Literacy Path – 2nd Grade

Evaluation for 1.1a
Materials include an explanation of the stated purpose of the supplemental program (e.g., additional instruction and/or practice, targeted remediation or acceleration).

The materials explain the stated purpose of the supplemental program. Section 1 of the Implementation Guide identifies the materials as providing “additional instruction and practice.” For example, the materials state that the program offers “focused practice on grade‑level standards” as well as “targeted remediation or acceleration.” The materials demonstrate this stated purpose through adaptive activities that reinforce the same standards addressed during core instruction. These activities adjust in difficulty based on individual student performance, supporting the program’s purpose of offering additional instruction and practice and providing targeted remediation or acceleration.

The materials include evidence of targeted remediation or acceleration tailored to individual student performance. For example, section 1 of the Implementation Guide explains that “Literacy Path’s adaptive engine adjusts content in real time based on each student’s performance. Every student, whether at, above, or below grade level, receives practice at the right level of difficulty on the standards where they need it most.” The materials indicate that students who require additional support receive scaffolded instruction and practice at their instructional level, while students demonstrating proficiency advance into higher‑level content and skill bands to extend learning opportunities.

Evaluation for 1.1b
Materials include guidance on how to appropriately use the supplemental program to support an existing core reading and language arts program.

The materials guide educators on how to use the supplemental program to support an existing core reading and language arts program. Section 1 of the Implementation Guide explains that Literacy Path supports core ELAR instruction through TEKS‑aligned adaptive practice, intervention support, progress monitoring, and educator‑guided instructional planning. For example, section 1 states that adaptive activities “reinforce the same standards taught in core instruction” and provide students with “practice at the right level of difficulty” based on individual performance. The materials also note that the program supports ELAR and Spanish Language Arts and Reading (SLAR) instruction by aligning practice activities to grade‑level TEKS expectations.

Section 2 of the Implementation Guide explains that the adaptive engine “adjusts content in real time based on each student’s performance,” which allows educators to use student performance data to guide intervention and instructional support decisions within the core program. For example, this section describes how adaptive adjustments help educators identify areas where students need additional support or extension, demonstrating how the supplemental program supports and extends the existing core reading and language arts program.

Evaluation for 1.1c
Materials include a scope and sequence outlining student expectations, skills taught, and a rationale for the design of the scope and sequence.

The materials include the skills taught, a scope and sequence outlining student expectations, and a rationale for the design of the scope and sequence. Section 7 of the Implementation Guide, “TEKS Alignment and Scope and Sequence,” provides TEKS‑aligned tables that identify vocabulary and literacy standards addressed across grades 2–5, showing grade‑level expectations and how skills progress across grade levels. The materials outline the skills taught in the supplemental program and organize instruction through adaptive pathways that adjust based on student data and demonstrated mastery. Section 7 further explains the rationale for the scope and sequence, detailing how the program supports ELAR and SLAR instruction through TEKS‑aligned adaptive practice.

The materials include a rationale for the design of the scope and sequence. For example, section 2, “Research Foundation,” explains that the program design is grounded in literacy development research supporting a structured progression of skills and adaptive instruction. The materials also describe how the BRAVE motivation and engagement framework is intended to support student motivation and sustained engagement in literacy learning.

Evaluation for 1.1d
Materials include guidance on time requirements (e.g., duration, frequency) and suggested pacing for effective implementation.

The materials give guidance on time requirements and suggested pacing. For example, section 3 of the Implementation Guide, under “Routine Student Experience at a Glance,” describes a typical 15‑minute session” and provides specific durations for instructional components, such as “Read the Passage ~3–4 Min” and “Answer Questions ~8–10 Min,” establishing expected lesson duration. Additionally, “Integration Opportunities” in section 3 recommends using Literacy Path as a 15–20 minute technology station within a small‑group rotation.

The materials include guidance on suggested pacing for effective implementation. For example, section 2 of the Implementation Guide, “Adaptive Engine Overview,” explains that in Literacy Path, “fifteen working instructional level (WIL) bands span from grade 2 BOY (beginning of year) to grade 5 EOY (end of year),” showing how instructional content sequences across time. The materials further state that “readability escalation” occurs as text difficulty increases based on student proficiency, indicating a structured pacing progression. In addition, the “Platform Assignments” section provides educators with data on student progress toward pacing goals and identifies students who are behind, allowing educators to adjust pacing to meet instructional needs.

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

Resources and guidance are included to support educators in implementing the materials. For example, section 3 of the Implementation Guide provides guidance for launching the program, understanding TEKS alignment, defining educator roles, and engaging families. This section also includes a dashboard overview with a table of assessment types, helping educators effectively use program components as designed. In addition, the “Getting Started—Student and Teacher Onboarding” section outlines “Two Onboarding Paths,” including “Path A: NWEA MAP Import” and “Path B: Manual Entry,” and explains that the system will “create student accounts automatically from the roster data” and “set each student’s initial working instructional level (WIL) band from lexile scores,” offering resources and guidance for implementing the program as designed.

The materials include defined implementation expectations and technical support to guide educators in implementing the materials. Section 8 of the Implementation Guide, “Roles and Responsibilities,” outlines expectations for educators, instructional coaches, literacy specialists, and campus administrators. The materials also provide implementation supports such as references to “see the placement score to working instructional level (WIL) band table in Appendix E: Technical Specifications for More Information,” as well as guidance in “A Note on Dosage and Reading Growth,” which helps educators understand recommended usage and program expectations.

Evaluation for 1.1f
Materials contain supports for families in both Spanish and English with suggestions on supporting the progress of their student.

Supports for families in Spanish, such as suggestions to families for supporting their students’ progress, are included in the materials. For example, section 9, “Family Engagement and Resources,” includes the “Power of Your First Language” resource, which states, “The most important reading support you can give your child does not require English” and explains that a child’s home language “is the foundation for your child’s English literacy,” providing guidance for families on how to support reading development using their primary language. This section also includes Spanish‑language support materials, such as a sample family welcome letter in Spanish, demonstrating how families are supported in understanding and supporting student learning in their home language.

Supports for families in English include suggestions for supporting their students’ progress. For example, section 9, “Family Engagement and Resources,” includes the parent letter for grades 2–5, which explains that the Literacy Path platform provides focused practice on skills being taught in class, reinforcing instruction rather than replacing it. The section notes that educators receive real‑time data on each student’s progress to help families understand how the program supports ongoing learning and progress monitoring. The Literacy Path platform also includes English‑language resources for families in the Resource Library, such as the “Parent Resource & Vocabulary Support Guide Grade 2,” which offers guidance on building a love of reading at home, helping students understand why they read, building vocabulary at home, and engaging in reading and vocabulary activities. Section 9 further outlines how educators can access and share these English resources with families to support student progress.

Evaluation for 2.1a
Materials include appropriate instructional assessments for the stated purpose of the supplemental program (e.g., diagnostic placement assessments for targeted remediation or acceleration).

The materials include diagnostic assessments appropriate for the program’s stated purpose of targeted remediation and acceleration. Section 2 of the Implementation Guide, under “Diagnostic, Formative, and Summative Assessments,” explains that the program provides a diagnostic assessment that identifies each student’s starting point in the supplemental program, supporting targeted remediation or acceleration. The same section describes formative assessments that “monitor trends over time” and “evaluate growth,” demonstrating how the program gathers ongoing performance data to inform instruction. The materials also include summative assessments, such as the Snapshot Assessments, which measure student growth over time. The materials use an adaptive engine that administers two types of 15‑question assessments to evaluate cumulative growth across the TEKS standards: Snapshot Assessments serve as periodic mastery checks that can trigger WIL band movement, and Placement Assessment functions as an initial diagnostic that determines each student’s starting WIL band and baseline mastery across grade‑level TEKS for students who do not have NWEA Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) data.

A comprehensive set of instructional assessments is included that aligns with the stated purpose of the supplemental program. Section 4 of the Implementation Guide, under “Assessment Design Overview,” identifies the assessment item types used across diagnostic, formative, and summative assessments, including multiple-choice, multi-select, hot text, dropdown, and short constructed-response items, demonstrating that the assessments offer appropriately structured tasks that support skill development. Section 4, “Understanding Your Dashboard and Using Data,” further explains that Literacy Path uses these item types to assess comprehension across Depth of Knowledge levels, consistent with the types of questions students encounter on STAAR. Across sections 2, 3, and 4 of the Implementation Guide, the materials describe how the program systematically uses diagnostic, formative, and summative assessments to gather ongoing performance data, measure growth aligned to the TEKS standards, and inform daily instruction.

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

The materials explain the intended purposes and definitions of the instructional assessments provided. The Literacy Path materials define the role of each assessment type within the Assessment Types and Activity Types tables, which describe diagnostic assessments as tools that establish each student’s baseline mastery, and formative assessments as progress‑monitoring measures that track standard‑level mastery to inform next instructional steps. Section 2 of the Implementation Guide, under “Assessment Overview,” reinforces these definitions by outlining how diagnostic assessments identify initial instructional levels and how formative assessments provide ongoing data to guide instruction. Section 4 of “Assessment Design Overview” identifies the item types used in these assessments.


The materials define the purpose and use of the instructional assessments included in the program. For example, section 2 of the Implementation Guide, under “Snapshot Cadence and Instructional Grouping,” describes how assessment data support monitoring student progress, determining mastery status, guiding instructional grouping, and supporting next instructional steps through adaptive instruction. The materials further explain these definitions in “Snapshot Cadence” and “Forming Small Groups Using Dashboard Data,” which outline how diagnostic assessments establish baseline mastery and how formative assessments track standard‑level mastery to inform instruction. The technical specifications in the Mastery Status Decision Matrix reinforce these purposes by showing how assessment results determine mastery status and guide instructional decisions.

Evaluation for 2.1c
For instructional assessments administered by educators, materials include guidance to ensure consistent and accurate administration of instructional assessments.

This guidance is not applicable to the program because the program is student driven. Assessments are administered by the program, not an educator.

This guidance is not applicable to the program.

Evaluation for 2.1d
Instructional assessments include items at varying levels of complexity.

The materials include items at varying levels of complexity. For example, section 2 of the Implementation Guide, under “Question Types and Comprehension Levels,” explains that assessment items span multiple Webb’s Depth of Knowledge (DOK) levels, including DOK 1 (literal comprehension), DOK 2 (inferential comprehension), and DOK 3 (evaluative and analytical comprehension). The materials also describe how multigenre passages such as fiction, nonfiction, poetry, drama, and persuasive texts are incorporated to increase cognitive demand and broaden the range of reading tasks as students progress through adaptive levels. These descriptions show that the program includes assessment items intentionally designed to reflect varying levels of complexity.

The materials include instructional assessments with a variety of item types. For example, section 4 of the Implementation Guide, under “Understanding Your Dashboard and Using Data,” identifies the assessment formats used across Practice Activities, Snapshot Assessments, and Placement Assessments. The “Question Types” table in this section explains that the program includes multiple-choice single (MC1), multiple-choice multi-select (MCM), drop-down, short constructed-response (SCR), and hot text items. The materials describe how these item types appear across assessment opportunities to support varied student responses and measure different levels of comprehension, indicating that the program includes a range of item types within its instructional assessments.

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

The materials include instructional assessments that guide the educator in interpreting student data. For example, section 4 of the Implementation Guide, under “Understanding Your Dashboard and Using Data,” includes “Forming Small Groups Using Dashboard Data,” which explains how educators can interpret student performance on instructional assessments through a five‑step process that identifies clusters of students with similar skill gaps and groups them for targeted small‑group instruction. The materials specify that mastery data from Literacy Path should be used to identify students who are struggling and that instructional groups should be reviewed and adjusted monthly following each round of Snapshot Assessments.

The scoring information criterion is not applicable because the program uses a student-driven digital assessment system with automatic scoring. In section 2 of the Implementation Guide, “Routine Student Experience at a Glance” explains that “Literacy Path automatically scores activities, updates mastery data, and assigns subsequent activities based on student performance.” Because assessment items are scored digitally within the platform, educator scoring guides or manual scoring rubrics are not required for implementation.

Evaluation for 2.2b
Materials provide guidance for the use of the supplemental program to respond to student trends in performance on assessments.

Guidance is included on how to use the supplemental program to address performance trends on assessments. The Implementation Guide explains how educators can use the Classroom Dashboard to interpret assessment results and identify grade-level standards requiring additional support. The dashboard organizes students by mastery status, such as needs support, developing, and on track/mastered, based on completed practice activities and assessments. It also provides reports on grade-level standards needing hands-on support, standards mastery, question-type performance, class assignment goals, and instructional-level distribution. The materials include a Mastery Status Decision Matrix and guidance for forming small groups using dashboard data, connecting mastery levels to recommended instructional actions and supporting educators in identifying shared skill gaps and targeting the specific grade-level TEKS.

The materials further guide educators in using assessment data to adjust instruction. The Implementation Guide states that per-standard mastery data, WIL band progression, intervention alerts, and Snapshot Assessment results provide information for lesson planning, intervention decisions, and small-group instruction. Educators are directed to identify students needing support, group students by skill gaps, and adjust instruction based on mastery trends. The materials also describe a three-stage intervention system that addresses persistent low mastery through targeted practice, standard-specific instructional videos, and educator-directed small-group instruction with ready-to-use resources. In addition, adaptive differentiation features, including scaffolded hints, readability matching, and dashboard-based activity assignments, adjust instruction in response to student performance.

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

The materials include tracking tools for both educators and students to monitor progress and growth, as described in the Implementation Guide under “Dashboard Overview” and through the platform’s “Dashboard” and “Assignments” tabs. The program provides student-level mastery data, WIL progression history, and weekly pacing indicators, enabling educators and students to monitor progress toward instructional goals and mastery of standards. The dashboard views display mastery of standards, activity completion, and WIL band movement, providing educators with clear tools for tracking growth over time.

Tools are included that support ongoing progress monitoring, as explained in section 5, “The BRAVE Motivation and Engagement Framework” and section 7, “Adaptive Scope and Sequence Rationale.” These sections describe student‑level mastery displays, motivation reports from Literacy Path’s BRAVE Framework for cultivating reading growth, engagement trend indicators, and WIL band progression data that help students and educators observe growth patterns. The materials provide immediate feedback on student responses, opportunities for second attempts with hints, and standards‑based support videos after repeated errors, which help students track their own learning and monitor improvement. Students can also view their progress through the “Dashboard” tab, where they can see their scores, activity history, and growth within the program.

Evaluation for 2.2d
If applicable for the stated purpose of the supplemental program, materials include guidance for entry and exit criteria.

The materials include guidance for entry criteria on targeted remediation and acceleration. In section 3, “Getting Started: Two Onboarding Paths,” the Implementation Guide explains that educators can place students in the program by importing NWEA MAP data or administering a 15-question placement assessment. The technical specifications document includes the Placement Score-to-WIL Band and Percentile-to-WIL Band Placement tables, which connect assessment results to each student’s WIL. The materials explain that these measures establish baseline mastery of the TEKS standards, determine instructional placement, and identify students who may require additional support.

The materials also include guidance for exit criteria based on student mastery and progress. In section 2, “The Adaptive Engine,” and section 7, which describes promotion within the adaptive scope and sequence, the materials explain that students progress through WIL bands as they demonstrate mastery of literacy standards and perform successfully on Snapshot Assessments. Progress monitoring, mastery data, and assessment performance determine readiness for advancement. Section 10 further explains that students who master most standards within their current WIL band and score strongly on Snapshot Assessments are promoted to the next WIL band. The intervention system also uses a three-stage process consisting of “Monitor, Video, and Hands-On Support.” The materials state that when student performance improves, the system returns students to monitoring status, indicating that they have exited targeted intervention support.

Evaluation for 3.1a
If applicable for the stated purpose, materials include educator guidance for differentiated instruction and activities for students who have not yet reached proficiency in grade-level skills.

Materials for grade 2 include educator guidance and differentiated activities for students who have not yet reached grade-level proficiency in certain skills. This guidance appears in “Supporting All Learners” and “Built‑In Differentiation,” where a differentiation table outlines supports for students performing below, at, and above grade level. For example, the table explains that below‑grade‑level students are placed at an appropriate instructional level based on their WIL band. Additionally, the materials note that “standards are scaffolded from lower‑grade equivalents,” giving students access to prerequisite skills needed for success.

The materials include guidance and differentiated supports for students who have not yet reached grade-level proficiency in certain skills, which is described in the Implementation Guide under “What Is the Intervention System?” and “Supports Aligned to IEP Goals and Specially Designed Instruction (SDI).” For example, the materials outline a three‑stage intervention system that increases targeted practice, provides standard‑specific instructional videos, and alerts educators when students need direct instructional support. Additionally, guidance in section 10, “FAQ,” explains how the intervention system monitors performance for each TEKS standard, supplies a skill‑building video when students continue to struggle, and notifies the educator when hands‑on support is required.

Evaluation for 3.1b
If applicable for the stated purpose, materials include educator guidance for differentiated instruction and activities for students who have demonstrated proficiency in grade-level skills.

The materials include educator guidance and differentiated activities for students who have demonstrated proficiency in grade-level skills. Guidance in “Built-In Adaptive Differentiation,” “Adaptive Scope and Sequence Rationale,” and “Supporting All Learners” documents explain how the program advances proficient learners through higher WIL bands, providing access to more complex passages, challenging questions, and advanced content. The adaptive system skips standards already mastered (90 percent or greater) and focuses instruction on areas that still require support. Students who consistently demonstrate mastery may move into higher-grade-level content, with cross-grade advancement requiring a 90 percent mastery threshold.

The materials also describe a continued-promotion protocol for students who master content at their current level. According to “FAQ #5,” students who master most standards within a WIL band and perform strongly on Snapshot Assessments are promoted to the next WIL band, with mastery transferring at 75 percent to reflect increased rigor. Educators can further extend learning through higher-grade-level Deep Dive and Quick Boost activities. Students who reach the highest supported band (grade 5 EOY) continue to receive reinforcement and enrichment on remaining standards.

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

The materials include educator guidance on providing specially designed instruction (SDI) to students receiving supports and services through special education, as described in the Implementation Guide under “Supports Aligned to IEP Goals and Specially Designed Instruction (SDI).” The materials explain that individualized pacing, adaptive difficulty, and accessible content features help students make progress toward their IEP goals, and that read-aloud and text-to-speech supports reduce barriers to accessing grade-level content while maintaining appropriate challenge. The adaptive engine positions learners at their actual skill level and allows them to move through content at a self-determined pace, supporting SDI requirements. Guidance in “Supporting All Learners” includes a Supports Aligned to IEP Goals and Specially Designed Instruction (SDI) table, which identifies SDI-aligned needs such as individualized pacing, adaptive difficulty, accessible content, visual accessibility, and progress monitoring aligned to IEP goals. The table also outlines the corresponding Literacy Path features and instructional impacts, providing educators with clear guidance on how to meet the needs of students receiving special education services.

The materials include educator guidance for providing SDI for students receiving supports and services through special education, which is described in the Implementation Guide under “Supports Aligned to IEP Goals and Specially Designed Instruction (SDI)” and “Collaboration Between General and Special Education.” For example, the materials explain that individualized pacing, adaptive difficulty, accessible content, and read-aloud and text-to-speech supports help students work toward their IEP goals while accessing instruction at an appropriate level of challenge. The unified data system supports SDI by giving general and special education teachers a shared view of per-standard mastery, enabling them to monitor progress toward targeted goals and identify areas requiring additional support. Guidance in section 6, “Supporting All Learners,” further outlines role-specific responsibilities: General education educators manage students’ Literacy Path progression and use real-time dashboard data to inform instruction, while special education educators track mastery toward IEP-aligned goals and plan targeted interventions.

Evaluation for 3.2a
Educator-led supplemental programs include explicit (direct) prompts and guidance to support the educator in modeling and explaining the skill(s) to be learned.

This guidance is not applicable to the program because the program is student driven. Modeling and explanation of skills is done by the program, not an educator.

Evaluation for 3.2b
Educator-led supplemental programs include educator guidance and recommendations for effective delivery and facilitation using a variety of instructional approaches.

This guidance is not applicable to the program because the program is student driven. Instructional delivery and facilitation is done by the program, not an educator.

Evaluation for 3.2c
Materials include guidance for educators on recommended structures (e.g., whole group, small group, individual) to support effective implementation.

The materials for grade 2 include guidance for educators on recommended instructional structures to support effective implementation, which is described in the Implementation Guide under “Roles and Responsibilities” and “Forming Small Groups Using Dashboard Data.” For example, the materials describe a five-step process for forming and adjusting small groups based on student performance data, allowing educators to provide targeted instruction aligned to identified skill needs. Additionally, guidance in section 6, “Understanding Your Dashboard and Using Student Data,” explains how educators can use dashboard data to identify clusters of students who share similar skill gaps by sorting the class-level standards mastery view by “needs support” and grouping students in sets of three to five based on need.

The materials include guidance for educators on recommended instructional structures to support effective implementation, with direction provided in the Implementation Guide under “Literacy Path in Your MTSS Framework,” “Integration Opportunities,” “Alignment to Core Instruction,” and “Integration Models.” For example, the materials outline how Literacy Path can be implemented within tier 1 and tier 2 instructional settings and describe multiple integration models aligned to the program’s intended use. Additionally, the materials position Literacy Path alongside core instruction and explain how adaptive differentiation, emergent bilingual supports, and special education accommodations can be incorporated to meet the needs of diverse learners.

Evaluation for 3.3a
Materials include educator 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 language.

The materials include educator guidance on providing linguistic accommodations for various levels of language proficiency, as defined by the ELPS, which are designed to engage students in using increasingly more academic language. For example, guidance in section 6, “Supporting All Learners,” under “Supporting Emergent Bilingual Students,” provides resource documents aligned with the TEKS and the ELPS that outline linguistic accommodations for beginning, intermediate, advanced, and advanced high proficiency levels.

Additionally, the “Platform Features by ELPS Levels” table describes how educators can scaffold instruction at each proficiency level, such as preteaching vocabulary for beginning learners, providing cognates and sentence frames for intermediate learners, and creating structured opportunities for extended academic discussion for advanced and advanced high learners.

Evaluation for 3.3b
Materials include implementation guidance to support educators in effectively using the materials in state-approved bilingual and English as a Second Language (ESL) programs.

The materials include implementation guidance to support educators in effectively using them in state-approved bilingual and ESL programs, provided in section 6, “Using Literacy Path Across Bilingual Education and ESL Program Models.” For example, the materials offer specific implementation recommendations for dual language immersion (DLI), transitional bilingual education, and ESL program models.

The guidance describes how educators can use Literacy Path within each model, including language-allocation considerations, use of Spanish and English literacy pathways, and alignment to TEKS for ELAR and SLAR to support bilingual and ESL instruction. The materials also include scaffolded hints that provide emergent bilingual (EB) students with context-specific support after an incorrect response, reducing language demand while maintaining the learning opportunity.

Evaluation for 3.3c
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 5.1a
Materials include explicit (direct) instruction on specific vocabulary using multiple strategies for teaching word meaning (e.g., student-friendly definitions, synonyms and antonyms, examples and non-examples, categorization and classification, images).

In grade 2, the Literacy Path materials provide structured opportunities for students to learn specific vocabulary through multiple strategies that support word meaning development. Student‑facing Word Maps introduce target vocabulary using a picture, a student‑friendly description, examples, and non-examples. As students progress, the Word Maps expand to include formal definitions and student‑generated definitions in “In My Own Words,” providing multiple representations of vocabulary. These supports align to strategies such as student‑friendly definitions, examples and non-examples, and visual representations. For example, the Resource Library includes the “Word Maps: Getting Started” routine, which teaches vocabulary by having students work with one word, one picture, and two examples. This routine provides explicit instruction using at least two strategies for teaching word meaning.

The materials build in explicit, direct instruction on vocabulary using three or more strategies for teaching word meaning. The “Learning and Practicing Vocabulary” guide introduces vocabulary through student‑friendly definitions, synonyms and antonyms, examples and non-examples, categorization and classification activities, and visual representations. This is illustrated through the guide’s outline of five vocabulary strategies that include the strategy name, research rationale, step‑by‑step implementation notes, grade‑band guidance, and a classroom example. The “TEKS & ELPS Alignment” section further identifies the vocabulary strategies included in the guide and shows how they align to state standards.

Evaluation for 5.1b
Specific vocabulary selected for explicit (direct) instruction includes high-utility tier 2 and tier 3 academic vocabulary.

In grade 2, the Literacy Path materials provide structured opportunities for students to learn high‑utility tier 2 academic vocabulary through explicit routines and multiple strategies that support word‑meaning development. The “Fun, Cross-Content Vocabulary Strategies” guide identifies tier 2 words that appear frequently in grade level texts and classroom tasks. For example, the guide includes instruction with academic terms such as equivalent, compare, describe, explain, analyze, and evidence. These words represent broad academic concepts that strengthen students’ ability to interpret texts, participate in discussions, and express ideas with clarity. The guide also provides educator-facing routines that model how to introduce tier 2 vocabulary through student-friendly definitions, examples and non-examples, guided practice, and opportunities for students to apply the terms during reading, writing, and collaborative learning.

The Literacy Path materials embed focused instruction on discipline‑specific vocabulary that supports students in learning key science and social studies concepts. The “Fun, Cross-Content Vocabulary Strategies” guide identifies tier 3 words that carry precise, content-based meaning essential for understanding academic concepts. For instance, the materials demonstrate this by including instruction with technical terms such as organism, community, habitat, erosion, evaporation, and environment. These words represent specialized vocabulary that helps students build accurate scientific and environmental understanding. The guide further demonstrates how educators introduce tier 3 vocabulary through concrete examples, visual supports, real-world connections, and structured opportunities for students to use the terms during content-based investigations, hands-on activities, and academic discussions.

Evaluation for 5.1c
Materials include repeated opportunities for students to practice using specific vocabulary in multiple contexts.

Within the grade 2 Literacy Path program, students engage in consistent vocabulary practice across multiple routines that reinforce word meaning in varied contexts. The “Read Around It” routine appears consistently in the Literacy Path Resource Library under “Learning Activities” and is used across multiple practice passages. The routine typically begins in the warmup, where students preview tier 2 academic vocabulary they will encounter in the passage. During guided practice, students apply the strategy while reading short informational or literary texts that embed tier 3 content‑specific terms. In independent practice, students revisit the same vocabulary through comprehension questions that require them to use within‑sentence and beyond‑sentence clues to determine meaning. Lessons at this grade level commonly include tier 2 words such as observe, compare, describe, explain, and identify, alongside tier 3 science and social studies terms such as habitat, organism, erosion, evaporation, and landform. Because the routine appears across multiple passages throughout the year, students receive repeated opportunities to practice using specific vocabulary in varied contexts.

The materials embed structured practice that allows students to apply targeted vocabulary across varied reading and writing experiences. The “Deep Dive: Use New Words” routine provides students with chances to apply vocabulary in authentic writing by selecting a word from a shared word bank and incorporating it into a brief personal narrative. For example, partners analyze each other’s writing to determine the meaning of the selected word using contextual evidence, giving students practice with vocabulary in a new communicative setting. Students also encounter targeted vocabulary across multiple genres, such as drama, informational text, folktales, and persuasive text. Through repeated exposure in varied reading and writing experiences, students deepen their understanding of how academic vocabulary functions across contexts and strengthen their ability to interpret and apply academic language during reading.

Evaluation for 5.2a
Materials include explicit (direct) instruction on using morphemic analysis to determine word meaning in alignment with grade-level TEKS as appropriate for the program's stated purpose.

In grade 2, the Literacy Path materials introduce opportunities for students to analyze word parts as they learn how prefixes, suffixes, and base words contribute to word meaning. The “Teaching Morphemic Analysis” resource provides direct instruction on how prefixes, suffixes, and known base words contribute to word meaning. For instance, the resource includes a structured four part instructional sequence in which teachers define morphemes, model how to analyze familiar and unfamiliar words, guide students through the analysis process, and support independent application. Instruction focuses on high-frequency prefixes such as un‑, re‑, and pre‑ and suffixes such as ‑ful, ‑less, and ‑ness attached to known base words, aligning to grade-level expectations for analyzing meaningful word parts.

The materials feature educator-facing guidance that explains how morphemic analysis supports vocabulary development and comprehension. The resource provides sample educator language, implementation notes, and research-based rationale to ensure that instruction is explicit and systematic. Students apply morphemic analysis during connected reading and vocabulary tasks through routines such as “Word Sort by Morpheme,” “In Context Analysis,” and “Morpheme of the Week.” These activities require students to identify meaningful word parts, explain how prefixes and suffixes affect word meaning, and apply morphemic reasoning to determine the meaning of unfamiliar words encountered in grade level text.

Evaluation for 5.2b
Materials include opportunities for students to practice using morphemic analysis to determine word meaning in alignment with grade-level TEKS as appropriate for the program's stated purpose.

The materials for grade 2 provide structured opportunities for students to apply morphemic analysis to determine word meaning. Students apply morphemic knowledge during authentic reading of connected text in the practice activity “George Washington Carver,” where they read a grade‑level informational passage and respond to comprehension questions that require them to analyze prefixes, suffixes, and familiar base words to determine the meaning of unfamiliar terms. One item asks: “Read this sentence from paragraph 3. People called Carver the greatest of his time. What does the word greatest mean?” Students analyze the base word great and the suffix ‑est to determine meaning. Additional questions prompt students to interpret common affixes such as re‑, un‑, and pre‑, and suffixes such as ‑ful, ‑less, and ‑ness attached to familiar base words. These tasks reinforce morphemic analysis as a strategy for determining word meaning during real reading experiences.

The materials integrate structured practice that helps students analyze how suffixes contribute to word meaning. In the Deep Dive lesson “Crack the Code: ‑ly, ‑er, ‑est,” students learn and apply the “Suffix Equation” strategy: Identify the suffix, identify the base word, and combine the meanings to determine the meaning of the entire word. Through a gradual release model, educators first model the analysis of words containing ‑ly, ‑er, and ‑est before students independently break apart and interpret words such as softly, kindly, faster, louder, fastest, and loudest. Additional digital activities extend practice with abstract noun endings such as ‑tion and ‑sion, giving students repeated opportunities to analyze how suffixes alter meaning and function.

Evaluation for 5.2c
Materials include explicit (direct) instruction on using contextual analysis to determine word meaning in alignment with grade-level TEKS as appropriate for the program's stated purpose.

The materials for grade 2 provide structured opportunities for students to use contextual analysis to determine word meaning. The Quick Boost activity “Context Clue Sort” provides direct instruction on the different types of context clues authors use to support understanding of unfamiliar vocabulary. For example, educators model how to identify definition clues, example clues, synonym clues, antonym clues, and restatement clues before guiding students to sort sentence strips into categories based on the type of clue present. Students then analyze each sentence, determine which clue type is used, and explain how the clue supports understanding of the target word. Anchor charts created during the lesson provide ongoing reference for students as they apply contextual analysis during reading.

The materials incorporate structured routines that help students use context clues within and beyond a sentence to determine word meaning. In the section of the Deep Dive lesson “Read Around It,” students learn a four-step strategy: Read the whole sentence, look for clue words, read the sentence before or after if needed, and use those clues to determine meaning. The routine provides educator modeling, guided practice, and independent application using authentic reading passages. Students identify clue words, determine meanings, classify the type of context clue used, and justify their reasoning with evidence from the text.

Evaluation for 5.2d
Materials include opportunities for students to practice using contextual analysis to determine word meaning in alignment with grade-level TEKS as appropriate for the program's stated purpose.

The grade 2 materials offer structured opportunities for students to apply contextual analysis to determine word meaning. Students apply context‑clue strategies across a variety of texts and genres, including fiction, informational passages, poetry, and dramatic scripts. Poems such as “Mia’s Red Kite,” “The Kite Poem,” and “I Use a Wheelchair” include questions that require students to use surrounding words, phrases, and ideas within the poem to determine the meaning of unfamiliar vocabulary. One representative item from “Mia’s Red Kite” asks: “What does the word ‘soar’ probably mean in the poem?” A question from “I Use a Wheelchair” asks: “Using clues from the whole poem, what does ‘zoom’ probably mean?” Students use contextual information within and beyond the sentence to infer meaning, supporting the development of flexible strategies for determining word meaning during authentic reading.

The materials provide opportunities to apply contextual analysis within authentic dramatic texts. Plays such as “Turtle and Fox Parts A and B,” “Missing Backpack,” “Kite Rescue,” and “Playground Problem” include questions that require students to use dialogue, character actions, and plot details to determine the meanings of unfamiliar words and phrases. Students analyze how vocabulary functions within the scene, consider how word meaning contributes to character interactions, and justify their interpretations using evidence from the text. These activities offer repeated practice with context clues across dramatic texts of increasing complexity, supporting students in applying contextual analysis flexibly across genres and reading situations.

Evaluation for 8.1a
[English reading language arts] Materials include opportunities for students to read high-quality, grade-level, complex texts as appropriate for the program's stated purpose, in a variety of text types (e.g., literary, informational). [Spanish reading language arts] Materials include opportunities for students to read high-quality, grade-level, complex authentic or transadapted Spanish texts as appropriate for the program's stated purpose, in a variety of text types (e.g., literary, informational).

The grade 2 materials provide access to high‑quality texts that support sustained reading and deeper comprehension. Students read a collection of 11 fiction passages in Literacy Path that provide sustained reading experiences and support comprehension, vocabulary development, inferencing, and analysis. Each passage includes aligned comprehension questions that require students to interact meaningfully with the text. For example, students answer a DOK 1 question in “The Missing Puzzle Piece – Part B” that asks which sentence tells what Mia looks like. This task requires students to locate and recall explicit details from the text. For instance, students answer a DOK 2 question that asks what the word cheered means in the story, which requires them to use context clues to determine word meaning. Additionally, students answer a DOK 3 question that asks which idea from another story is most like Lena and Mia working together to finish the puzzle.

The materials offer opportunities for students to read grade‑level, complex texts that match the program’s stated purpose. Students read full literary selections rather than isolated sentences or short fragments. Texts such as “Sea Turtle Journey” and “Lily’s Secret Door” include questions that require students to explain character actions, determine word meaning, and make inferences. For instance, students answer a question that asks why Lily follows the firefly in “Lily’s Secret Door,” which requires them to interpret character motivation. Additionally, students answer a question that asks what the reader can tell about the firefly after it says, “I will show you a secret door,” which requires them to analyze dialogue and draw conclusions.

The materials include opportunities for students to read a variety of text types. Students read literary fiction through the 11‑passage collection. Students also read informational texts that build knowledge while supporting comprehension practice. For example, students read “Sea Turtle Journey,” an informational text that explains how sea turtles nest, hatch, and move toward the ocean. These factual details support comprehension through text‑based questions. Additionally, the informational text collection exposes students to nonfiction text structures that align with grade‑level expectations.

Evaluation for 8.1b
Materials include a variety of high-quality texts at different levels of complexity.

The grade 2 Literacy Path materials feature a progression of texts that increase in linguistic, structural, and cognitive demand across the instructional year. Early texts such as “Lily’s Secret Door” present concrete vocabulary, a linear event sequence, and a single narrative perspective that support developing readers. As students advance, Literacy Path uses paired passages like “Lily’s Secret Door” and “Sea Turtle Journey,” which require students to integrate information across genres and interpret multiple‑meaning words in context. Later informational selections such as “Goods and Services in Our Town” introduce maps, glossaries, and discipline‑specific vocabulary that require students to synthesize information across text features.

The materials include several high‑quality texts at different levels of complexity, and Literacy Path provides literary, informational, and content‑rich passages that differ in structure, vocabulary load, and knowledge demands. Literary selections such as “Lily’s Secret Door” offer descriptive language, character actions, and narrative sequencing that strengthen literary comprehension. Informational texts like “Sea Turtle Journey” and “Goods and Services in Our Town” introduce scientific and social studies concepts, discipline‑specific terms, and text features such as diagrams and headings that require students to interpret and integrate information. Additionally, the WIL adaptive system adjusts text complexity as students demonstrate proficiency, providing continued opportunities to engage with appropriately challenging grade‑level texts.

Evaluation for 8.1c
Texts include content that is relevant, engaging, and authentically reflects students' diverse backgrounds and experiences.

The grade 2 materials feature texts that thoughtfully represent diverse experiences and perspectives in ways that are relevant and engaging for students. To begin, the poem “My Grandma’s Language” explores bilingual family life through themes of identity, cultural heritage, and intergenerational connection. For example, Spanish words and phrases such as buenos días appear naturally within the poem, showing multilingual communication as a meaningful part of daily life rather than an isolated instructional feature. Additionally, students make personal connections by identifying real-life experiences similar to the poem’s events, strengthening relevance and engagement. The program also provides a Spanish-language version of the poem, supporting equitable access for emergent bilingual learners.

The grade 2 materials also provide texts that present diverse perspectives and lived experiences. For instance, the poem “I Use a Wheelchair, I Use My Voice” offers a first-person narrative from a student who uses a wheelchair, emphasizing inclusion, self‑advocacy, and belonging. Furthermore, TEKS‑aligned comprehension questions prompt students to reflect on how individuals should treat one another and consider perspectives that may differ from their own. In addition, the biography “George Washington Carver” introduces students to the accomplishments of an influential African American scientist whose innovations continue to shape agriculture. Students engage with academic vocabulary while learning about historical contributions that connect literacy with science and social studies.

Evaluation for 8.2a
Materials activate or supply background knowledge.

The grade 2 Literacy Path materials include instructional guidance that activates and supplies background knowledge to support vocabulary development and comprehension. To begin, the “Vocabulary Instruction: Do’s and Don’ts” guide synthesizes decades of research into practical strategies that emphasize meaningful learning over rote memorization. Rather than relying on isolated definitions, the guide encourages educators to connect new words to students’ prior knowledge, real‑world experiences, discussion, and authentic contexts. Additionally, students deepen understanding by acting out vocabulary, examining images, viewing short video clips, handling objects, or recalling shared classroom experiences. The guide also recommends student‑friendly explanations, multiple exposures, oral language practice, word‑relationship instruction, and home‑language connections.

The Literacy Path materials also include a structured framework of evidence‑based routines that activate and build background knowledge while supporting vocabulary and comprehension. For instance, the “Learning and Practicing Vocabulary” guide presents five research‑supported routines: “Student‑Friendly Definitions,” “Synonyms and Antonyms,” “Examples and Non‑Examples,” “Categorization and Classification,” and “Images and Visual Representations.” These connect new vocabulary to students’ existing knowledge and experiences. Furthermore, each routine includes rationale, implementation steps, grade‑band guidance, and classroom examples aligned to the TEKS and ELPS. As students engage, they build background knowledge by linking new words to prior experiences, organizing vocabulary into categories, analyzing relationships among concepts, using visuals, and discussing ideas collaboratively.

Evaluation for 8.2b
Materials include pre-teaching of unfamiliar vocabulary in texts.

The Literacy Path materials provide explicit guidance for preteaching unfamiliar vocabulary prior to students’ engaging with texts to support comprehension and language development. The “Vocabulary Instruction: Do’s and Don’ts” guide emphasizes selecting high-utility tier 2 vocabulary and introducing it before reading through student-friendly explanations, real-world connections, and interactive experiences. Educators are guided to ensure students have prior exposure to key words before encountering them in texts, with additional support through oral language practice, discussion, sentence frames, and home-language connections for emergent bilingual students.

The materials also include structured routines in the “Learning and Practicing Vocabulary” guide that support intentional preteaching of unfamiliar words before reading. These routines include student-friendly definitions, synonyms and antonyms, examples and non-examples, categorization and classification, and visual representations. Each routine includes educator modeling, step-by-step implementation, and classroom examples aligned to the TEKS and ELPS. These strategies are used to introduce and clarify vocabulary prior to text exposure, ensuring students encounter unfamiliar words with foundational understanding that supports comprehension during reading.

Evaluation for 8.2c
Materials include explicit (direct) instruction on using contextual analysis to determine the word meaning of unfamiliar vocabulary in texts in alignment with grade-level TEKS as appropriate for the program's stated purpose.

The grade 2 materials provide explicit instructional guidance for teaching contextual analysis as part of daily vocabulary instruction. Specifically, “Vocabulary Happens All Day” emphasizes that vocabulary development is strengthened through intentional educator modeling, repeated exposure, and purposeful use of academic language across content areas. Educators explicitly model how to use surrounding sentences, familiar experiences, and textual context to determine word meaning during authentic reading experiences. For example, when students encounter unfamiliar vocabulary such as discover, observe, or brilliant in short, informational or literary passages, educators demonstrate how to look at nearby sentences and picture clues to infer meaning before turning to external resources. The resource directs educators to connect new words to students’ background knowledge, facilitate discussion using newly learned vocabulary, and integrate contextual analysis naturally into reading, writing, science, and social studies.

The materials provide explicit, step-by-step instruction for using contextual analysis within grade-level texts through structured Deep Dive lessons. In “Read Around It,” educators model a clear and systematic process in which students use both within-sentence and beyond-sentence context clues to determine the meaning of unfamiliar and multiple-meaning words. Instruction follows a gradual release model, beginning with educator think-alouds that demonstrate how to identify meaningful clues, locate supporting evidence in surrounding sentences and paragraphs, and verify inferred meanings. Educators explicitly guide students to explain how specific context clues support their thinking before moving into guided practice and independent application. Additionally, the “Context Detective” lesson provides direct instruction on using a structured, scripted process to analyze multiple types of context clues to determine word meaning. Students are explicitly taught to identify clues, infer meaning, and justify their reasoning using textual evidence. Across these lessons, students apply contextual analysis strategies to increasingly complex literary and informational texts, demonstrating clear alignment to grade-level TEKS and supporting independent vocabulary problem-solving.

Evaluation for 8.2d
Materials include opportunities for students to practice using contextual analysis to determine word meaning of unfamiliar vocabulary in texts in alignment with grade-level TEKS as appropriate for the program's stated purpose.

The grade 2 Literacy Path materials integrate contextual analysis into students’ work with grade‑level literary texts. To begin, in the Deep Dive lesson “Setting Matters,” educators preview unfamiliar vocabulary with student-friendly definitions to remove barriers to comprehension. As students read, they apply contextual reasoning as they analyze how the setting influences characters, events, and overall understanding of the narrative. Using a gradual release model, educators model their thinking through think-alouds before students independently read “The Waiting Room” and explain why the setting matters. Students then support their ideas with evidence from the text, using contextual clues such as the “NO ENTRY” sign, Dani’s limited activities, and the physical characteristics of the waiting room to explain how the setting shapes the character’s feelings and the events of the story.

The materials further extend opportunities for students to practice contextual analysis through a structured continuation of the “Setting Matters” lesson. After reading “The Waiting Room,” students apply contextual clues to the “What If the Setting Changed?” counterfactual activity, determining how changes in location, environment, or conditions would affect the character’s feelings, actions, and the events of the story. As students engage, they use evidence from the text to justify how specific contextual details shape meaning, reinforcing the same reasoning process modeled earlier in the lesson. Through embedded supports, including sentence frames, partner discussion, observation tools, and scaffolds for EB learners, students practice applying contextual clues with increasing independence.

Evaluation for 8.3a
Materials include systematic and explicit (direct) instruction on reading comprehension skills at multiple levels (i.e., literal, inferential, evaluative) in alignment with grade-level TEKS as appropriate for the program's stated purpose.

The grade 2 Literacy Path materials include systematic and explicit direct instruction in literal, inferential, and evaluative comprehension through recurring Deep Dive lessons that follow consistent routines. To begin, “Language That Paints Pictures” uses a predictable sequence of modeling, discussion, and independent practice as students analyze imagery, literal language, similes, and onomatopoeia. Students move from identifying language features to explaining their purpose using textual evidence. Similarly, “Reading Between the Lines” teaches a structured inference routine requiring students to combine multiple text clues with background knowledge, construct an inference, and justify it with precise evidence. Students evaluate the strength of their reasoning and revise when needed.

The materials include explicit instruction in reading comprehension skills at multiple levels through direct modeling and scaffolded practice. For example, in “Language That Paints Pictures,” educators model how authors intentionally choose descriptive, literal, and figurative language to create meaning and influence the reader’s experience. Think-alouds show students how to identify language choices, analyze their effects, and justify interpretations with textual evidence. In “Reading Between the Lines,” educators explicitly model how to identify two text clues, activate background knowledge, construct an inference, and select supporting evidence. Students then explain, evaluate, and revise their reasoning. Through explicit modeling, guided discussion, and structured practice, students learn to independently apply literal, inferential, and evaluative comprehension skills while engaging with grade‑level texts.

Evaluation for 8.3b
Materials include opportunities for students to practice reading comprehension skills at multiple levels (i.e., literal, inferential, evaluative) with a variety of grade-level texts in alignment with the grade-level TEKS as appropriate for the program's stated purpose.

The grade 2 Literacy Path materials provide students with integrated opportunities to engage in comprehension work that blends vocabulary, inference, text‑feature analysis, and evaluation within a single reading experience. In the “Sea Turtle Journey” and “Lily’s Secret Door” paired passage set, students determine vocabulary using context, make evidence‑based inferences about characters and informational details, analyze the purpose of text features, and evaluate how an author’s choices support understanding. Questions require students to move beyond recall by explaining reasoning, interpreting the author’s craft, and applying textual evidence to justify conclusions.

The materials offer opportunities for students to practice reading comprehension skills with a variety of grade‑level texts through authentic informational passages that reinforce literal, inferential, and evaluative thinking. In “Benjamin Franklin: A Man Who Made Things Better” and “How We Pick Our President,” students retrieve explicit information, develop evidence‑based inferences, and evaluate important ideas, author’s purpose, and key concepts. Additional texts such as “The Flag That Brings Us Together” and “The Sahara and Gobi Deserts” broaden comprehension practice across civic, cultural, geography, and science‑related content. Across these varied informational texts, students synthesize information, compare ideas, analyze relationships, and justify conclusions using textual evidence.