iCEV STEM Site – 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. Both tools help educators identify when the course covers grade-level TEKS, including correlations for each unit that identify the content type where 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” section identifies 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. The guidelines include 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, noting that 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 which names the later unit that depends on it. Each Unit Internalization Protocol includes a “Connecting to Prior Learning” section 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 a “Instructional Delivery by Unit” section that includes a unit overview for each unit. There is a unit plan for educators to use when internalizing lessons that lists 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 “Lesson Plan - PTX26_Reverse Engineering” resource includes a vocabulary handout that lists terms and definitions. However, the handout does not categorize vocabulary as academic, professional, or technical to support educator 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, parents can create their own accounts using an access code contained within the curriculum. However, the materials do not provide information for educators to view and use with each unit with suggestions on how families can support the progress of their students in English or Spanish.

There is 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 “Professional Presentation in Engineering” lesson includes Checks for Understanding and a performance-based capstone 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” resource 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. For example, some of these checks include 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 with 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 types of assessments used as students progress through instruction. The tutorial resources guide educators in managing pretests and posttests and interpreting assessment results via 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 relevant 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” document 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. 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” resource 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, the “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.

The Educator Resource Guide, specifically the “iCEV Assessment Framework” and “Progress Monitoring Tools in iCEV” sections, provides 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” provide additional guidance by presenting 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” 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” resource 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” 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, and identify classroom activities including Checks for Understanding, exit tickets, and unit assessments. The lesson and unit structures outline the 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 the 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 the “Lesson Plan - PTX26_Reverse Engineering” resource 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 the 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.

Neither the “Lesson Plan - PTX26_Reverse Engineering” resource nor the “Differentiation & Learner Support in iCEV” section of the Educator Resource Guide provides 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 with 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 a structured sequence of instructional steps, it does not include guidance describing how educators should model the skill, process, or thinking required for the activity before 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 that support students in accessing 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. However, 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” includes 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, which 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 “Principles of Technical Drawing” lesson plan provide structured, step-by-step guidance for lesson delivery aligned to the course TEKS. The materials include sequenced instructional routines. For example, these include bell ringers; distribution of action plans, vocabulary handouts, and key concepts and skills; presentation of content through video segments and slides; and facilitation of activities, projects, and exit tickets. Within the “Principles of Technical Drawing” lesson, educators introduce concepts through video segments. The lesson also directs educators to assign guided activities such as the “Modelmaking & Technical Drawing” activity and the “Drafting Practice” activity. The lesson also directs educators to administer Checks for Understanding to support student engagement with technical drawing concepts such as orthographic projection, dimensions, and tolerances. These materials provide a clear framework for organizing instruction and engaging students in industry-relevant content.

However, the “Instructional Delivery by Unit” section and the “Principles of Technical Drawing” lesson plan do not include guidance for how educators should model technical drawing processes, demonstrate industry-standard techniques, or explicitly teach skill application prior to student practice. While some steps suggest providing examples, the materials do not include structured educator modeling, worked examples, check-for-understanding questioning strategies, or sample student responses specific to technical drawing skills.

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

The “Machine Shop Madness” project and the “Drafting Practice” activity from the “Principles of Technical Drawing” lesson include opportunities for students to use and apply industry-specific vocabulary during instruction. “Machine Shop Madness” requires students to use specific technical vocabulary such as through hole, blind hole, tapped hole, and chamfer in a written product quote, applying the terms to identify and price real drawing features rather than matching them to definitions. “Drafting Practice” requires students to use vocabulary such as projection type, scale, and tolerance in a title block and a peer review discussion. These tasks require students to apply the vocabulary in a written, applied context. As a result, the materials include opportunities for students to use and apply industry-specific academic and technical vocabulary.

The “Machine Shop Madness” project and the “Drafting Practice” activity are both limited to the “Principles of Technical Drawing” lesson 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 an intentional progression of rigor across the course aligned to Bloom’s Taxonomy. The materials explain that students move from foundational recall and comprehension to guided application, independent implementation, problem solving, and professional-level communication and presentation, indicating increasing complexity in learning expectations over time. Additionally, the “Professional & Technical Skills Snapshot” section of the Course Implementation Guide identifies how professional, employability, and technical skills are embedded and reinforced across multiple lessons, showing where skills such as collaboration, communication, problem solving, and technical drawing are addressed throughout the course. These materials establish a general framework for progression and skill development across units.

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 increasing complexity and identify where skills are addressed, they do not include specific, sequenced instructional tasks, structured practice opportunities, or examples showing how skills are built, applied, and refined across lessons and units. The snapshots present skills as mapped to lessons and described conceptually, rather than showing how tasks increase in rigor in practice.

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 “Experiential Learning & Real-World Application” section of the Course Implementation Guide describes instructional activities that require students to demonstrate industry-specific knowledge and skills through authentic applied tasks. The materials indicate that students engage in inquiry-based investigations, performance-based lab challenges, and career-connected research, requiring them to apply skills such as experimental design, data analysis, research documentation, and lab safety compliance. Additionally, the materials describe “Career Connection” activities embedded in each lesson, which require students to analyze, compare, research, or simulate professional experiences, reinforcing the expectation that students demonstrate understanding of content in real-world and industry contexts. These activities provide opportunities for students to apply course TEKS in authentic scenarios aligned to engineering practices.

The “Professional & Technical Skills Snapshot” section of the Course Implementation Guide identifies industry-specific academic, professional, and technical skills associated with lessons, such as collaboration, problem solving, technical documentation, and technical drawing, and shows where these skills are embedded throughout the course. This section primarily presents a mapping of skills to lessons rather than detailed task descriptions, but the inclusion of experiential learning activities and real-world applications 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. 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 within the course. The materials explicitly reference integration with mathematics, science, and English language arts, indicating that students apply skills such as quantitative reasoning, scientific analysis, and technical reading and writing within engineering contexts. These connections are embedded within the course structure and lesson sequencing, supporting the application of academic knowledge in industry-relevant scenarios.

The “Course At-a-Glance” and “TEKS Alignment” document provide evidence of cross-curricular connections across multiple core academic disciplines. However, they do not demonstrate intentional connections to all disciplines, such as social studies. However, the inclusion of relevant cross-curricular integration across mathematics, science, and English language arts provides sufficient evidence that the materials support transferable academic 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 “Principles of Technical Drawing” lesson plan provides an example of academic, technical, and employability knowledge and skills intentionally integrated within an authentic industry task. In the “Machine Shop Madness” activity, students assume the role of a precision machinist, reading and analyzing technical drawings to identify dimensioning errors using industry-standard drafting conventions, calculating rates and measurements, and producing a client quote. This single task requires students to apply academic reasoning, technical drawing knowledge, and professional communication skills simultaneously in alignment with the course TEKS and real-world engineering industry expectations.

Each lesson plan in the course identifies the TEKS and ELPS covered, the lesson goal, description and objectives, a class-by-class overview of instructional strategies and pacing, and overviews of activities, projects, and career connections with any required materials listed. The “Experiential Learning & Real-World Application” section of the Course Implementation Guide further describes how students engage in inquiry-based investigations, performance-based lab challenges, and career-connected research. These investigations require students to apply academic, technical, and employability skills together within authentic engineering contexts aligned to the course TEKS.

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 & Rationale” section of the Course Implementation Guide describes the course as a capstone experience that prepares students for postsecondary STEM programs. It also identifies the course’s role within multiple programs of study, including civil engineering, electrical engineering, engineering foundations, and mechanical and aerospace engineering pathways. However, this section functions as an overview of course intent and positioning and does not include any activities, tasks, or structured opportunities in which students actively investigate career clusters or programs of study. While the materials identify relevant pathways, they do not provide evidence that students engage in analyzing, researching, or evaluating these programs of study.

The “Experiential Learning & Real-World Application” section of the Course Implementation Guide states that career awareness is embedded throughout the course and that each lesson includes a “Career Connection” activity in which students analyze, compare, research, or simulate professional experiences tied to careers. It also identifies exposure to multiple career areas such as engineering, engineering technology, manufacturing, robotics and automation, and product design. However, this section provides only a high-level description of intended implementation and does not include specific examples or evidence demonstrating how students investigate career clusters or programs of study in a way that is differentiated or appropriate for this advanced, grade 12 course. The materials do not clearly show sustained, structured investigation aligned to programs of study.

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 & Rationale” section of the Course Implementation Guide describes the course as preparation for postsecondary STEM programs and entry-level technical employment. It identifies alignment to programs of study such as civil engineering, electrical engineering, engineering foundations, and mechanical and aerospace engineering. While this establishes connections to career pathways, the section does not include references to LMI such as job demand, wage data, employment projections, or regional workforce trends. There are no tasks or structured opportunities requiring students to analyze workforce data to inform career decisions. As a result, the materials do not provide opportunities for students to analyze regional or statewide LMI or emerging workforce data to support data-driven investigations of careers.

The “Experiential Learning & Real-World Application” subsection of the Course Implementation Guide explains that career awareness is embedded throughout the course through “Career Connection” activities, in which students analyze, research, compare, or simulate professional experiences related to engineering careers. The materials also highlight exposure to high-demand careers and workforce readiness skills across fields such as engineering, manufacturing, robotics, and product design. However, the section does not include explicit use of labor market information or workforce data, such as regional or statewide job growth, salary comparisons, or demand indicators. It also does not require students to analyze such data as part of career investigations. 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 - Mock Interview Questions” activity provides a career investigation in which students develop interview questions and ideal responses for a selected career field studied in the lesson. This task requires students to engage with a specific career by considering job expectations, required skills, and professional communication within that field. By generating both questions and responses, students must research and reflect on the qualifications, responsibilities, and expectations associated with a career path, which supports the development of career awareness and planning. Although the activity emphasizes interview preparation, it provides an opportunity for students to explore career fields and consider how they would present themselves as candidates, contributing to the development of individual career goals.

The “Engineering Design Process Overview” lesson plan includes embedded “Career Connection” opportunities and project-based learning experiences that connect engineering design tasks to real-world applications and professional contexts. Within this lesson, students engage in collaborative design work, reflect on each phase of the engineering design process, and consider how engineering practices apply to real-world careers. These structured experiences, combined with ongoing “Career Connection” activities referenced throughout the lesson, provide opportunities for students to explore engineering roles, workplace expectations, and skills required in the field. Together, these components support students in developing an understanding of career pathways and contribute to the formation of individual career goals aligned to engineering disciplines.

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.

The “Lesson Plan - Professionalism in the Sciences - Engineering Design” resource provides structured lesson components, including PowerPoint segments, bell ringers, vocabulary handouts, and Checks for Understanding that introduce concepts. For example, these concepts include professional communication, collaboration, time management, and workplace behavior. The lesson outlines step-by-step instructional sequences and directs educators to facilitate discussions and activities related to professionalism in engineering contexts. However, the materials primarily guide educators on what activities to assign rather than how to provide explicit, direct instruction of the content. The lesson does not include detailed instructional modeling, scripted explanations, sample responses, or content-specific examples that would support educators in delivering explicit instruction aligned to professional standards and employability skills.

The “Lesson Plan - STEM Careers - Engineering Design” resource includes structured activities such as job search analysis, career planning tasks, and goal-setting exercises in which students explore careers, analyze job postings, and develop SMART goals related to career pathways. While these activities address employability skills and career readiness, the lesson primarily provides procedural guidance for activities rather than explicit educator-directed instruction on how to teach these skills. The materials outline when to present content and what tasks students should complete but do not include detailed guidance for modeling employability skills, delivering content-specific instruction, or connecting skills explicitly to engineering career clusters at an advanced level. Without clear, explicit instructional guidance aligned to the TEKS and CTE Employability Skills Standards, the materials do not meet the requirement for direct instruction.

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.

The “Instructional Delivery by Unit” section of the Course Implementation Guide outlines lesson structures that include activities such as class discussions, projects, and reflection tasks intended to build professional and employability skills. While these lessons introduce general workplace concepts and include occasional “Career Connection” activities, the materials primarily focus on broad skill development rather than structured career development tasks such as mock interviews, resume writing, or portfolio development. Career-related activities are limited in frequency and are primarily concentrated in early units, with later lessons emphasizing technical skill application rather than sustained career preparation. As a result, the materials do not provide sufficient or consistent opportunities for students to engage in meaningful, level-appropriate career development activities aligned with TEKS and CTE Employability Skills Standards.

The “Professional & Technical Skills Snapshot” section of the Course Implementation Guide identifies where employability skills such as communication, collaboration, and critical thinking are embedded across lessons and units. However, this section functions as a mapping tool and does not include descriptions of specific student tasks or activities demonstrating how students actively engage in career development processes. The snapshot indicates the presence of skills but does not provide evidence of structured, scaffolded activities such as resume development, mock interviews, or portfolio creation that would allow students to apply these skills in authentic career preparation contexts. The materials do not include clear, repeated opportunities for students to practice career development tasks aligned to engineering fields and course expectations.

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

The “Engineering Design Process Overview” vocabulary handout provides a list of academic and technical vocabulary terms, such as constraints, decision matrix, proof of concept, and stakeholders. Each is paired with a definition to support student understanding of engineering concepts. While this resource supports vocabulary exposure and reference, it functions primarily as a standalone glossary and does not include guidance or expectations for students to use this vocabulary within career development contexts. The handout does not connect the terminology to professional communication, workplace applications, or career-focused activities, nor does it require students to apply vocabulary in speaking or writing tasks related to career development. As a result, the materials do not demonstrate an emphasis on vocabulary use during career-related learning opportunities.

The “Engineering Design Process Overview” vocabulary activity reinforces vocabulary comprehension through a matching exercise in which students pair engineering terms with their corresponding definitions. This activity focuses on recognition and recall of technical vocabulary rather than application. It is isolated from career development tasks and does not require students to use academic, professional, or technical vocabulary in authentic scenarios such as interviews, workplace communication, or career research. The materials do not include structured opportunities for students to apply vocabulary in meaningful career development activities, and vocabulary use is not embedded into career-focused tasks or expectations. Therefore, vocabulary is not emphasized within 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: Engineering Presentation” describes a lesson in which students engage in a workplace-simulated safety inspection. For example, the “Hazards Scavenger Hunt” has students walk through the lab to identify real potential hazards, such as spilled water, exposed wiring, leaking batteries, or improperly stored glass, and propose a solution to each one, mirroring the safety inspection responsibilities of a real workplace.

In the Course Implementation Guide, “Engineering Design Process” describes hands-on, project-based learning through the “Sustainable Design” project. For example, students work in teams across the full nine-class arc of the engineering design process to build a physical prototype using raw materials and document their reasoning at each stage in an engineering notebook. 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, “Instructional Delivery by Unit” includes multiple lessons in which students use industry-specific equipment and technical materials. In the “Lab Safety: Engineering Presentation” lesson, the “Safety Guidelines” activity requires students to reference a user manual for equipment or tools used in the classroom. Furthermore, the “Proper Equipment Maintenance” activity requires students to read a manufacturer’s manual to identify proper handling, maintenance, and storage procedures. In the “Circuits & Electrical Components” and “Lab Challenge: Circuits” lessons, students use digital multimeters, breadboards, resistor kits, and capacitor kits to construct and test circuits. In the “Principles of Technical Drawing” lesson, students use calipers, a compass, and a triangle to complete technical drawing activities.

These materials provide evidence that students use relevant industry-specific materials, including technical texts/manuals and equipment, during experiential learning. This use is present across three separate units, including “Professional Foundations,” “Electrical Systems,” and “Design Process Documentation.” This demonstrates the integration of industry-specific materials is a recurring feature of experiential learning within the course.

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 opportunities such as inquiry-based investigations, lab challenges, and real-world engineering problem solving. The section emphasizes that students engage in applied learning, develop technical and employability skills, and make connections to careers through “Career Connection” activities and industry insights. However, the section provides a high-level overview of instructional approaches and does not include evidence that students are expected to use academic, professional, or technical vocabulary during these experiential learning activities. There is no explicit guidance or embedded requirement for students to apply vocabulary in tasks such as labs, projects, or collaborative problem solving.

The “Assessment Framework” outlines a comprehensive approach to assessing student learning through formative, summative, and performance-based tasks, including design challenges, projects, and skill-based evaluations. These assessments support the application of engineering concepts and the development of technical and employability skills within classroom experiences. Despite this emphasis on experiential and applied learning, the framework does not provide evidence that students are required to use academic, professional, or technical vocabulary during these activities. Vocabulary use is not explicitly embedded within performance tasks, rubrics, or project expectations, and there are no clear requirements for students to demonstrate mastery of terminology in authentic contexts.

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 “Machine Shop Madness” project has students take on the role of a precision machinist fabricating custom parts. For example, students analyze a real engineering drawing to identify missing dimensions, correctly add them, identify and count common features, and use a feature rate table to calculate an itemized cost estimate for the part.

“Machine Shop Madness” also requires students to evaluate the viability of their solution before submitting it. For example, the rubric specifically scores whether realistic numbers were used in the feature rate table and whether the total custom part cost estimate is reasonable. This demonstrates students applying academic and technical knowledge to an authentic, industry-specific problem and developing and evaluating a viable solution.

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, the “Professional & Technical Skills Snapshot” presents charts that identify where professional and technical skills are introduced and reinforced throughout the course. Some of these skills include information evaluation, problem solving, and communication. The document shows alignment of these skills across lessons and highlights their integration within instruction. However, the snapshot serves as a high-level mapping tool and does not provide evidence of students engaging in industry-related data analysis. There are no examples of tasks requiring students to analyze datasets, identify trends, or apply quantitative or qualitative reasoning to make or justify decisions. The document does not demonstrate how students use data in authentic engineering contexts.

In the Course Implementation Guide, “Experiential Learning & Real-World Application” describes experiential learning opportunities such as lab investigations, problem-solving activities, and real-world application of engineering concepts. The section highlights that students engage in inquiry-based learning and develop skills related to research, experimentation, and application of engineering practices. Despite this emphasis on applied learning, the section does not include evidence that students conduct industry-related data analysis as part of these experiences. There are no specific examples of activities requiring students to evaluate data, identify trends, or use quantitative and qualitative reasoning to justify decisions. The materials do not demonstrate structured opportunities for students to engage in data-driven analysis within authentic engineering contexts.

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, the “Professional & Technical Skills Snapshot” provides charts that identify where professional and technical skills are addressed across lessons in the course. Some of these skills include communication, problem solving, and information evaluation. The document illustrates how skills are distributed and reinforced throughout instruction. However, the snapshot functions only as a high-level mapping tool and does not provide evidence of inquiry-based learning opportunities. There are no descriptions of activities in which students formulate industry-specific questions, conduct research, or engage with industry-specific sources to investigate engineering concepts. Additionally, the document does not demonstrate how students independently apply inquiry processes to deepen understanding.

In the Course Implementation Guide, “Experiential Learning & Real-World Application” describes experiential learning through inquiry-based investigations, lab challenges, and real-world problem-solving activities. The section emphasizes student engagement in applied learning and highlights connections to careers through general descriptions of instructional practices and “Career Connection” activities. Despite referencing inquiry-based learning broadly, the section does not include specific evidence of structured inquiry tasks aligned to industry contexts. There are no detailed examples of students generating questions, conducting targeted research using industry-specific resources, or investigating authentic engineering problems through sustained inquiry processes. The materials do not demonstrate how students actively engage in inquiry-based learning to the level required by the course.