Are your literacy and numeracy materials up to par? A tool for evaluating teaching and learning materials (TLMs)

Group Submission Type: Formal Panel Session

Proposal

A significant challenge facing education systems globally is the availability and use of instructional materials, which vary widely in quality and in alignment with evidence-based instructional practices. These materials include scope and sequence guides, teachers’ guides, and student workbooks, and play a critical role in supporting foundational learning. Quality refers to the extent to which materials are appropriate for the grade level (as defined by the Global Proficiency Framework) in terms of content, instructional approach, and format; reflect inclusive education practices; and are usable by the intended audience. Alignment with evidence-based instructional practices refers to the integration of research-backed methods that have been shown, under rigorous conditions, to support student learning. Systematically evaluating instructional materials for both quality and alignment is a complex and demanding process.

To support this process, the World Bank and the Gates Foundation, through the Engeza initiative, developed two tools (one for literacy and one for mathematics) designed to guide review teams in evaluating instructional materials for pre-K through grade 3. The tools were developed to respond to a growing need and demand from education stakeholders in low-income countries regarding the quality of existing resources for improving foundational literacy and math. As efforts to improve reading and math expand, governments and donors want to know if their resources are being spent on quality TLMs.

Although tools such as the World Bank’s Teachers’ Guide Diagnostic Tool, the Reading League’s Curriculum Review Tool, and “how-to” guidance and checklists developed under the Gates Foundation’s Science of Teaching initiative are available, no existing tool was found that provided sufficient detail on evidence-based content and instructional practices by grade and reading/mathematics domains to formulate specific materials revisions recommendations.

These new tools offer a structured, objective framework grounded in clearly defined, research-based content and pedagogical criteria. They aim to minimize subjective bias and reduce variations in individual technical preferences, ensuring consistency and reliability in evaluations.
Results from the tools can support several key decisions: (1) reviewing currently used materials to identify strengths and areas for improvement, including addressing content gaps and enhancing instructional practices; (2) selecting materials from a set of existing options through a landscape assessment to identify those that are highest in quality and best aligned with research-based practices; and (3) developing new instructional materials that support foundational learning goals as outlined in the Global Proficiency Framework. However, the tools are not intended to inform decisions related to the adequacy of professional development for implementation, the quality of remedial or intervention programs, or funding decisions based on material quality.

The TLM review tools are intended for use by education practitioners, literacy and mathematics experts, curriculum developers, and policy makers engaged in foundational learning. Because the tools require judgments about quality and alignment with evidence-based instructional practices, review team members should possess adequate knowledge of early literacy and/or mathematics teaching and learning. For the literacy tool, experts in the language of instruction of the associated materials are also critical. While not all members must have technical expertise, teams should include individuals with specific qualifications: familiarity with grade-level content and instructional expectations (including the Global Proficiency Framework); knowledge of evidence-based practices, such as structured pedagogical approaches; and an understanding of inclusive education strategies, such as differentiated instruction and cultural responsiveness.
The purpose of this presentation is to share the rationale for the two tools, an overview of their content and how they are intended to be used, and outcomes and lessons learned from its recent application in several contexts. These include countries that have experienced conflict, such as Nigeria and Pakistan.

The tools are a critical, timely resource that can help education leaders address the current crisis in foundation literacy and numeracy in low-income countries in particular, and help to expedite the expanded distribution of high-quality TLMs. Moreover, the tools can help to diffuse tensions in contexts where decisions regarding teaching and learning materials can be fraught given the involvement of diverse stakeholders in developing and funding them, the languages involved, and other factors. Finally, the tools can also help to “level the playing field” by ensuring the quality of materials across languages, which can in turn help to provide a more equitable education and eventually mitigate socioeconomic other inequities within countries.

Sub Unit

• General Pool

Chair

• Alison Pflepsen, Independent

Individual Presentations

• Evaluating literacy and numeracy teaching and learning materials: Tool development and pilot test cases - Alison Grimsland, The World Bank Group

• Minding the gap: Bridging research and practice in literacy teaching materials - Sylvia Linan-Thompson, University of Oregon

• Improving mathematics outcomes through evidence-based curricular materials - Leanne Ketterlin Geller, Southern Methodist University

Discussant

• Jennifer Swift-Morgan, Prevail Fund