emergent Bilingual Students-Linguistic: Accommodations by English Language Proficiency Levels” section of the SDI resource provides specific, high-quality supports for the varying linguistic levels (Beginning, Intermediate, Advanced, High), including linguistic accommodations and teaching samples. However, the lessons do not embed these supports. For example, in Unit 2, the “Dressed in White: Dynamics, Expression and Articulation” lesson does not include the ELPS supports in the independent annotation activity within the “Student Task Flow: Interpret” section, where students are prompted to add a text note on each line of music explaining why the expression matters. In the lesson’s Differentiation: Support, students receive a word bank of emotion words to help them write their interpretive notes. These strategies do not provide sufficient language support, as students with linguistic accommodations would benefit from additional or simplified rubrics, such as further chunking the discussion or adapting the instructions.

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

The “Support for Emergent Bilingual Students: Implementation Guidance for State-Approved 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 emergent bilingual students.

In the web browser settings, the materials support Google Translate, allowing students to translate into many languages. With this support, students may respond to writing prompts and annotate music texts 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.

The SDI resource includes the “Support for Emergent Bilingual Students-Building Academic Language, Comprehension, and Background Knowledge” section, which embeds guidance for emergent bilingual students through oral and written discourse. However, this guidance is not consistently embedded across the Flat platform. For example, the “Developing Discipline-Specific Vocabulary” section references academic and discipline-specific vocabulary strategies, including pre-teaching, multisensory methods, bilingual vocabulary walls, and leveraging cognates, but the lessons do not explicitly include them. In unit 1, the “LLwyn On: Historical Research” lesson does not embed a bilingual strategy in the independent research activity within the “Differentiation: Support” section, which directs the educator to curate a list of 2–3 specific, reading-level-appropriate websites so students do not have to search the open web. The lesson also lacks cross-curricular resources, links, or information on the history of Welsh folk music, and it does not provide language support for historical research or sentence stems to guide the student task flow. The materials contain inconsistencies in the “Increasing Comprehension” section, which references comprehension strategies not explicitly included in the lessons, such as chunking instructions, visual and auditory redundancy, and peer activities that support linguistic development. In unit 2, the “Dressed in White: Dynamics, Expression and Articulation” lesson does not include bilingual emergent supports in the independent annotation activity within the “Student Task Flow: Interpret” section (in which students are directed to add a text note on each line of music explaining why the expression matters, such as “This slur makes the melody feel gentle”) or in the word bank in the Differentiation: Support, which guides educators to provide a bank of emotion words to help students write their interpretive notes. These strategies do not provide sufficient language support, as emergent bilingual students would benefit from additional or simplified rubrics, such as further chunking the discussion or adapting the instructions.

The “Building Background Knowledge” section references strategies for building background knowledge that are not explicitly included in the lessons, such as student cultural connections, prior knowledge activation, and supplemental cultural research lessons. In the “Composition” unit, the “Composition 1” lesson does not include the bilingual emergent supports in the independent composition activity in the “Classroom Procedure: Explain” section (where students are introduced to the theme-and-variations form) or in the Differentiation: Support, which directs educators to provide a prewritten theme so the student only needs to focus on creating the variations. These strategies do not provide sufficient background knowledge support, as the lesson could prompt students to discuss and explain the new terminology and draw on diverse examples of theme and variation in their cultures. Additionally, the “Making Cross-Linguistic Connections Through Oral and Written Discourse” section references cross-linguistic connections (i.e., musical terminology language connections, bilingual lyric resources, and bilingual reflections and research) that the lessons do not explicitly include. In the “Supplemental Lessons” unit, the “Skill-Builder 2: The Bronze Horizon” lesson does not include sufficient language-development strategies in the independent annotation activity; the “Classroom Procedures: Write” section asks students to explain how to balance a homophonic trio and to define stylistic terms. Additionally, the writing assignment requires students to respond to the new terms homophonic trio and moderato cantabile, which they must also include in their reflections. The support section does not include musical terminology, language connections, or other bilingual strategies that would meet an emergent bilingual student’s needs.

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.

In unit 3, the “Macunda: Pitches and Rhythms” lesson lacks TEKS-aligned instruction and educator guidance. For example, in the educator modeling and concept introduction sections, the educator is expected to explain that a phrase is like a “musical sentence” and to demonstrate rising and falling contours on the board. The materials provide educator guidance but do not sufficiently support discipline-specific artistic literacy or clearly connect to the attached TEKS. Additionally, the lesson does not address all the TEKS components.


In the “Supplemental Lessons” unit, the “Skill-Builder 1: The Sforzando Sprint” lesson lacks TEKS-aligned instruction and educator guidance, including in the educator modeling and concept introduction sections, where the educator explains that “The Sforzando Sprint” is written in ABA ternary form. The materials provide educator guidance but do not sufficiently support discipline-specific artistic literacy or clearly connect to the attached TEKS.

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 Scope and Sequence resource’s “Rationale for Unit Order and Conceptual Connections Across the Course” and “Conceptual Connections Across the Year” sections reference prior learning across the course. However, the materials do not do so consistently. The Scope and Sequence resource fails to accurately reflect the connections among the course materials, including “Llwyn On” and “Dressed in White,” as explicitly stated. The four-course unit overviews do not sufficiently connect or align with spiraled concepts because they do not reference the introductory review component at the start of each new unit.

In the “Scope and Sequence” resource, the “Rationale for Unit Order and Conceptual Connections Across the Course” section does not include explicit connections among the other courses. For example, the materials state, “The unit order is intentionally designed to guide students from fundamental technical skills toward advanced expressive interpretation and culturally informed musicianship.” The materials provide limited guidance and organization across courses, and, as a result, inhibit the development of rigorous discipline-specific artistic literacy, including the reintroduction of grade 7 concepts.

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

In unit 1, the “Macumba (Senhô): Historical Research” lesson includes vocabulary opportunities, as students research musical features of Macumba-related and Afro-Brazilian music, “explaining how those features carry cultural meaning and foster community identity using specific musical vocabulary.” In the Vocabulary Check, students “Quickly define key terms such as Polyrhythm, Call-and-Response, Percussion Ensemble, Groove.” The materials support music literacy vocabulary through oral discussion and supporting vocabulary banks that enable students to demonstrate their understanding of music vocabulary.

In unit 2, the “Dressed in White: Peer Evaluation” lesson lacks sufficient vocabulary opportunities and offers no consistent terminology support or clarification. The materials do not provide appropriate music literacy vocabulary, as the criteria are overly general and do not allow students to elaborate on specific music terms. The materials do not embed correct musical literacy, such as references to legato phrases, piano, forte, minor, major, or other essential terminology; instead, they prompt students with general, informal terms like smooth lines, loud, and soft.

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 unit 4, the “Dark Cedars: Pitches and Rhythms” lesson does not include a student demonstration of literacy, nor does it connect to the assigned educational standards or the TEKS. The sight-reading activity does not align with the designated 3A standard, which states, “demonstrate, alone and in groups, characteristic vocal or instrumental timbre. “The lesson primarily focuses on vocal techniques: humming, singing on a neutral syllable, and using breath support for musical phrasing. The materials do not properly reference the mallet percussion sight-reading activity. The materials lack the resources and support students need to demonstrate their musical understanding, as the lesson clearly uses a vocal timbre strategy in a percussion ensemble activity.

In unit 4, the “Dark Cedars: Peer Assessment” lesson does not include a student demonstration of literacy or connect to the assigned educational standards or TEKS. The musical literacy activity does not align with the designated 5E standard, “Evaluate the quality and effectiveness of musical performances by comparing them to exemplary models and offer constructive suggestions for improvement.” The lesson does not address listening to exemplary models; instead, it focuses on evaluating peer performances. The materials lack the resources and support students need to demonstrate their musical understanding aligned with the 5E 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 unit 2, the “Dressed in White: Peer Evaluation” lesson lacks TEKS-aligned instruction and educator guidance for varied skill levels, particularly in the peer performance recording activity, which is intended to meet the 5E standard that requires students to “evaluate the quality and effectiveness of musical performances by comparing them to exemplary models and offer constructive suggestions for improvement.” The materials do not reinforce the active listening and music evaluation skills required for the peer performance evaluation. They also do not provide exemplary models; instead, they ask students to review another student’s performance. The materials lack the resources and support students need to demonstrate their musical understanding as it pertains to the 5E standard, which is not intended for peer evaluations. The materials lack the music-reading skills and strategies students need to develop the appropriate musical skills for the assigned instrumental piece.

In unit 4, the “Dark Cedars: Sight Read” lesson does not include TEKS-aligned instruction or educator guidance for varied skill levels. For example, the sight-reading activity does not align with the designated 3A standard, which states that students “demonstrate, alone and in groups, characteristic vocal or instrumental timbre.” The lesson primarily focuses on solfege singing techniques and does not correctly reference the percussion instrumental sight-reading activity. The materials lack the resources and support students need to demonstrate their musical understanding in a percussion sight-reading ensemble activity.

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 Connections Across the Course” and “Conceptual Connections Across the Year” sections reference prior learning across the courses. However, the materials do not do this consistently. In the “Composition” unit, the “Composition 4” lesson does not provide intentional opportunities for students to refine skills such as reviewing bar form or providing musical examples that connect ABA and rondo forms. The lesson asks students to apply their understanding of rondo form by composing a 16–20-measure piece for a full ensemble, but the materials do not provide the depth of compositional skill needed to adequately prepare and develop the skills required to compose to that extent. The materials do not adequately develop compositional skills and expectations because they fail to reinforce prior learning, scaffold musical concepts, and review previously learned compositional techniques from the course.

The materials do not explicitly connect new discipline-specific artistic skills to prior learning across courses. For example, the “Dark Cedars” mallet percussion unit does not include any prior knowledge or techniques for percussion units. In unit 4, the “Dark Cedars: Sight Read” lesson provides no technical knowledge, and the learning goal does not reference percussion. Instead, it immediately moves into a formative assessment requiring students to demonstrate complete musicianship in a timed sight-reading of “Dark Cedars.” The materials do not prepare students for an introductory percussion performance evaluation because they offer no prior or new technical knowledge of the marimba or glockenspiel.

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 materials do not provide students with opportunities to develop discipline-specific artistic skills. In the grade 8 general music program, lessons on percussion ensembles and performance are included; however, students do not practice discipline-specific skills such as proper mallet technique, finding notes on barred instruments, and using a metronome to maintain rhythmic precision. Students do not rehearse in instrument-specific circles to align technique. In “Dark Cedars: Final Performance,” students must accurately perform the rehearsed music. Educators are not provided with activities to help students master essential techniques for independent and expressive performances. Consequently, students engage with music but do not participate in activities that develop musical skills through performing, exhibiting, or presenting artistic works at developmentally appropriate levels and in alignment with the course TEKS.

In the “Supplemental Lessons” unit, the “Skill-Builder 2: Performance” lesson does not include the instrumental technique level required by the 3C standard, which asks students to “perform independently with accurate intonation, demonstrating appropriate small-ensemble performance techniques in known keys.” The materials do not reinforce or support particular instrumental strategies, as the score presents a trio with insufficient intonation guidance. For example, materials simply prompt the educator to tell students, “Make sure you are playing the slur in measures 7 and 8 smoothly without tonguing.” The lesson distinguishes the woodwind family only by tonguing technique and does not associate it with the other instrumental families. Additionally, the lesson includes misleading guidance on intonation for the “middle voice,” which is more applicable in a vocal setting than in this instrumental one. Additionally, the materials present the instruments in a fixed, pre-set tuning, with instructors using “Part 1 (root), Part 2 (3rd), and Part 2 (5th/root)” and “sustain the opening Bb Major triad.” The lesson incorrectly uses vocal pedagogy and skills in a trumpet sight-reading activity. The materials lack the resources and support students need to demonstrate their ensemble skills.

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.

In the Scope and Sequence resource, the “Rationale for Unit Order and Conceptual Connections Across the Course” and “Conceptual Connections Across the Year” sections describe how musical skills are refined across units. However, the materials do not do so consistently throughout the course. In unit 2, the “Llwyn On: Practice Log 2” lesson does not support the development of musical technique, such as targeted articulation goals (i.e., focus on musicality—crescendo, decrescendo, accent, staccato). The guided practice does not include the crucial educator feedback component of the performance practice framework, as students have only self-evaluation criteria (i.e., perform “Llwyn On” expressively and score yourself using your expressive rubric; focus on how the music feels, not just the notes). The guided practice activities in this lesson, as well as throughout the units, do not provide a suitable performance-log structure, focusing only on formative performance assessment rather than educator-guided musical refinement.

The four units do not develop skills by increasing rigor, and they function as stand-alone units that focus on entirely different instrument groups. For example, unit 1 focuses on the recorder, unit 2 on a marimba percussion trio, unit 3 on a guitar-and-bass ensemble, and unit 4 on mixed percussion. The activities and tasks promote musical skill development. However, the materials do not demonstrate consistent progress and refinement in these skills because the quarterly instrument rotation hinders them. The materials do not include a coherent progression of competencies.

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 unit 3, the “LLwyn On: Final Performance” lesson lacks a performance-skills assessment that adequately demonstrates the solo recorder skills referenced in the 3C standard, “perform independently and expressively, with accurate intonation and rhythm, developing fundamental skills.” The learning goal includes the recorder melody and piano accompaniment score but omits identifiable articulations, phrases, or breath marks/lifts. For the Review, students “highlight the most important technical elements for the final grade: accurate pitch, steady rhythm, clear articulation, and good breath support.” The materials do not sufficiently address music strategies needed for the final performance review and do not provide appropriate instrumental strategies to demonstrate mastery of accurate intonation, fundamental expressive skills, and ensemble performance.


In unit 4, the “Dark Cedars: Final Performance” lesson does not include a performance skills assessment that adequately demonstrates the percussion instrumental skills referenced in the 3C standard, “perform independently and expressively, with accurate intonation and rhythm, developing fundamental skills.” The materials include the mixed percussion score but do not include identifiable articulations and phrases. Students “think about what has improved most this unit (Tone? Rhythm? Confidence?).” The lesson does not align with the standard. The materials do not enable the student to demonstrate mastery of accurate intonation, fundamental expressive skills, and ensemble performance.

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 Scope and Sequence resource’s “Research Guide: Cultivating Cultural Literacy and Contextual Understanding” section provides specific guidance for historical and cultural studies (i.e., students do not simply play the right notes but actively relate music to history, culture, and the world). The materials support diverse art forms by incorporating multicultural perspectives on musical content; student research bridges music and other academic disciplines, including history, civics, and the free enterprise system.


In unit 3, the “Macumba (Senhô): Historical Research” lesson features a culturally infused research project in which students investigate the musical features—rhythms, instruments, textures—of Macumba-related and Afro-Brazilian music. This research activity supports learning about multicultural musical traditions by challenging students to explore and write about 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).

The materials do not give students opportunities to perform, exhibit, or present discipline-specific artistic works. In the “Supplemental Lessons” unit, the “Cross-Curricular 1” activity provides students an opportunity to compose “a 16-measure musical ‘soundtrack’ that musically represents the emotion and energy of a specific historical event.” However, the lesson does not provide sufficient opportunities to perform or present the historical reflection and music activity. The political-themed project includes criteria for social studies topics and a music form in the composition. Students write their piece, write a paragraph connecting the history to their music, and submit the score and the paragraph on the online platform. The lesson does not extend cross-curricular music composition and writing into any form of performance or presentation, as it requires only a digital submission and reflection.

In the “Composition” unit, the “Composition 4” lesson does not provide sufficient opportunities to perform or present a rondo-form composition. Students “apply their understanding of Rondo form by composing a 16–20-measure piece for a full ensemble.” However, the lesson includes no performance extensions, as it provides only criteria and techniques for applying rondo form to a large ensemble. The lesson lacks additional criteria beyond the composition activity, as it does not require the student or class to perform the student-created rondo piece.

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 “Supplemental Lessons” unit, the “Self-Governance, Leadership, and Free Enterprise Through Ensemble Decision-Making” lesson guides students to select their own role, a historical excerpt, and a melodic composition for the collaborative composition. It directs students to model self-governance and shared responsibility by working in small musical ensembles to make independent interpretive decisions. The materials support independent and collaborative student choice by providing explicit guidance on selecting group roles (e.g., facilitator or recorder), interpreting the musical excerpt, and deciding on phrasing and expression.

In the “Supplemental Lessons” unit, the “Health Concepts” lesson provides educator guidance to help students explore health and performance practice techniques through a composition assignment in which they apply their understanding of health and wellness concepts by composing an 8–12-measure melody that symbolically represents a chosen topic. The materials support students’ understanding of health concepts and creative decision-making by guiding them to compose music based on wellness principles.

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 unit 3, the “Macumba (Senhô): Peer Evaluation” lesson does not provide sufficient instruction for evaluating recorded performances in the peer-evaluation activity, in which students analyze a peer’s performance of Macumba by examining authentic Brazilian samba-style elements and offering constructive feedback. The provided criteria reference a student-made rubric that emphasizes constructive feedback and requires students to answer the five peer-review questions in the assignment. The lesson does not sufficiently align with the 5E standard (i.e., evaluate the quality and effectiveness of musical performances by comparing them to exemplary models and offer constructive suggestions for improvement), because the standard intends students to evaluate professional, exemplar recordings rather than those of student peers. The materials lack the depth and complexity required by the TEKS standard. The lessons do not use high-quality artistic works for the listening and written evaluation activity.


In the “Supplemental Lessons” unit, the “Self-Governance, Leadership, and Free Enterprise Through Ensemble Decision-Making” lesson does not provide sufficient instruction on interpreting a historical-themed group activity, and does not reference artistic music work; instead, it directs students to work in small musical ensembles to make independent interpretive decisions that reflect the collaborative principles found in the U.S. and Texas Constitutions. The lesson does not align with the 5E standard (i.e., evaluate the quality and effectiveness of musical performances by comparing them to exemplary models and offer constructive suggestions for improvement), as the standard intends professional, exemplar music rather than historical documents as the primary reference. The materials do not meet the depth and complexity requirements established by the TEKS standard because they do not incorporate high-quality artistic works within the political-themed composition activity.

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

In unit 1, the “Llwyn On: Dynamics, Expression and Articulation” lesson does not emphasize the appropriate music vocabulary for the score analysis assignment, which focuses on the unit song’s musical articulations. Students locate and identify all expressive markings in the score using a specific color-coded system. The student task flow and writing assignment do not connect to the musical vocabulary referenced in the task flow, as the unit song contains no articulation or dynamics. Students are asked to add a text comment to at least five markings and explain exactly what each symbol tells the performer to do. Additionally, the lesson does not include explicit musical symbols and instead relies on general references. Students use the highlighter tool to mark red for dynamics/volume, blue for articulation, green for phrase or breath marks, and yellow for expressive symbols. The materials do not support the student’s use of music vocabulary in this score-response activity because they provide inadequate guidance on musical terminology, which is neither provided nor explained.

In unit 2, the “Dressed in White: Dynamics, Expression and Articulation” lesson does not emphasize the appropriate musical vocabulary for the score analysis assignment, which focuses on the unit song’s musical articulations. Students analyze how expressive markings shape the emotional character of “Dressed in White” by annotating the score with a specific color-coding system and writing interpretive notes; however, the markings mentioned do not exist in the score. Only general references provide direction: use yellow for “Crescendo/ Decrescendo and dynamic changes.” The student’s task flow and writing assignment do not align with the musical vocabulary mentioned, as the materials do not support the student’s use of music vocabulary in this score-response activity because the musical terminology is neither provided nor explained.

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 “Supplemental Lessons” unit overview does not explain how musical works connect across lessons and units. Instead, these lessons and units are compiled into a mixed musical collection featuring various sub-units (i.e., the unit provides flexible, integrative lessons designed to reinforce musicianship and broaden students’ understanding of music in interdisciplinary, technological, health-related, and civics contexts; embedded across the year to reinforce skill development, provide instructional variety, and address student needs in real time). Each sub-unit’s lessons focus on a specific music sample or composition assignment that students analyze, record, and perform. However, the lessons do not connect music skills across the sub-units. The materials do not give students opportunities to develop a varied musical repertoire because they focus on only one work for exploration and analysis.

In the “Scope and Sequence” resource, the “TEKS Integration Guide: 8th Grade Music-KSS 5: Critical Evaluation and Response” section does not include the development of rigor and correlation of music skills under the evaluation and response thread. Students “design their own comprehensive performance rubrics.” They also apply their self-generated criteria by listening to their own recordings during self-evaluations. During peer evaluation lessons, students “listen to classmate recordings and practice offering balanced, constructive feedback using precise musical vocabulary.” However, the music evaluation component does not increase in rigor across the units, nor does it sufficiently advance evaluative rigor across tasks and activities. The materials lack a comprehensive repertoire of artistic works beyond individual and ensemble recordings.

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 to themselves and to other students. For example, in unit 1, the “Llwyn On: Self-Assessment” lesson includes explicit self-evaluation of the unit song using individual recordings. Students practice performing “Llwyn On,” record their best attempt, and use their self-created rubric to evaluate their pitch accuracy, rhythm, tone, and overall performance control. The task flow references the student-created rubric from the previous lesson, “Llwyn On: Rubric Generation.” Students use their rubric to score each category (pitch, rhythm, tone, etc.) and write 3–5 sentences explaining their reasoning. The unit provides further detail on peer feedback in the “Llwyn On: Peer-Feedback” lesson. The materials also include guidance on explicit instruction to prepare students for self-evaluative feedback, including criteria and reflective questions.

The materials do not consistently guide educators on how to help students receive feedback on discipline-specific artistic works from other students. For example, in unit 3, the “Macumba (Senhô): Peer Feedback” lesson includes explicit peer feedback on the unit song, with peer recordings and evaluations (i.e., students will evaluate a peer’s performance of “Macumba (Senhô)” by analyzing authentic Brazilian samba-style elements—including groove, syncopation, feel, articulation, and cultural awareness—and providing constructive feedback via a rubric and written questionnaire). However, the lesson does not explain how to receive feedback. Without this guidance, the educator cannot expand further, since the feedback is intended only to provide it. The materials do not sufficiently prepare the educator to guide students in receiving feedback without a clear evaluative document with explicit guidelines.

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

The materials give students opportunities to provide feedback on discipline-specific artistic works created by other students. For example, in unit 3, the “Macumba (Senhô): Peer Evaluation” lesson offers opportunities for peer feedback on students’ evaluations of the unit song. Students evaluate a peer’s performance of “Macumba (Senhô)” by analyzing authentic Brazilian samba-style elements and providing constructive feedback via a rubric and a written questionnaire. The task flow includes explicit guidelines and sentence starters to support students in their evaluation, including scoring each rubric category and answering five peer-review questions. The materials also include opportunities for peer evaluations of “Macumba (Senhô)” recordings, with explicit guidelines and criteria for peers to use when providing feedback.

In unit 2, the “Dark Cedars: Peer Evaluation” lesson offers opportunities for peer feedback on students’ performance evaluations of the unit song. Students evaluate a peer’s performance of “Dark Cedars” using their self-generated rubric. The task flow includes explicit guidelines and sentence starters to help students structure their evaluations, with prompts to comment on what they enjoyed about the performance, suggest improvements, or highlight what the performer did particularly well. The materials also include opportunities for peer evaluations of “Dark Cedars” recordings, with clear 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 discipline-specific feedback on their artistic work from peers. For example, in unit 1, the “Llwyn On: Peer Assessment” lesson includes student feedback in the peer evaluation activity for the unit song. Students listen to a classmate’s recording or live performance and evaluate it using a previously created rubric, demonstrating the ability to provide specific, constructive, and respectful feedback. The lesson focuses on active listening and written feedback based on the self-assessment rubric from the previous unit; students score each category based on performance and write a short comment for each score. The materials include lessons that provide peer evaluation by including criteria 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 unit 1, the “Llwyn On: Practice Log 1” lesson does not include educator feedback in the student practice log and reflection activity, in which students complete a focused practice log emphasizing technical improvement in “Llwyn On,” record a performance, and write a brief reflection analyzing their practice process. The practice log is the 14th course lesson and does not emphasize educator feedback. Additionally, the preceding lessons in the unit focus on self-assessment in the 12th lesson and peer evaluation in the 13th lesson. The materials do not provide sufficient opportunities to receive educator feedback, as they lack evaluative support in the lessons.

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

The materials do not include intentional, planned opportunities for students to receive educator feedback on their artistic work. The materials help educators deliver focused coaching and actionable feedback aligned with their objectives. They suggest that educators provide specific feedback related to lesson goals, but they do not provide the details needed to help students improve their performance and work toward mastery in their music-making. The unit offers limited guidance on how educators can give feedback that helps students refine essential skills. The directive to “provide targeted feedback” is too broad and does not include specific guidance on the skills taught in each lesson. Additionally, the unit overview does not reference educator feedback embedded in the coursework. For example, in the unit 1 overview of “Llwyn On,” students learn how to analyze a score, interpret expressive markings, create and apply performance rubrics, and evaluate their own and others’ recordings, including vetting and analyzing live professional performances. However, this lesson does not explicitly provide educators with guidance to help students refine their musical concepts and work.

In unit 2, the “Dressed in White: Final Performance” lesson does not provide educators with refinement feedback for the unit song’s final performance and self-reflection. In this lesson, students perform “Dressed in White” with a strong focus on expressive communication, using dynamic shaping, tone color, and phrasing appropriate to the folk style, followed by a written reflection on their artistic choices. The performance preparation does not include specific feedback from the educator. Instead, the lesson reinforces general recommendations (e.g., dynamic shaping: swells and fades that follow the melodic contour; phrasing: smooth, connected lines or legato without choppy breaks; emotional communication: conveying the mood of the piece; tone color: warm and controlled sound appropriate to the folk style). Additionally, the instruction does not consistently reinforce musical skills and vocabulary. The score lacks crucial articulation and expression, as referenced in educator modeling. The final reflection also does not include support for educator refinement, as the criteria are based on general feedback and are not specific to the unit song: students are asked to write 4–6 sentences in the comments discussing their expressive choices, which parts sounded the best, and what they would change if they did it again. The materials do not sufficiently enable the educator to refine music concepts and work, as they require the educator to 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 unit 1, the “Llywn On: Rubric Generation” lesson includes a student-created self-evaluation rubric used to refine performance of the unit song. Students design a simple performance rubric that measures fundamental elements of performing “Llywn On,” including pitch, rhythm, tone, expression, and accuracy, demonstrating their understanding of high-quality performance criteria. The educator guides the class in developing strong criteria so students can define quality points in the rubric; they choose 4–5 criteria from the list for their personal rubric and define what levels 4, 3, 2, and 1 look like for each chosen category. The materials reinforce student self-evaluation by providing opportunities for refinement through a performance rubric and quality standards.

In unit 2, the “Dressed in White: Self-Evaluation” lesson includes a self-evaluation criterion to refine performance of the unit song. Students evaluate the expressive qualities of their “Dressed in White” performance by using their previously created expressive rubric to score a recorded take. The criteria provide technical and expressive comment categories for students to use in self-evaluation; they listen to their recording and complete the expressive rubric they created in the “Generated Rubric” lesson. Additionally, the educator models positive feedback so students can respond with self-reflection. For this response, students write 4–5 sentences in the text box explaining which expressive choices worked best, where they could add more feeling, and how their playing fits the folk style. The materials support student self-assessment by offering 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 unit 4, the “Dark Cedars: Historical Research” lesson guides students to make connections within the fine arts and across core academics. The materials include an Iroquois research project that links music to history and cultural concepts, in which students analyze the historical context of “Dark Cedars” and evaluate the enduring value of Indigenous songs in modern culture by conducting research and writing structured responses to inquiry prompts. The materials also provide appropriate guidance for making cross-curricular connections in the fine arts by linking music to cultural and historical elements.

In the “Supplemental Lessons” unit, the “Cross-Curricular 2” lesson offers guidance on connecting the fine arts and core academics. The materials include an engineering-themed composition assignment that references technology and coding concepts, in which students apply coding logic (using sequencing and loops) to musical composition by creating an 8–12-measure piece built from repeating rhythmic grids and melodic variations. The materials also offer clear guidance for integrating music by incorporating engineering 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 “Supplemental Lessons” unit, the “Cross-Curricular 1” lesson connects the fine arts with core academics. The materials include a composition activity that links music to historical elements, allowing students to demonstrate cross-disciplinary understanding by composing a 16-measure musical “soundtrack” that musically represents the emotion and energy of a specific historical event through the strategic use of tempo, dynamics, and form. The materials also provide the necessary guidance for making fine arts cross-curricular connections by linking music to historical elements.

In the “Supplemental Lessons” unit, the “Texas Symbols and Their Musical Representations” lesson connects the fine arts with the core academic subjects. The research writing assignment includes a study of Texas symbols and the state song, in which students cultivate informed patriotism and state pride by analyzing key Texas symbols and linking their historical meanings to musical expression, specifically through the state song “Texas, Our Texas.” The materials provide essential guidance for integrating the fine arts by incorporating historical elements into the music content.

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 unit 1, the “Llwyn On: Historical Research” lesson includes a Welsh folk song and a cultural lesson in which students research the historical background of the Welsh folk song “Llwyn On,” explaining its origins, meaning, and significance in Welsh musical tradition to develop cultural literacy and historical awareness. However, the lesson provides minimal guidance on the Welsh folk style and cultural background, asking students to briefly discuss Welsh folk music and how folk songs act as “time capsules” that preserve community values and history, and to demonstrate how to identify a trustworthy source, such as academic sites or music archives. The materials do not align with the TEKS, as they offer only general references to Welsh culture and no further examination of musical style. As a result, the lesson does not align with 4B (describe written and aurally presented music representative of diverse styles, periods, and cultures) or 4C (identify relationships of music concepts to other academic disciplines). The materials lack TEKS-aligned guidance and student connections to Welsh culture by failing to link the historical context to the folk music adequately and to provide the necessary resources.

In unit 2, the “Dressed in White: Historical Research” lesson includes an Albanian folk cultural study in which students research how the folk song “Dressed in White” has influenced Albanian culture and investigate how it is adapted, performed, or referenced in modern musical settings. However, the concept discussion references the cultural context but offers no further exploration or concrete resources. Students are assigned to play one traditional recording of the song and one modern rendition, such as a pop adaptation, choral arrangement, or instrumental cover, and briefly discuss how folk music evolves across generations and how melodies survive even as instrumentation or style might change. The materials do not align with the TEKS because they reference only Albanian culture but offer no further examination of style, which does not align with 4B (describe written and aurally presented music representative of diverse styles, periods, and cultures) or 4C (identify relationships of music concepts to other academic disciplines). The materials lack TEKS-aligned guidance and connections to the Albanian cultural context. The lesson does not include resources or cultural context for the folk music tradition or the history of the traditional wedding song.

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).

The Scope and Sequence source includes a “Rationale for Unit Order and Conceptual Connections Across the Course” section that breaks down the coursework and explores various styles, traditions, and concepts. The “Cultural Literacy as an Expanding Framework” section outlines the diverse unit songs that anchor the year’s music; unit 1 presents an English folk song, “Llwyn On,” and unit 2 includes an Albanian folk song, “Dressed in White.” The materials provide varied opportunities for musical exploration by including artistic works from diverse cultures, styles, and periods.

The “8th Grade Supplemental Lessons” unit overview breaks down the coursework, which explores various styles, traditions, and concepts. The materials offer a range of cultural and contemporary selections in the form of supplemental lessons, adding repertoire that features diverse tempi, textures, articulations, and cultural styles, including “Sforzando Sprint,” “Bronze Horizon,” “Silver Stream Canon,” “The Summit’s Echo,” “La Llorona,” and “The Texas Rangers.” The unit overview provides a varied repertoire for musical exploration by including artistic 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.

The materials include activities and tasks that require students to demonstrate understanding of relevant, discipline-specific historical and cultural context aligned with the course TEKS. For example, in unit 3, the “Macumba (Senhô): Historical Research” lesson includes a research activity on the unit song that focuses on Afro-Brazilian folk music. Students analyze the musical features of Macumba-related and Afro-Brazilian music, explain how those features carry cultural meaning and foster community identity, and use specific musical vocabulary. The cultural research includes a musical style analysis of Afro-Brazilian rhythms and instruments in “Macumba (Senhô),” directing students to use the internet to find information on common Afro-Brazilian rhythms, percussion instruments used in this style, and the meaning of call-and-response. The materials provide cultural and historical connections that align with the attached 4B and 4C standards. The Afro-Brazilian folk music lesson explores cultural context through a folksong analysis and research project.

In unit 2, the “Dressed in White: Historical Research” lesson includes a research activity on the unit song, in which students examine how the folk song “Dressed in White” has influenced Albanian culture and how it is adapted, performed, or referenced in modern musical settings. The cultural research includes a comparative analysis of the musical style and text of “Dressed in White,” as well as how Albanian culture influences performance interpretations; students are directed to search online for modern uses or arrangements of the song, using search terms such as Albanian choir Dressed in White, instrumental folk covers, or festival performances, and to respond to what is different about the new versions and what remains the same. The materials provide cultural and historical connections that align with the attached 4B and 4C standards. The Albanian folk music lesson explores cultural context through a folksong analysis and research project.