iCEV STEM Site – Advanced Engineering Design & Presentation

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

The Course Implementation Guide includes a Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) correlation chart and table of contents that help educators identify when the course covers the grade-level TEKS. This includes correlations for each unit that identify the content type where the TEKS are addressed. The “Standards Snapshot” further notes that concepts and technical skills are introduced, reinforced, and extended as students progress through the course, with instruction strategically scaffolded to ensure all TEKS are integrated. In the Course Implementation Guide, the “Standards Snapshot” identifies the TEKS by lesson.

The “TEKS Spiraling Across Lessons & Units” section provides a table that identifies every TEKS addressed in more than one lesson beyond its first introduction, listing the “First Introduced” lesson and the “Reinforced/Extended” lesson(s) for each spiraling standard. A prefatory sentence clarifies that any standard not listed is addressed in a single lesson only, so educators can determine at a glance whether a given TEKS spirals and exactly where each occurrence lives.

Evaluation for 1.1b
Materials include suggested pacing to support effective implementation for various school models [e.g., traditional secondary schools, Early College High Schools (ECHS), Pathways in Technology Early College High School (P-TECH)], schedules (e.g., block, modified block), and instructional calendars (e.g., varying number of instructional days).

The Course Implementation Guide includes sequencing and pacing guidelines for traditional, modified block, and traditional block schedules, with suggested class days calculated by converting traditional days into total minutes and dividing by the number of minutes in a block. In the Course Implementation Guide, “Sequencing & Pacing Snapshot” provides pacing based on a standard instructional calendar. The Course Implementation Guide includes an algorithm for manually calculating pacing for schedules outside the standard models.

In the Course Implementation Guide, “Sequencing & Pacing Snapshot” directs educators to align pacing to partnering institutions and provides a proportional method for non-standard calendars. For example, the guide includes a fully worked 160-day P-TECH redistribution table and additional guidance for trimester and quarter systems.

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

The Course Implementation Guide includes a “Course Design Snapshot” that describes the overall progression of the course. Earlier units focus on foundational knowledge, middle units progress to applying technical skills, and closing units provide students with the opportunity to create and present a complete engineering design solution.

In the Course Implementation Guide, the “Course Design Snapshot” and “Instructional Delivery by Unit” sections explicitly state the rationale for unit order and include connective features in every unit. For example, each unit’s opening paragraph includes a “Looking Ahead” statement naming which later unit depends on it, and each Unit Internalization Protocol includes a “Connecting to Prior Learning” prompt tying it to a specific concept from the previous unit.

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

The Course Implementation Guide includes an “Instructional Delivery by Unit” section that includes an overview for each unit. The materials include unit plans for educators to use when internalizing lessons that list unit activities such as objectives, vocabulary, the sequence of the unit, and assessments.

In the Course Implementation Guide, “Instructional Delivery by Unit” also includes a Unit Internalization Protocol for each of the nine units. For example, each protocol includes a “Why This Unit Matters” statement, a numbered sequence of internalization steps covering TEKS/English Language Proficiency Standards (ELPS) review and misconception planning, a “Key Concepts & Skills” list, and an “Anticipated Student Misconceptions” list specific to that unit.

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

The Course Implementation Guide introduction states that the guide serves as a resource for instructional leaders by outlining the processes, structures, and expectations that ensure materials are implemented as designed. The Educator Resource Guide states, “Instructional leaders and administrators can use this guide to understand implementation expectations, monitor instructional fidelity, and support consistent use of materials across classrooms.”

The Course Implementation Guide includes a standalone “Guidance for Instructional Leaders” section. This section provides implementation checkpoints, coaching conversations tied to unit internalization, guidance on supporting pacing adjustments across school models, and indicators of on-track implementation.

Evaluation for 1.2a
Materials include comprehensive unit overviews that provide the background content knowledge and academic, professional, and technical vocabulary necessary to effectively teach the concepts and technical skills in the unit.

The Course Implementation Guide includes comprehensive unit overviews and vocabulary resources for educators. However, the materials do not include background content knowledge to support educator preparation.

The “Reverse Engineering” lesson includes a vocabulary handout that lists terms and definitions. However, the handout does not categorize vocabulary as academic, professional, or technical to support teacher guidance and student learning.

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 do not include resources that provide support for families in English or Spanish for each unit. According to the materials, families can create their own accounts using an access code contained within the curriculum. However, the materials do not provide suggestions on how families can support the progress of their students in English or Spanish.

The materials include a “Welcome Letter” that introduces families to the course overview. The letter mentions progress monitoring tools that the educator can use but does not include supports in English and Spanish for families with each unit.

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).

Each lesson plan in the Course Implementation Guide includes lesson objectives, TEKS alignment, student activities, and assessments. For example, the “Engineering Design Presentation” lesson plan includes Checks for Understanding and a performance-based “Design Promotion Presentation” project, both aligned to the lesson objectives.

The “Instructional Delivery by Unit” provides a comprehensive list of each lesson plan for the entire course. Each lesson plan includes an estimated time, a goal, a description of the lesson, and the objectives. Then, each daily lesson has questions, tasks, and materials needed to complete the steps of the lesson.

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

Throughout the course, students engage in hands-on and laboratory activities, with required materials detailed in each lesson under the activity and project descriptions.

The Course Implementation Guide also includes a course materials list that provides equipment and consumables detailed by lesson, activity, or project.

Evaluation for 1.3c
Materials include guidance on the effective use of lesson materials for extended practice (e.g., homework, extension, enrichment, work-based learning, Career and Technical Student Organizations, professional skills practice).

The materials do not include suggestions for extended practice, homework, or work-based learning. While the materials include a list of Career and Technical Student Organizations (CTSOs), no guidance is provided for how lessons connect to CTSO activities, and the Technology Student Association is not included in the list.

The materials offer modifications, accommodations, and extension suggestions. However, the materials do not include extended practice for students or effective use of lesson materials to extend additional practice.

Evaluation for 2.1a
Materials include a variety of instructional assessments (e.g., skills demonstrations, portfolio evaluations, certification benchmarks) at the unit and lesson level (including diagnostic, formative, and summative) that vary in types of tasks and questions.

The “iCEV Assessment Framework” section of the Educator Resource Guide and the “Assessment Framework” section of the Course Implementation Guide define and organize a variety of instructional assessments used throughout the course, including diagnostic, formative, and summative measures. These materials describe multiple assessment formats, such as pretests and posttests, Checks for Understanding, exit tickets, projects, and final assessments, demonstrating variation in both task type and question type. For example, the framework includes multiple-choice assessments to measure content knowledge, as well as performance-based tasks and projects that require students to apply learning in authentic contexts, ensuring that assessments occur at both the lesson and unit levels.

The “Pre/Posttest Blueprint” and the “Lesson Plan - PTX26_Reverse Engineering” document provide additional evidence of how these assessment types are implemented within instruction. The blueprint outlines a 50-question multiple-choice assessment structure, demonstrating a comprehensive diagnostic and summative measure with selected-response questions, while the lesson plan embeds formative assessments, including short Checks for Understanding and exit tickets that vary by task, such as responding to reflection prompts or submitting completed work. The lesson also includes end-of-lesson assessments and project-based evaluations, showing that students are assessed through a range of formats that include both question-based assessments and applied performance tasks throughout the lesson.

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

The “Assessment Framework” section of the Course Implementation Guide and the “iCEV Assessment Framework” section of the Educator Resource Guide define the types of instructional assessments used throughout the course and explain their intended purposes within instruction. These materials provide detailed guidance for each assessment type, including diagnostic, formative, summative, and skill-based assessments, and describe key elements such as the purpose of each assessment, when it is implemented during instruction, and how it supports student learning and performance improvement. For example, the frameworks explain how formative assessments are used to monitor student understanding during lessons, while summative assessments evaluate overall learning at the end of instruction, ensuring that educators understand both the definition and instructional role of each assessment type.

The “Assessment Framework” section of the Course Implementation Guide further details each assessment type by outlining how it is used within instruction and what educators should expect when implementing it. The materials describe key components for each assessment, including when the assessment should be implemented, time estimates, required resources, and guidance for improving student performance based on results. This additional detail clarifies how assessment types function in practice, helping educators understand not only the definition and intended purpose of each assessment, but also how to apply them to support student learning and instructional decision making.

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

The “iCEV Assessment Framework” section of the Educator Resource Guide and the “Assessment Framework” section of the Course Implementation Guide provide educator guidance that supports the consistent and accurate administration of instructional assessments. These materials describe each assessment type, explain when assessments should be administered during instruction, and include detailed guidance such as time estimates, required resources, and recommendations for implementation and improving student performance. This structured guidance ensures that educators understand how and when to administer assessments consistently across lessons while maintaining alignment to instructional goals.

The “Lesson Plan - PTX26_Reverse Engineering” resource and the “Teachers: Managing Pretests & Posttests” and “Teachers: Viewing Pretest & Posttest Reports” sections of the “iCEV Tutorials” resource provide additional guidance that supports accurate and consistent administration of assessments in practice. The lesson plan identifies specific points in the lesson where assessments should be administered and outlines the type of assessment used as students progress through instruction. The tutorial resources guide educators in managing pretests and posttests and interpreting assessment results through reports. Together, these materials ensure that educators not only know when to administer assessments, but also how to manage and use assessment data to support consistent instructional practices.

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

The “Lesson Plan - PTX26_Reverse Engineering” resource and the “TEKS Alignment” document provide evidence of alignment between formative assessments and the TEKS and lesson objectives. The lesson plan identifies the TEKS addressed within the lesson and includes formative assessments, such as Checks for Understanding and exit tickets, that are embedded throughout instruction as students progress through content. These assessments support monitoring student learning in relation to the stated objectives. However, while the materials include the TEKS for the lesson, they do not specify which TEKS are assessed by each formative or summative assessment within the lesson, requiring educators to determine how individual assessments align to specific standards.

The “Pre/Posttest Blueprint” and “TEKS Alignment” documents provide limited and inconsistent evidence of alignment for diagnostic and summative assessments. While the blueprint includes TEKS and lesson references for the 50-question diagnostic assessment, it does not demonstrate alignment to all course TEKS, and the materials do not clearly show how diagnostic and summative assessments are aligned to the TEKS and objectives of the course, unit, or lesson. Additionally, the TEKS are listed at the unit level, but they are not directly connected to specific assessments, requiring educators to independently determine alignment between assessments and standards.

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

The “TEKS Alignment” document and the “Pre/Posttest Blueprint” provide evidence that instructional assessments include TEKS-aligned items within the course. The “TEKS Alignment” identifies the standards addressed within each unit and lesson, and the “Pre/Posttest Blueprint” connects TEKS and lesson references to the 50-question multiple-choice diagnostic assessment, showing that assessment items are aligned to specific content standards. These materials demonstrate that instructional assessments include TEKS-aligned items that measure student knowledge of course content.

The “TEKS Alignment” document, “Pre/Posttest Blueprint,” and the “Assessment Framework” section of the Course Implementation Guide do not provide evidence that instructional assessments include items at varying levels of complexity. While the materials identify TEKS addressed in lessons and assessments and describe the types of assessments used, they do not specify or demonstrate variation in cognitive demand or complexity across assessment items. Additionally, the “Pre/Posttest Blueprint” outlines a multiple-choice assessment structure, but it does not indicate differing levels of complexity within the assessment items. Therefore, the materials do not include instructional assessments that incorporate TEKS-aligned items across varying levels of complexity.

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

In the Educator Resource Guide, the “iCEV Assessment Framework” and “Progress Monitoring Tools in iCEV” sections provide scoring guidance that supports interpretation of student performance across instructional assessments. The materials include answer keys for selected-response items and scoring guides with rubrics for constructed-response and performance-based tasks, outlining how student work should be evaluated. These resources define how assessments are scored and provide criteria for evaluating projects and performance tasks, ensuring that educators can consistently interpret student performance based on established scoring expectations.

The “Course Grades Report,” “Pre/Posttest Reports,” and “Progress Snapshot” present student performance data in formats that support instructional decision making. These tools allow educators to view individual and class-level performance, including summaries of how students responded to assessment items, enabling comparisons across students and identification of trends in understanding. The reporting features support interpretation of assessment results by organizing performance data into accessible summaries, helping educators analyze student progress and adjust instruction based on assessment outcomes.

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 “Instructional Delivery by Unit” section of the Course Implementation Guide and the “Progress Monitoring Tools in iCEV” and “Feedback Cycle Supports” sections of the Educator Resource Guide include instructional assessments and tools that provide data on student performance. The materials describe summative assessments at the end of each unit and identify classroom practices such as Checks for Understanding and exit tickets, while the progress monitoring tools provide visual summaries of student performance to help educators identify trends.

The “Assessment Framework” section includes a “Responding to Performance Trends” table. The table pairs each performance level with a specific instructional response drawn from the guide: extension opportunities for the White level, small-group instruction with existing materials for Yellow, and reteaching with accommodations and guided remediation for Red.

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 “Progress Snapshot” and the “Progress Monitoring Tools in iCEV” section of the Educator Resource Guide provide tools for educators to track student progress and growth across the course. The “Progress Snapshot” presents a course-level view of student performance, displaying the percentage and number of students categorized as “on track,” “approaching,” or “needs attention” based on assessment averages. The tool includes color-coded performance indicators and a student-level view that shows lesson completion and final assessment averages, enabling educators to compare progress across the class. Additional progress monitoring tools described in the Educator Resource Guide, including student engagement reports and activity tracking, provide multiple data points that allow educators to monitor student learning, identify trends, and respond to performance gaps over time.

The “Progress Snapshot” and “Pre/Posttest Reports” resources provide tools for students to track their own progress and growth within the course. The “My Progress Snapshot” view allows students to monitor their lesson completion and final assessment averages, offering a clear representation of their performance over time. The tool displays completed and missing work, along with color-coded performance indicators, helping students understand their current level of mastery and track changes in performance. Additionally, assessment reports provide access to performance results from pretests and posttests, allowing students to review outcomes and monitor their progress across instructional units.

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

The “Differentiation & Learner Support in iCEV” and “Instructional Supports in iCEV” sections of the Educator Resource Guide and the “Instructional Delivery by Unit” section of the Course Implementation Guide include general instructional supports and guidance for lesson delivery. These materials describe features and strategies such as direct instruction, guided practice, independent practice, and feedback cycles. The materials also identify classroom activities including Checks for Understanding, exit tickets, and unit assessments. The lesson and unit structures outline TEKS, objectives, essential questions, and class activities, providing a consistent instructional format. However, the materials do not include educator guidance for differentiated instruction, targeted activities, or paired (scaffolded) lessons designed specifically for students who have not yet reached proficiency in content and technical skills in the course TEKS.

The “Lesson Plan - PTX26_Reverse Engineering” resource provides additional evidence of instructional structure and general supports but does not include guidance for differentiation tied to student proficiency. The lesson plan outlines TEKS, objectives, lesson descriptions, class overviews, and activity sequences, and includes accommodations, modifications, and extension suggestions following activities and projects. However, these supports are general and not specific to content or student performance, and they do not identify when or how to implement differentiated strategies based on student needs. Additionally, the materials do not include paired or scaffolded lessons or explicit guidance for supporting students who have not yet reached proficiency in the TEKS, requiring educators to independently determine how to adjust instruction to address learning gaps.

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

The vocabulary handout and vocabulary activity for “Lesson Plan - PTX26_Reverse Engineering” provide access to key terms used throughout the lesson, including academic and technical vocabulary associated with course content. These materials include lists of vocabulary terms with corresponding definitions, allowing students to reference terminology introduced during instruction. The “ELPS Guide” resource supports language development by identifying expectations for student use of academic language. However, while the materials include vocabulary resources, they do not include embedded supports within instructional text or activities that guide students in understanding unfamiliar vocabulary in context, such as scaffolding for academic, professional, or technical language.

The vocabulary handout, vocabulary activity, and “ELPS Guide” do not provide embedded supports for interpreting unfamiliar vocabulary or references within instructional materials. The vocabulary resources function primarily as standalone lists of terms and definitions and do not integrate supports such as contextualized explanations, guided practice within lesson activities, or scaffolds for interpreting language within the text. Additionally, the materials do not address other forms of language support, such as figurative language, idioms, or discipline-specific language structures within instructional content. As a result, the materials do not include embedded supports for unfamiliar vocabulary and references in text.

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

The “Lesson Plan - PTX26_Reverse Engineering” resource and the “Instructional Delivery by Unit” section of the Course Implementation Guide include educator guidance for differentiated instruction, enrichment, and extension activities. The lesson plan provides structured guidance for lesson delivery, including activities, projects, and extension opportunities that allow students to deepen understanding beyond core instruction. For example, the materials include extension activities associated with projects and tasks, providing opportunities for students who have demonstrated proficiency to engage in more advanced or applied learning experiences aligned to course objectives and TEKS.

The “Accommodations, Modifications & Extensions” section of the Educator Resource Guide and the “TEKS Alignment” document further support differentiated instruction by providing instructional supports for extending and enriching student learning. The materials include extensions and enrichment opportunities embedded within activities and projects, along with guidance that helps educators adjust instruction to meet the needs of students demonstrating mastery. These supports provide educators with options to extend learning through additional tasks, projects, and applications aligned to TEKS-based standards, ensuring that students who have demonstrated proficiency can continue to develop content knowledge and technical skills at an advanced level.

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

The “Lesson Plan - PTX26_Reverse Engineering” resource and the “Differentiation & Learner Support in iCEV” section of the Educator Resource Guide provide general instructional guidance and features intended to support diverse learners. The lesson plan outlines lesson structure, instructional steps, activities, and projects, and includes accommodations and modifications associated with activities and assessments. The Educator Resource Guide describes platform features and strategies designed to support learners during instruction. However, while the materials include general supports and accommodations, they do not include educator guidance for providing SDI for students receiving supports and services through special education.

The “Lesson Plan - PTX26_Reverse Engineering” resource and the “Differentiation & Learner Support in iCEV” section of the Educator Resource Guide do not provide guidance specific to implementing specially designed instruction for students receiving special education services. Although the lesson plan includes instructional steps and general accommodations tied to activities and projects, it does not explain how to modify instruction, instruction delivery, or assessment practices to meet individualized student needs. Additionally, the materials do not reference individualized supports, strategies aligned to individualized education plans, or targeted instructional adaptations for students who require specially designed instruction. As a result, the materials do not include educator guidance for providing SDI for students receiving supports and services through special education.

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.

The “Lesson Plan - PTX26_Reverse Engineering” resource and the “Instructional Delivery by Unit” section of the Course Implementation Guide include educator guidance to support explaining the concept(s) to be learned during instruction. The lesson plan outlines instructional steps, class overviews, essential questions, and guided discussion opportunities, directing educators to introduce content, gather information from instructional materials, and facilitate student discussion. These prompts provide general guidance for delivering content and supporting student understanding through explanation. However, while the materials include guidance for explaining concepts, they do not include explicit, direct prompts for educators to model the concepts or demonstrate processes for students during instruction.

The “Lesson Plan - PTX26_Reverse Engineering” resource does not provide explicit educator prompts or guidance for modeling concepts or demonstrating tasks as part of instruction. While the lesson includes a hands-on activity and structured sequence of instructional steps, it does not include guidance describing how educators should model the skill, process, or thinking required for the activity prior to student engagement. The prompts that are included focus on general lesson delivery, questioning, and discussion rather than step-by-step modeling of concepts or tasks. As a result, the materials do not include explicit direct prompts and guidance to support the educator in modeling the concepts to be learned.

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

The “Lesson Plan - PTX26_Reverse Engineering” resource and the “Instructional Delivery by Unit” section of the Course Implementation Guide provide a structured sequence for lesson delivery, including class overviews, instructional steps, and activity progression. The lesson plan outlines a set of educator-directed steps for presenting content, facilitating discussion, and guiding students through activities, providing a consistent format for delivering instruction. However, while the materials include a structured sequence for lesson delivery, they do not include educator guidance and recommendations for using a variety of instructional approaches to support effective lesson delivery and facilitation.

The “Lesson Plan - PTX26_Reverse Engineering” resource and the “Instructional Supports in iCEV” section of the Educator Resource Guide do not provide guidance that supports the use of multiple instructional approaches within lessons. The materials present a single set of instructional steps for educators to follow and do not include recommendations for adapting instruction through approaches such as modeling, collaborative learning, differentiated facilitation strategies, or varied instructional methods. While general lesson delivery steps are provided, they do not offer guidance for how educators can adjust or vary instructional approaches to meet different learning needs. As a result, the materials do not include educator guidance and recommendations for effective lesson delivery and facilitation using a variety of instructional approaches.

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 “Lesson Plan - PTX26_Reverse Engineering” resource and the “Instructional Supports in iCEV” section of the Educator Resource Guide support multiple types of practice, including guided, independent, and collaborative learning opportunities. The lesson plan includes structured activities, projects, and hands-on tasks that guide students through content, allowing them to engage in both educator-supported practice and independent application of skills. The instructional supports describe guided practice and independent practice components, along with feedback cycles that support ongoing learning. These elements demonstrate that students engage in multiple forms of practice as they develop content knowledge and technical skills.

The “Instructional Delivery by Unit” section of the Course Implementation Guide and the “Lesson Plan - PTX26_Reverse Engineering” resource provide guidance and recommended structures for implementing these practice types effectively. The materials outline classroom structures such as whole-group instruction, guided practice, and individual work, supported by step-by-step lesson sequences and activity progression. Lesson overviews and instructional steps guide educators in organizing instruction and facilitating learning through different formats, ensuring that practice activities are implemented using clear structures. This combination of varied practice types and structured delivery guidance supports effective lesson facilitation.

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, professional, and technical language.

The materials include linguistic accommodations for various levels of language proficiency, as defined by the ELPS, that are differentiated by levels of language proficiency. In the Course Implementation Guide, the “ELPS Guide” section includes a Proficiency Level Key defining three scaffolding bands (Beginning, Intermediate, Advanced/Advanced High) used throughout the guide.

For example, each of the 26 lettered student expectations has a distinct activity and project for each proficiency band across all four language domains (listening, speaking, reading, writing), with the amount of support changing based on the student’s proficiency level. From there, the added content follows the guide’s domain structure with each section’s scaffolding appearing in the A–F subsections.

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

The “Accessibility & Language Supports” section of the Educator Resource Guide provides educator guidance for implementing linguistic accommodations within bilingual and ESL instructional contexts. The materials identify platform features such as closed captioning, text-to-speech, and translation tools so students can access content in multiple ways. These supports allow educators to adjust instruction based on student language needs and provide multiple entry points for understanding course content. This guidance demonstrates how educators can use built-in tools to support language access and comprehension for students participating in bilingual and ESL programs.

The “Language Development Supports” section of the Educator Resource Guide and the “ELPS Guide” provide additional implementation guidance by connecting instructional practices to ELPS-aligned language development. These materials include guidance for supporting academic, professional, and technical vocabulary development and reinforcing language skills through instructional activities. The “ELPS Guide” outlines expectations for integrating language development into content instruction, while the Educator Resource Guide identifies supports that help educators reinforce language use during lessons. Together, these materials provide guidance that supports educators in effectively implementing instructional materials within state-approved bilingual and ESL programs.

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

The “Language Development Supports” section of the Educator Resource Guide and the “ELPS Guide” include embedded guidance that supports educators in developing academic, professional, and technical vocabulary and increasing student comprehension during instruction. These materials provide strategies aligned to the ELPS that support vocabulary development, comprehension, and background knowledge building within content instruction. The guidance describes how students engage in oral and written discourse to develop language skills and includes supports that help students make cross-linguistic connections between their first language and English. These embedded strategies are designed to support emergent bilingual students in accessing and using increasingly complex language within instructional activities.

The “Accessibility & Language Supports” section of the Educator Resource Guide provides additional embedded supports that assist educators in implementing linguistic accommodations during instruction. The materials identify platform features such as closed captioning, text-to-speech, and translation tools that support students in accessing content and reinforce language development as they engage with instructional materials. These tools provide ongoing, embedded supports that help students build vocabulary, strengthen comprehension, and engage in content learning using academic and technical language. Together with the ELPS-aligned strategies, these supports ensure that educators have guidance for integrating language development throughout instruction.

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 on industry-specific knowledge and skills in alignment with the course TEKS.

The “Instructional Delivery by Unit” section of the Course Implementation Guide and the “Lesson Plan - PTX26_Reverse Engineering” resource provide structured, step-by-step guidance for lesson delivery aligned to the course TEKS. The materials include specific directions for classroom routines and instructional sequencing, such as bell ringers, distribution of worksheets and handouts, presentation of content through slide decks, facilitation of small group discussions, assignment of projects, and use of exit tickets. The lesson plans outline what activities to assign and when to implement them, providing educators with a consistent framework for managing instruction and engaging students in industry-related concepts.

However, neither the Course Implementation Guide nor the “Lesson Plan - PTX26_Reverse Engineering” resource includes guidance for how educators should model industry-specific knowledge or demonstrate technical skills aligned to the TEKS. The materials outline what activities to assign and when to implement them, but do not provide worked examples, educator modeling prompts, check-for-understanding strategies, or content-specific instructional guidance for either industry-specific knowledge or skills. As a result, the materials do not include guidance for educators to provide explicit instruction on industry-specific knowledge or skills in alignment with the course TEKS.

Evaluation for 4.1b
Materials consistently provide opportunities for students to develop, use, and apply industry-specific academic, professional, and technical vocabulary.

The “Design on Trial” activity and the “Dissect a Click” project from the “Lesson Plan - PTX26_Reverse Engineering” resource include opportunities for students to use and apply industry-specific vocabulary during instruction. “Design on Trial” requires students to analyze ethical scenarios and provide a written justification for each response using academic vocabulary such as intellectual property and ethical practice. “Dissect a Click” requires students to document and illustrate a product’s systems using technical vocabulary such as input sensor and processing architecture. These tasks require students to apply the vocabulary in a written, applied context rather than simply matching terms to definitions. As a result, the materials include opportunities for students to use and apply industry-specific academic and technical vocabulary.

The “Design on Trial” activity and the “Dissect a Click” project are both limited to “Lesson Plan - PTX26_Reverse Engineering” and do not extend to other lessons within the course. While the materials demonstrate vocabulary application within this single lesson, they do not include evidence of a structured, sequenced approach to building new vocabulary knowledge across multiple lessons. As a result, the materials do not include opportunities for students to consistently develop industry-specific academic and technical vocabulary across the course.

Evaluation for 4.1c
Materials provide opportunities for students to develop and refine industry-specific knowledge and skills through activities and tasks that progressively increase in rigor and complexity across lessons and units within the course.

The “Course Design Snapshot” section of the Course Implementation Guide describes a structured progression of learning that increases in rigor and complexity across the course. The materials outline a sequence in which students move from foundational knowledge and recall to application, independent prototype development, and professional-level communication and presentation, aligned to increasing levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy. Additionally, the “Professional & Technical Skills Snapshot” section of the Course Implementation Guide identifies how skills are intended to be embedded, developed, and reinforced across multiple lessons, indicating a planned progression of professional and technical skill development throughout the course.

However, the “Course Design Snapshot” and “Professional & Technical Skills Snapshot” do not provide concrete examples of activities or tasks that demonstrate how students develop and refine industry-specific knowledge and skills through progressively increasing rigor. While the materials describe a general pathway of progression and skill alignment, they do not include specific, sequenced tasks or structured practice opportunities that show how skills are built or refined across lessons and units. The snapshots identify where skills are addressed but do not provide evidence of implementation through examples of increasingly complex activities, scaffolding structures, or opportunities for iterative skill development.

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

The “Professional & Technical Skills Snapshot” and “Experiential Learning & Real-World Application” sections of the Course Implementation Guide describe learning experiences that require students to demonstrate industry-specific knowledge and skills. The materials indicate that students engage in authentic, applied tasks, including real engineering design workflows, collaborative design, iterative prototyping, and technical communication. The course outlines expectations for students to demonstrate skills such as designing solutions, technical documentation, prototype fabrication and testing, and professional communication, which align with industry standards and the course TEKS. Additionally, the skills snapshot identifies where professional and technical skills are embedded across lessons, indicating that students are expected to apply these skills throughout the course.

While the materials identify a range of industry-specific knowledge and skills and describe authentic applications, the “Professional & Technical Skills Snapshot” primarily presents a list of skills aligned to lessons without specifying the exact tasks, performance criteria, or evidence of student demonstration within each lesson. The inclusion of experiential learning tasks and real-world applications still provides evidence that students are required to demonstrate understanding of industry-specific knowledge and skills.

Evaluation for 4.2a
Materials explicitly connect new knowledge and skills to prior learning across lessons and units within the course and across courses as applicable.

The “Course Design Snapshot” and “Professional & Technical Skills Snapshot” sections of the Course Implementation Guide describe a general progression of learning and skill development across the course. The materials indicate that students move from foundational knowledge to more complex applications and that professional and technical skills are embedded and reinforced across lessons.

Every Unit Internalization Protocol includes a “Connecting to Prior Learning” prompt. For example, units 2 through 9 feature a “Prior-Unit Connection” section naming the specific prior unit and skill, while unit 1 includes a “Cross-Course Connection” section tying back to the level 1 Engineering Design & Presentation course.

Evaluation for 4.2b
Materials are aligned with and provide relevant cross-curricular connections that support transferable academic knowledge and skills in literacy, math, social studies, and science.

The “Course At-a-Glance” section of the Course Implementation Guide and the “TEKS Alignment” document identify cross-curricular connections that support transferable academic knowledge and skills. The materials explicitly reference integration with core academic disciplines, including mathematics, science, and English language arts. The materials also indicate that cross-curricular connections are embedded within lesson sequencing and course design. These connections support the development of skills such as quantitative reasoning, technical reading and writing, and application of scientific concepts within industry-relevant contexts.

The materials include cross-curricular connections to mathematics, science, and English language arts. However, the “Course At-a-Glance” and “TEKS Alignment” document do not provide evidence of intentional cross-curricular connections to all core academic disciplines, such as social studies. However, the inclusion of multiple relevant academic disciplines demonstrates sufficient alignment and integration to support transferable knowledge and skills.

Evaluation for 4.2c
Materials integrate academic, technical, and employability knowledge and skills in the context of the course and in alignment to the course TEKS.

The “Professional & Technical Skills Snapshot” and “Experiential Learning & Real-World Application” sections of the Course Implementation Guide identify academic, technical, and employability skills included throughout the course. The materials list skills such as technical documentation, solution development, collaboration, communication, and project management, and describe authentic contexts such as engineering design workflows, collaborative design, iterative prototyping, and technical communication aligned to industry expectations. These materials indicate that students are expected to develop a range of transferable and industry-relevant skills.

The Course Implementation Guide also includes an “Integrated Skill Application Examples” section. For example, the unit 7 example shows students applying academic reasoning about conditional logic, the technical skill of fixing wiring, and teamwork to coordinate debugging, all within one real-time task, with two additional worked examples from units 5 and 9.

Evaluation for 5.1a
Materials provide opportunities for students to investigate career clusters and programs of study as applicable to the level of the course and in alignment with the course TEKS.

The “Course Purpose and Rationale” identifies several engineering-related programs of study, including civil engineering, electrical engineering, engineering foundations, and mechanical and aerospace engineering. The document also states that the course is designed to prepare students for careers in engineering and technical fields and to develop skills used in entry-level engineering careers. However, the section serves as an overview of course goals and pathway alignment and does not include activities or instructional tasks requiring students to investigate career clusters, compare programs of study, or analyze pathway options. As a result, the document provides information about engineering pathways but does not provide evidence of student investigation of those pathways.

The “Experiential Learning & Real-World Application” document describes how career awareness is embedded throughout instruction through Career Connection activities and exposure to subject matter experts. The materials indicate that students explore careers related to lesson content and are introduced to industry expectations, workforce demands, and engineering-related occupations such as mechanical engineer, electrical engineer, civil engineer, robotics engineer, and engineering technician. The document also identifies postsecondary opportunities, including associate degrees, bachelor’s degrees, certifications, and apprenticeships. However, the materials do not provide evidence of structured activities requiring students to investigate career clusters or programs of study in depth. Career exploration is presented primarily as awareness building and exposure rather than as sustained investigation aligned to advanced engineering pathways. The materials do not demonstrate that students analyze, compare, or evaluate specific engineering programs of study or career clusters applicable to the advanced level of the course.

Evaluation for 5.1b
Materials provide opportunities for students to analyze relevant regional or statewide Labor Market Information (LMI) or emerging market workforce data to support data-driven investigations of careers.

The “Course Purpose and Rationale” resource describes the course as preparation for careers in engineering and technical fields and identifies several programs of study, including civil engineering, electrical engineering, engineering foundations, and mechanical & aerospace engineering. The document also emphasizes the development of technical and professional skills for entry-level engineering careers. However, the section functions as a high-level overview of course goals and pathway alignment and does not include labor market information, workforce statistics, salary data, employment projections, or activities requiring students to analyze career opportunities using quantitative workforce information. As a result, the materials identify career pathways but do not provide opportunities for data-driven career investigations using regional or statewide LMI.

The “Experiential Learning & Real-World Application” resource embeds career awareness throughout the course through “Career Connection” activities, exposure to subject matter experts, and discussions of engineering-related occupations, postsecondary opportunities, and workforce readiness skills. Students are exposed to careers such as mechanical engineer, electrical engineer, civil engineer, robotics engineer, and engineering technician and learn about potential pathways including degrees, certifications, and apprenticeships. However, the materials do not include regional or statewide labor market data, workforce demand statistics, salary comparisons, job growth trends, or emerging industry data. Additionally, students are not required to interpret labor market information, analyze workforce trends, compare employment projections, or make career decisions based on quantitative data. While students engage in general career exploration, the materials do not include structured analysis of LMI or workforce data, which does not support data-driven investigations of careers.

Evaluation for 5.1c
Materials include career investigation activities and tasks designed to support development of individual career goals (e.g., career interest inventories, career goals, post-secondary education requirements, post-secondary career plans).

The “Career Connections” online job search provides a structured career investigation activity that requires students to research and compare three job postings related to the industry studied in the lesson. Students analyze job titles, job descriptions, qualifications, required education or certifications, responsibilities, benefits, pay, and postsecondary education requirements. By examining multiple career options and comparing workforce expectations, students engage in career investigation activities that support informed career decision making and awareness of educational pathways related to their fields of interest.

The “Lesson Plan - PTX26_Reverse Engineering” resource includes a “Career Connection” activity that requires students to research a career introduced during the lesson and investigate potential career paths associated with course content. The lesson identifies career exploration as a component of instruction and emphasizes helping students build research skills while considering future career opportunities. Additionally, the career investigation activity encourages students to examine qualifications and postsecondary requirements associated with career options, supporting the development of individual career goals and increasing awareness of pathways connected to engineering and technical fields. Although the opportunities are limited in depth and frequency, the materials provide sufficient evidence that students engage in career investigation activities designed to support career planning and goal development.

Evaluation for 5.2a
Materials include guidance for teachers to provide explicit (direct) instruction on professional standards and employability skills relevant to career clusters and programs of study as applicable to the level of the course and in alignment with the course TEKS and Texas CTE Employability Skills Standards.

In the Course Implementation Guide, “Engineering Design Presentation” provides direct instructional content on professional communication as an employability skill. For example, the lesson explicitly teaches clear, concise, and effective communication, including specific guidance such as avoiding jargon when the audience is the public and adjusting the level of detail based on whether the audience is a project manager, sales team, or customer.

The “Engineering Design Presentation” lesson also frames these employability skills within the professional structure of the engineering design process. For example, the lesson teaches the different types of design presentations engineers give throughout a project, including preliminary design review, prototype, testing and evaluation, and project closing presentations. The lesson also identifies the range of professional stakeholders involved, such as project managers, regulatory organizations, and clients. This demonstrates direct instruction on professional standards and employability skills relevant to career clusters.

Evaluation for 5.2b
Materials provide opportunities for students to engage in career development activities and tasks (e.g., mock interviews, resume writing, portfolio development) as applicable to the level of the course and in alignment with the course TEKS and Texas CTE Employability Skills Standards.

In the Course Implementation Guide, “Instructional Delivery by Unit” outlines several career-related activities within the STEM careers unit, including job search tasks, job posting analysis, and a career research project. Students analyze multiple job postings, compare qualifications and responsibilities, and complete a job search activity where they identify training opportunities such as job shadowing or apprenticeships. Additional tasks include creating SMART career goals, completing a “Career Learning Experiences Outline” activity, and researching degrees within the advanced engineering design pathway. The document also includes “Career Connection” activities, such as researching careers and viewing pre-recorded interviews with engineering professionals. While these activities provide exposure to career exploration and basic planning, they are concentrated within a limited portion of the course and are not consistently embedded across units. Furthermore, many of the tasks involve research, reflection, or summarization rather than requiring students to produce authentic career development artifacts (e.g., resumes, interview practice, or professional portfolios) or engage in varied, interactive experiences aligned to specific engineering fields of study.

The “Professional & Technical Skills Snapshot” resource presents a table that maps professional and employability skills. For example, skills include written and oral communication, collaboration, time management, and workplace conduct. The snapshot identifies where these skills are introduced, reinforced, and developed, and serves as a reference tool for lesson planning and tracking student progression. However, the document does not include descriptions of specific student activities or tasks that require students to engage in career development practices. It does not provide evidence of how students demonstrate career readiness through applied tasks, nor does it include structured experiences such as mock interviews, resume development, or portfolio creation. As a result, while the snapshot shows where skills are embedded, it does not provide evidence of meaningful or varied opportunities for students to actively engage in career development activities aligned to the course level, engineering pathways, or Texas CTE employability standards.

Evaluation for 5.2c
Materials emphasize the use of academic, professional, and technical vocabulary during career development opportunities.

The “Lesson Plan - PTX26_Reverse Engineering” resource provides a list of academic and technical vocabulary terms related to engineering concepts, including definitions for terms such as reverse engineering, product architecture, interfaces, and intellectual property. The handout supports content knowledge by introducing key terminology and explaining how systems function through concepts such as input, processing, and output. However, the resource is limited to definitions and explanations and does not include structured opportunities for students to use this vocabulary in career development contexts. The materials do not provide tasks requiring students to apply terminology in activities such as job exploration, professional communication, or industry-specific scenarios. As a result, the materials introduce vocabulary but do not emphasize or facilitate its use within career development opportunities.

In “Lesson Plan - PTX26_Reverse Engineering,” students complete a matching exercise in which they pair key engineering terms with their corresponding definitions. This activity reinforces recognition and recall of academic and technical vocabulary by requiring students to identify correct term–definition relationships. However, the activity focuses solely on vocabulary identification and does not extend to application in authentic or career-related contexts. Students are not asked to use terminology in writing, speaking, or problem-solving tasks connected to engineering careers or workplace scenarios. Additionally, the activity does not include multiple representations, discussion prompts, or performance-based tasks that would require students to demonstrate vocabulary use in professional settings. Therefore, while vocabulary is practiced, the materials do not emphasize its use during career development opportunities.

Evaluation for 6.1a
Materials include experiential learning through classroom experiences (e.g., labs, workplace simulations, project-based learning) and/or work-based learning (e.g., job shadowing, internships, practicums) to develop or reinforce the real-world application of technical and employability skills in the context of the course and aligned to the appropriate level on the work-based learning continuum.

In the Course Implementation Guide, “Lab Safety Procedures: Advanced Engineering Design” describes a lesson in which students engage in workplace-simulated lab safety experiences. For example, the “Hazards Scavenger Hunt” activity has students walk through the lab to identify real potential hazards, such as spilled water, exposed wiring, or improperly stored hazardous substances, and propose a solution to each one, mirroring the safety inspection responsibilities of a real workplace.

In the Course Implementation Guide, “Lab Safety Procedures: Advanced Engineering Design” also describes “Safety Guidelines” and “Proper Equipment Maintenance” activities, having students reference actual user manuals and manufacturers’ manuals for equipment and tools used in the classroom. This demonstrates a classroom-based workplace simulation that mirrors authentic industry safety practices; therefore, the materials provide experiential learning through classroom experiences.

Evaluation for 6.1b
Materials provide opportunities for students to use relevant industry-specific materials (e.g., technical texts/manuals, equipment, technology, supplies) during experiential learning.

In the Course Implementation Guide, “Lab Safety Procedures: Advanced Engineering Design” describes a lesson in which students reference actual technical manuals as part of hands-on lab safety experiences. For example, the “Safety Guidelines” activity requires students to reference a user manual for equipment or tools used in the classroom and to identify safety guidelines for proper use. The “Proper Equipment Maintenance” activity requires students to read a manufacturer’s manual to identify proper handling, maintenance, and storage procedures.

In the Course Implementation Guide, “Microcontrollers: Sensors & Feedback Loops” provides a lesson in which students wire real sensors to a microcontroller and write code to read live data. For example, the “Sensors Coding Challenge” project directs students to consult the manufacturer’s instructions or technical data sheets when selecting sensors, and requires the use of industry-specific equipment such as a microcontroller, breadboard, jumper wires, and distance sensor. Together, these two lessons demonstrate industry-specific materials, including technical texts/manuals and equipment, being used during experiential learning.

Evaluation for 6.1c
Materials emphasize the use of academic, professional, and technical vocabulary during experiential learning opportunities.

In the Course Implementation Guide, “Experiential Learning & Real-World Application” describes experiential learning through activities such as collaborative design projects, iterative prototyping, and problem-based engineering tasks intended to simulate real-world application. The document also references career exploration through “Career Connection” activities and exposure to industry professionals to help students connect classroom learning to engineering careers. However, while the section highlights general skills, such as collaboration and technical communication, it does not include explicit expectations for students to use academic, professional, or technical vocabulary during these experiential learning opportunities. There are no examples of structured tasks, prompts, or assessments requiring students to incorporate discipline-specific terminology when engaging in design, problem-solving, or project-based work, indicating that vocabulary use is not emphasized within these experiences.

In “iCEV Assessment Framework,” the materials outline experiential learning through classroom activities and projects, including hands-on tasks, design challenges, and skill demonstrations that increase in complexity throughout the course. The framework describes how students engage in structured activities with guidance, accommodations, and extensions, and it emphasizes skill development through application of technical knowledge. While the framework references guided instruction and content delivery, it does not include evidence that academic, professional, or technical vocabulary is emphasized during experiential learning activities. There are no requirements for students to use discipline-specific terminology in project-based tasks, lab work, or performance-based assessments. Additionally, no rubrics or supports are provided to ensure vocabulary use in these contexts. Although students participate in experiential learning, the materials do not emphasize the application of vocabulary within those opportunities.

Evaluation for 6.2a
Materials include opportunities for students to apply academic and technical knowledge and skills to authentic, real-world, industry-specific problems and develop and evaluate viable solutions as applicable to the level of the course and in alignment with the course TEKS.

In the Course Implementation Guide, the “Professional & Technical Skills Snapshot” presents charts that map professional and technical skills across multiple lessons. Some of these skills include communication, collaboration, systems thinking, and prototype testing. The document identifies where these skills are introduced and reinforced throughout the course and demonstrates an intentional progression of skill development. However, the snapshot functions only as a tracking and planning tool and does not describe specific instructional activities or tasks. It does not provide evidence of students applying these skills to authentic, real-world, industry-specific problems or engaging in the development and evaluation of solutions. As a result, while skills are identified and mapped, the materials do not demonstrate how students use these skills in meaningful problem-solving contexts aligned to engineering practices.

In the Course Implementation Guide, “Experiential Learning & Real-World Application” describes experiential learning opportunities such as project-based learning, collaborative design, and iterative prototyping intended to simulate real-world engineering practices. The document emphasizes connections to STEM careers and highlights the use of problem-based learning to support real-world application of knowledge and skills. However, the section provides a general overview of instructional approaches and does not include specific examples of authentic industry problems or detailed descriptions of student tasks that require the development and evaluation of viable solutions. Additionally, there is no clear evidence of alignment with specific engineering industry contexts or demonstration of how students engage in rigorous problem-solving processes reflective of real-world engineering challenges. Therefore, the materials suggest real-world application but do not provide sufficient evidence of authentic, industry-specific problem-solving opportunities aligned to the course level and TEKS.

Evaluation for 6.2b
Materials include opportunities for students to conduct industry-related data analysis to evaluate information, identify trends, and justify decisions using quantitative and qualitative reasoning as applicable to the level of the course and in alignment with the course TEKS.

In the Course Implementation Guide, “Design Challenge: Remote Control Vehicle” describes a lesson in which students develop their own standardized testing procedure and use it to collect performance data on their prototype. For example, students complete a “Quality Control” section of their Engineering Notebook where they evaluate their testing results and identify where the design’s quality, reliability, and safety can be improved.

In the Course Implementation Guide, “Advanced Engineering Design & Presentation Capstone” includes a “Testing & Evaluating” segment where students build and test prototypes of their own design. For example, students record their progress in the Engineering Notebook as they test, evaluate, and optimize their design based on the results, using up to 60 percent of the project’s time on this testing and evaluation cycle.

Evaluation for 6.2c
Materials include opportunities for students to engage in inquiry-based learning (e.g., formulating industry-specific questions, conducting research using industry-specific sources) as applicable to the level of the course and in alignment with the course TEKS.

In the Course Implementation Guide, “Design Challenge: Remote Control Vehicle” describes a lesson in which students research real components and existing patents as part of their design process. For example, students complete a “Component Research” section and a “Patent Research & Process” section of their Engineering Notebook, investigating industry components and existing intellectual property relevant to their remote control vehicle design. This demonstrates students conducting research using industry-specific sources.

In the Course Implementation Guide, the “Advanced Engineering Design & Presentation Capstone” includes a “Define the Problem” segment in which students research an existing innovation before designing their own solution. For example, students research an existing “last mile” transportation innovation, determine its benefits, and explore the context and constraints that make the design challenging, before moving into their own goal-setting and design work. This demonstrates students formulating a problem and conducting industry-specific research to investigate it.