iCEV STEM Site – Engineering Design & Problem Solving

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 TEKS correlation chart and table of contents that help educators identify the TEKS correlations for each unit and the type of content that addresses each TEKS. The “Standards Snapshot” explains the coverage of concepts as well as the introduction, reinforcement, and extension of each technical skill. The snapshot also explains the strategic scaffolding of instruction to ensure the integration of all of the TEKS. The “Standards Snapshot” also identifies the TEKS by lesson.

The “TEKS Spiraling Across Lessons & Units” table identifies every TEKS addressed in more than one lesson. This section lists the “First Introduced” lesson and the “Reinforced/Extended” lesson(s) for each spiraling standard. An introductory 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, Suggested class days are traditional days converted into total minutes and divided by the number of minutes in a block. The Course Implementation Guide has a “Sequencing & Pacing Snapshot” section that provides pacing based on a standard instructional calendar. The guide also includes an algorithm for manually calculating pacing for schedules outside the standard models.

In the Course Implementation Guide, the “Sequencing & Pacing Snapshot” section 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.

The “Course Design Snapshot” and “Instructional Delivery by Unit” sections of the Course Implementation Guide 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. 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” feature that provides a unit overview for each unit. The materials include 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.

The “Instructional Delivery by Unit” section of the Course Implementation Guide 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/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 introduction to the Course Implementation Guide states that the guide serves as a resource for instructional leaders by outlining the processes, structures, and expectations that ensure proper implementation of the materials. The Educator Resource Guide states that “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 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, families 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 for each unit with suggestions on how families can support the progress of their student 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 & Problem Solving Capstone” lesson includes Checks for Understanding and a performance-based capstone project aligned to the lesson objectives that covers research, technical writing, data analysis, and engineering design process skills.

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. Additionally, 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. The sequencing and pacing guide also includes suggested times for each lesson component. These times help educators estimate pacing to successfully facilitate lessons. .

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. The list does not include the Technology Student Association.

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 and performance-based tasks and projects that require students to apply learning in authentic contexts. This framework ensures that assessments occur at both the lesson and unit levels.

The course assesses students through a range of formats, including question-based assessments and applied performance tasks throughout the lesson. The “Pre/Posttest Blueprint” and “Lesson Plan - PTX26_Reverse Engineering” resource both explain how to implement the different assessment types within instruction.The blueprint outlines a 50-question multiple-choice assessment structure, demonstrating a comprehensive diagnostic and summative measure with selected-response questions. 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. Lessons also include end-of-lesson assessments and project-based evaluations.

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. These framework sections explain the intended purposes of each assessment and provide detailed guidance for diagnostic, formative, summative, and skill-based assessment types. Within the framework sections, educators can also find information about the purpose of each assessment, when it appears during instruction, and how it supports student learning and performance improvement. For example, the frameworks explain how educators can use formative assessments to monitor student understanding during lessons, while summative assessments evaluate overall learning at the end of instruction. This guidance ensures 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 educators use each type and what educators should expect when implementing it. The materials describe key components for each assessment, including when the educator should implement the assessment, time estimates, required resources, and guidance for improving student performance. 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 educators should administer assessments 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 “Teachers: Managing Pretests & Posttests” and “Teachers: Viewing Pretest & Posttest Reports” sections of the “iCEV Tutorials” resource and the “Lesson Plan - PTX26_Reverse Engineering” document provide additional guidance that supports accurate and consistent administration of assessments. The tutorial resources guide educators in managing pretests and posttests and interpreting assessment results through reports. The lesson plan identifies specific points in the lesson where educators should administer assessments and outlines the type of assessment used as students progress through instruction. Together, these materials ensure that educators know not only 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” documents show how formative assessments align with the TEKS and lesson objectives. The lesson plan identifies the TEKS alignment for the lesson and describes the formative assessments, including Checks for Understanding and exit tickets. These assessments test student understanding of the lesson objectives, but the materials do not specify the TEKS alignment for the formative or summative assessments. Educators need to determine how individual assessments align with specific standards.

The “Pre/Posttest Blueprint” and the “TEKS Alignment” document provide limited and inconsistent evidence of alignment for diagnostic and summative assessments. While the blueprint includes the TEKS and lesson references for the 50-question diagnostic assessment, it does not demonstrate alignment to all course TEKS. Moreover, the materials do not clearly show how diagnostic and summative assessments align with the TEKS and objectives of the course, unit, or lesson. Additionally, the materials list the TEKS at the unit level, but they do not connect the TEKS 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” document identifies the standards addressed within each unit and lesson, and the “Pre/Posttest Blueprint” connects the TEKS and lesson references to the 50-question multiple-choice diagnostic assessment. These two documents show that assessment items align with specific content standards and 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 the 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 educators should evaluate student work. These resources define how educators should score assessments 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, allowing educators to make comparisons among students and identify 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 color-coded “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. The Educator Resource Guide describes additional progress monitoring tools, including student engagement reports and activity tracking. These tools 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 “ELPS Guide” section in the Course Implementation Guide provides a single activity or project for each student expectation. However, the guide does not include educator guidance on providing linguistic accommodations for various levels of language proficiency, which is what this indicator requires.

The “ELPS Guide” in the Course Implementation Guide includes a Proficiency Level Key defining three scaffolding bands that each align with the ELPS Proficiency Level Descriptors. For example, each of the 26 lettered student expectations has a distinct activity and project for each proficiency band across all four language domains. This satisfies the previously identified gap and supports a full score for this indicator.

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 activity for the “Reverse Engineering” lesson plan 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” 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 handouts, vocabulary activities, 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 the 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 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 concepts 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 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.

Neither the “Lesson Plan - PTX26_Reverse Engineering” resource nor the “Instructional Supports in iCEV” section of the Educator Resource Guide provides 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 the materials provide general lesson delivery steps, 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 educators use clear structures when implementing practice activities. 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, and provide differentiation by levels of language proficiency. The “ELPS Guide” section of the Course Implementation Guide includes a Proficiency Level Key, which defines 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 sections.

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, which 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, 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 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 “Course Design Snapshot” and “Professional & Technical Skills Snapshot” describe a general progression of learning but do not explicitly connect new knowledge and skills to prior learning across lessons, units, or courses.

Every Unit Internalization Protocol includes a “Connecting to Prior Learning” section. Each unit also features a “Prior-Unit Connection” that names the specific prior unit and skill that connects to the current unit. For example, the prompt in unit 2 asks students to recall the professional communication norms established in unit 1.

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

The “Transportation Station” project and the “Design Dynamics” activity from the “Engineering Design Process Overview” lesson include opportunities for students to use and apply industry-specific vocabulary during instruction. The “Transportation Station” project requires students to document their reasoning in an engineering notebook throughout each of the seven stages of the engineering design process. Students record a problem statement, research summary, decision matrix analysis, and testing plan. “Design Dynamics” requires students to analyze a real-world bridge design scenario and explain in writing how factors such as complexity, manufacturability, maintainability, stakeholders, and regulations affect the engineering design process. These tasks require students to apply vocabulary in a written, applied context rather than simply recognizing or matching terms. As a result, the materials include opportunities for students to use and apply industry-specific academic and technical vocabulary.

The “Transportation Station” project and the “Design Dynamics” activity are both drawn from the “Engineering Design Process Overview” lesson and do not extend to other lessons within the course. While the materials demonstrate vocabulary application throughout 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 “Professional & Technical Skills Snapshot” listed academic, technical, and employability skills separately by lesson but did not integrate them in the context of the course.

Every Unit Internalization Protocol includes a “Connecting to Prior Learning” section. Each unit also features a “Prior-Unit Connection,” which names the specific prior unit and skill that connects to the current unit. For example, the prompt in unit 2 asks students to recall the professional communication norms established in unit 1.

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.

In the Course Implementation Guide, the “Engineering Design Process Overview” describes a lesson in which students complete formal assessment checkpoints tied directly to content during instruction. For example, following the “Engineering Design Process Steps” segment in class 7, students complete a Check for Understanding. They complete another Check for Understanding after the “Engineering Design Process Factors” segment in class 8. Finally, students complete a comprehensive final assessment in class 9, which covers the engineering design process and its influencing factors. This demonstrates students being required to show understanding of industry-specific knowledge and skills aligned to the course TEKS.

In the Course Implementation Guide, the “Engineering Design Process Overview” section also describes applied tasks that go beyond formal assessment. For example, the “Transportation Station Project” requires each student to individually document their design process in an engineering notebook, referencing the “Brainstorming Strategies,” “Decision Matrix,” and “Engineering Notebook Example” handouts to structure their reasoning at each stage. The “Design Dynamics” activity requires students to analyze a scenario and identify how various factors affect the engineering design process. The materials include activities and tasks that have students apply and document 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. The course embeds and reinforces professional and technical skills across lessons.

Every Unit Internalization Protocol includes a “Connecting to Prior Learning” section. For example, units 2 through 9 have a “Prior-Unit Connection” section, which names the specific prior unit and skill. Unit 1 uses a “Cross-Course Connection” 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, demonstrating how students apply skills such as quantitative reasoning, data analysis, and technical reading and writing within engineering design and problem-solving contexts. The materials embed these cross-curricular connections within the course structure and lesson sequencing, supporting the application of academic concepts in industry-relevant scenarios.

While the “Course At-a-Glance” section of the Course Implementation Guide and the “TEKS Alignment” document provide evidence of cross-curricular connections across multiple core academic disciplines, 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 “Professional & Technical Skills Snapshot” and “Experiential Learning & Real-World Application” sections of the Course Implementation Guide identify academic, technical, and employability knowledge and skills included throughout the course. The “Skills Snapshot” maps lessons to skills, such as communication, collaboration, problem solving, and technical processes, and indicates where the course addresses these skills across units. Additionally, the “Experiential Learning & Real-World Application” section describes authentic contexts, including project-based learning, real-world applications, and career-connected experiences that align with industry expectations. These materials indicate that educators expect students to engage with a range of skills in industry-relevant contexts.

The “Professional & Technical Skills Snapshot” and “Experiential Learning & Real-World Application” sections of the Course Implementation Guide do not provide evidence that academic, technical, and employability skills are intentionally integrated within instructional tasks or activities. While the materials list skills and describe authentic contexts, they do not include specific examples showing how the course combines and applies these different skill types within the same learning experiences. The course aligns these skills to lessons in isolation, but the experiential descriptions do not include task-level evidence demonstrating integrated application of multiple skill types during instruction. As a result, the materials do not show the integration of academic, technical, and employability knowledge and skills to support meaningful application and workplace readiness.

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 and identifies its 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” states that the materials embed career awareness throughout the course. 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 appropriate differentiation 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 and identifies alignment to programs of study such as civil engineering, electrical engineering, engineering foundations, and mechanical and aerospace engineering. While this section establishes connections to career pathways, it does not include references to labor market information 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” section explains that the materials embed career awareness 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, nor does it require students to analyze such data as part of career investigations. While students engage in general career exploration, the absence of structured analysis of LMI or workforce data means the materials do 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” section includes a career investigation activity 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. After generating questions and responses, students research and reflect on the qualifications, responsibilities, and expectations associated with a career path. This activity 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 lesson plan for the “Engineering Design Process Overview” lesson includes embedded “Career Connection” opportunities. The lesson also has project-based learning experiences, such as the “Transportation Station Project,” which connects 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 for “Professionalism in the Sciences: Engineering Design” provides structured lesson components, including PowerPoint segments, bell ringer activities, vocabulary handouts, and Checks for Understanding. These components introduce concepts such as 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 for “STEM Careers: Engineering Design” 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 the TEKS and CTE Employability Skills Standards.

The “Professional & Technical Skills Snapshot” section of the Course Implementation Guide identifies embedded employability skills such as communication, collaboration, and critical thinking 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 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 does not connect to 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 the course does not embed vocabulary use into career-focused tasks or expectations. Therefore, the course does not emphasize vocabulary 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.

The “Experiential Learning & Real-World Application” section of the Course Implementation Guide describes a variety of classroom-based experiential learning opportunities, including inquiry-based investigations, performance-based design challenges, technical skill application, and “Career Connection” activities that simulate professional experiences. These experiences emphasize real-world problem solving, engineering design, and career awareness within the classroom setting. However, the section provides only a broad overview of instructional approaches and does not include evidence of structured work-based learning opportunities such as job shadowing, internships, or practicums. While students engage in simulated or classroom-based experiences, the materials do not demonstrate progression along the work-based learning continuum beyond classroom instruction.

The “Assessment Framework” section of the Course Implementation Guide outlines experiential learning through activities such as hands-on projects, lab challenges, guided instruction, and performance-based assessments that allow students to apply technical skills in structured classroom environments. These opportunities emphasize skill development through collaboration, experimentation, and project-based learning aligned to the TEKS and industry standards. However, all described experiential learning opportunities occur within the classroom context and are limited to simulations or instructional activities. The materials do not include or reference authentic work-based learning experiences aligned to the appropriate level of the work-based learning continuum, such as partnerships with industry, internships, or field-based 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.

The “Instructional Delivery by Unit” section of the Course Implementation Guide provides opportunities for students to use industry-specific tools, technology, and technical documents during hands-on experiential learning. In the “Tool Use” unit, students use vernier calipers to measure coins in the “Coins & Calipers” activity, supported by a “Tips for Using Measurement Tools” handout that guides accurate use of laboratory instruments. In the “Lab Safety” unit, students engage directly with safety data sheets, safety signage, and hazard identification during a scavenger hunt activity, reflecting authentic workplace safety documentation.

In the “Technical Drawing” unit, students use computer-aided design tools and reference the ASME Y14.5 standard for geometric dimensioning and tolerancing while completing a “Tolerance Brochure” project. In the “Machine Shop Madness” activity, students assume the role of a precision machinist, reading technical drawings and identifying dimensioning errors using industry-standard drafting conventions. In the culminating design challenge, students construct an autonomous rover using industry-relevant equipment including an Arduino microcontroller, motor controllers, infrared reflectance sensors, a power drill, deburring tools, mechanical fasteners, mounting components, wiring sensors, and programming navigation logic in a workflow that mirrors authentic engineering and robotics industry practices.

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

The “Experiential Learning & Real-World Application” section of the Course Implementation Guide describes experiential learning opportunities such as inquiry-based investigations, performance-based design challenges, and career-connected activities that simulate real-world engineering experiences. These opportunities emphasize the application of technical and employability skills through hands-on tasks and problem-solving scenarios. However, the section provides only a high-level description of these experiences and does not include evidence of students using academic, professional, or technical vocabulary as part of these activities. There are no expectations, embedded prompts, or structured requirements for students to apply industry-aligned terminology during experiential learning tasks, and the course does not connect vocabulary use to these experiences.

The “Assessment Framework” section of the Course Implementation Guide outlines experiential learning through activities such as projects, lab challenges, guided instruction, and performance-based assessments that support the development of technical and employability skills. The framework references the use of instructional supports such as key concepts and vocabulary handouts during guided instruction; however, the materials present these supports as general resources rather than integrated components of experiential learning tasks. The materials do not provide evidence that the course requires students to use academic, professional, or technical vocabulary during labs, projects, or other hands-on learning experiences.

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.

The “Professional & Technical Skills Snapshot” section of the Course Implementation Guide identifies where the course embeds professional and technical skills such as collaboration, research, communication, and problem solving across lessons. This section provides a visual mapping of skills across units and indicates alignment to technical competencies such as modeling, solution development, and evaluation. However, the snapshot functions as a reference chart and does not include descriptions of specific instructional tasks or authentic problem scenarios in which students apply these skills. The materials do not provide evidence of students engaging in industry-specific problems or developing and evaluating viable solutions within real-world contexts. The section does not demonstrate opportunities for authentic application of knowledge and skills.

The “Experiential Learning & Real-World Application” section of the Course Implementation Guide describes experiential learning opportunities such as inquiry-based investigations, design challenges, and career-connected activities intended to simulate real-world engineering experiences. The section emphasizes exposure to industry practices and the application of problem-solving and technical skills through classroom-based activities. However, this section provides only a high-level overview of instructional approaches and does not include specific examples of authentic, industry-specific problems or evidence of students developing and evaluating solutions to real-world challenges. While the materials reference real-world applications, they do not demonstrate structured opportunities for students to engage with authentic problems aligned to the level of the course or to produce viable, evaluated solutions.

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.

The “Professional & Technical Skills Snapshot” section of the Course Implementation Guide identifies where the course embeds skills such as research, data analysis, and critical thinking. The section maps technical skill development, including analyzing data and evaluating solutions, across various units and lessons. However, this section functions as a high-level reference chart and does not include descriptions of specific instructional activities or tasks in which students conduct industry-related data analysis. The materials do not provide evidence of students evaluating real-world data sets, identifying trends, or using quantitative and qualitative reasoning to justify decisions within an industry context.

The “Experiential Learning & Real-World Application” section of the Course Implementation Guide describes experiential learning opportunities such as inquiry-based investigations, performance tasks, and career-connected activities designed to simulate real-world engineering practices. These experiences emphasize general problem solving, design thinking, and exposure to industry expectations. However, the section provides only an overview of instructional approaches and does not include specific examples of students conducting industry-related data analysis, such as interpreting real-world data, analyzing trends, or justifying design decisions using quantitative or qualitative evidence. While the materials reference data analysis as a skill, they do not demonstrate structured opportunities for students to apply this skill in authentic, industry-related 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 “Evaluating Experimental Design” section describes an activity in which students conduct research using an authentic engineering design source. For example, educators assign students an actual engineering design research paper. Students must determine the type of study performed and identify its key experimental design elements based on the information provided.

In the Course Implementation Guide, the “Comparing Designs” section extends this research task further. For example, students identify three different engineering design papers on the same topic, evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of each experiment’s design based on the information presented, and rank the designs from strongest to least strong. Students conduct research using industry-specific sources.