Answers to the most frequently asked questions about CURATE. If you don't see the answer to your question here, email DESE-CURATE@mass.gov
Q: How is CURATE different from EdReports?
A: Our panels use EdReports findings whenever possible as a trusted source of evidence in their reviews; however, CURATE builds on EdReports' work in three main ways: (a) CURATE focuses on Massachusetts standards, which are related but not identical to the standards EdReports uses; (b) CURATE incorporates input from educators with experience implementing the specific products under review; and (c) CURATE places particular emphasis on supports for multilingual learners, diversity of representation in texts, and other aspects of accessibility, usability, and equity.
Q: With the updates to CURATE in SY24, is EdReports still the gateway evaluator?
A: EdReports is one of many gateway evaluators for CURATE and remains a gateway evaluator for ELA/Literacy, mathematics, and science curricular products. Other content areas, such as Digital Literacy/Computer Science and History/Social Science, have other approved gateway evaluators for CURATE.
Gateway evaluators are trusted and reliable independent third parties that facilitate a robust, transparent, independent, and educator-driven review process to provide ratings of widely used curricular materials, along with clear and comprehensive rationales for those ratings. Independent third parties that facilitate such a curriculum review process wanting to be approved gateway evaluators for CURATE are invited to submit an official bid to a no-cost RFR through COMMBUYS, the official procurement record for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
Q: EdReports has put a hold on their evaluations. Has there been any conversations about "fast tracking" existing programs with newer copyrights? Publishers usually release enhancements every three years.
A: Yes, we have considered the "fast tracking" option proposed by publishers; however, we have decided not to change our current CURATE process. We may reconsider the "fast tracking" option at a later point in time and will communicate such a change and requirements to publishers accordingly.
Q: How do you decide which products CURATE panels review?
A: Publishers opt in by submitting their products to CURATE. To qualify for review, submitted products must be designed for comprehensive core curriculum, as opposed to supplemental or intervention programs, and they must demonstrate alignment to college- and career-ready standards as determined by a robust, transparent, independent, and educator-driven review completed prior to CURATE's. Usually, but not always, that review comes from EdReports for ELA/literacy, mathematics, and science products.
Q: What do CURATE panels look for in the products they review?
A: Our CURATE rubrics are unique to Massachusetts and include two domains. Standards Alignment focuses on the expectations set by the Massachusetts Curriculum Frameworks for what students should know and be able to do by the end of each grade. Classroom Application focuses on how products actually work in classrooms: their accessibility for diverse students, their usability for busy teachers, and any available research on their impact.
Q: How are CURATE panelists selected, trained, and supported in their work?
A: Our CURATE Fellows, all current classroom teachers of record in Massachusetts, undergo a rigorous selection process involving both written applications and interviews. We value deep knowledge of relevant content and WIDA standards and content pedagogy, as well as diversity of experience and expertise. During nine hours of initial training, Fellows internalize the CURATE rubrics, practice coming to consensus, build personal relationships, and begin their reviews. At these and subsequent panel meetings, they work with a facilitator charged with guiding their discussion, a report writer from the Rennie Center responsible for documenting decisions and evidence, and a DESE content expert supporting understanding of the standards and rubric. Fellows receive a base stipend for the training and additional compensation for each product they review.
Q: What determines when a CURATE report will be archived?
A: CURATE reports will be archived for the following reasons:
Publishers report they typically publish new editions of their products every three years. Local education agencies (LEAs) intending to make new adoptions are encouraged to consider products from the publisher that have more current reports, to ensure selected products will not be out-of-date and will continue to be supported by the publisher during the LEAs' intended period of early implementation.
Q: Will you please clarify the change to reviews of Open Educational Resources (OER)?
A: Beginning with SY24, CURATE will review and publish reports for only the base program of open educational resources from the original publisher. Open educational resources are products that have been licensed to certified publishers who provide access to the materials through a unique user experience via a unique online platform and print materials. The content of both teacher and student-facing materials are the same across all versions and do not impact the indicators evaluated by the CURATE rubric in Standards Alignment. Schools/Districts will need to investigate each certified publisher's website for details on the differences between versions to determine which publisher's options will best address their needs as they consider Classroom Application (Access for Students, Usability for Teachers) and other factors for their local context. We will note in the published report when the product is an OER with additional certified publishers.
Q: What is the process for submitting a new copyright to be reviewed of a program that has already been reviewed by CURATE?
A: A previous CURATE "overall" rating of Meets Expectations or Partially Meets Expectations doesn't automatically transfer to a new edition or copyright. Publishers wishing to submit a new edition or copyright for a product that was previously CURATE-reviewed must do so under the current CURATE process. The current rubric will be used for the review. We will notify publishers should we change our current process as related to "fast-tracking" previously CURATE-reviewed products that have been "enhanced" or have a new copyright.
Q: How does CURATE incorporate evidence of impact on student learning?
A: The Impact on Learning criterion was designed to communicate information about a specific product's efficacy based on meeting a definition of evidence in tiers 1, 2, or 3 as defined by ESSA. As part of their CURATE review submission, publishers may provide DESE research of efficacy. DESE's research office determines whether the provided research meets an ESSA definition of evidence in tiers 1, 2, or 3 that can be included with the published CURATE report.
As has been the process established for CURATE, a published CURATE report for a product that meets a definition of evidence in tiers 1, 2, or 3 by ESSA will be communicated through a rating of Meets Expectations for the Impact on Learning criterion. Beginning with SY24, a rating will be provided to clarify expectations for the rating of this criterion.
Q: I am using a product rated Partially Meets Expectations by CURATE. Should I stop?
A: Not necessarily. Because CURATE reviews only products already vetted by EdReports or a similar review process, CURATE ratings identify differences among a generally solid subset of products on the market. Accordingly, our rubrics explain that a rating of Partially Meets Expectations signals that "teachers in Massachusetts would benefit from having these materials but need to supplement or adapt them substantively to serve their students well." Do consider carefully whether adequate and appropriate supplementation and adaptation is taking place in your context.
Q: Without the overall rating, how will "high quality" status be determined?
A: High-quality instructional materials (HQIM), at a minimum, are (A) aligned to academic state standards and (B) provide ease of use with inclusive practices and educative teacher guides. Without the "overall" rating, we define "high quality" from a CURATE review as the following:
Schools/Districts should investigate the details in the Classroom Application domain of a CURATE report to determine which of the available standards-aligned products is the "strong horse" for their local context and equity priorities. The Department uses the "high quality" rating of curricular materials to establish prerequisites for grant program participation, promote HQIM adoption, support HQIM implementation, and monitor progress towards goals specific to the Department's Educational Vision, Strategic Objective 2: Promote deeper learning so that all students engage in grade-level work that is real-world, relevant, and interactive.
Q: What does a rating of N/A for Foundational Skills mean for a K–5 ELA/Literacy product?
A: A rating of N/A for Foundational Skills means that the curricular product was not designed to address the criterion, and the publisher explicitly communicated this omission in legal submissions for a CURATE review. The N/A rating allows the Department to communicate more effectively that a reviewed K–5 language arts core curricular product is without foundational skills and will need to be paired with a strong foundational skills resource, such as Appleseeds, to address all components of the core literacy block.
Q: Is an ELA/Literacy core program not "high quality" if it has a rating other than Meets Expectations for Foundational Skills?
A: A rating other than Meets Expectations for Foundational Skills does not necessarily mean the product is not high quality. High-quality instructional materials in grades K–5 language arts can be realized in these ways:
Q: If a CURATE report for a product is archived, does that mean the materials are no longer "high quality"?
A: An archived CURATE report doesn't necessarily indicate that a product is no longer "high quality," although a rating that results in a specific edition of a curricular product identified as being "high quality" is not meant to live into perpetuity. We notify publishers prior to archiving their materials. If the publisher determines it makes sense for them, they may choose to resubmit the same edition of their product for a re-review using the most current rubric, or opt in for a new review of their most current edition of the product.
As recommended best practice to support continuous improvement, local education agencies (LEAs) should establish a curriculum review cycle and routinely evaluate their current materials to assess and determine the extent to which their current materials are still well serving all their students to promote deeper learning. As such, the archiving of a CURATE report does not indicate that LEAs should purchase new materials; it communicates mainly that the CURATE report is outdated and LEAs intending to make new adoptions should do so from publisher materials with more current reports. This is to ensure that the product will continue to be supported by the publisher during LEAs' intended period of early implementation.
Q: Once archived, will programs still be considered "high quality" for the purposes of DESE grants?
A: The archiving of CURATE reports communicates that a CURATE report is outdated and local education agencies (LEAs) considering a new adoption should do so from a list of publisher products with more current reports. While the "high quality" status of a specific edition of a product does not live into perpetuity, LEAs implementing a product that received a previous "overall" CURATE rating of Meets Expectations or Partially Meets Expectations will still be eligible for DESE grants to support skillful implementation. We may in the future restrict grant funding of new adoptions and implementation support to products that are not on the archived reports list.
Q: If a school/district adopts a product that does not yet have a CURATE report but does have one from EdReports or other approved gateway evaluations, will they still be eligible for grants?
A: Consistent with grants and other opportunities the Center for Instructional Support has provided before to support purchase or implementation of high-quality instructional materials, districts/schools may look to EdReports or other approved educator-driven gateway evaluations to determine whether a product they intend to adopt that does not yet have a CURATE report meets the Department's definition of quality. An ELA/Literacy, mathematics, or science product reviewed by EdReports is considered "high quality" if it receives a rating of "Green"/ "Meets Expectations" in both Gateway 1 and Gateway 2 of Alignment. While we might approve an EdReports or other approved gateway evaluation rating for a grant prerequisite, we may hold a higher standard for materials that would be available for purchase using grant funds.
Q: Is our school/district affected by having adopted a product with an archived report?
A: A school/district that is implementing a product that is now on the archived CURATE reports list is not necessarily affected. An archived CURATE report communicates primarily that the report is outdated. If a product doesn't have a new copyright or edition, the publisher may opt in for a re-review using the current rubric. Schools/Districts intending to make new adoptions, however, are encouraged to consider products that have more current reports. To support continuous improvement, it is recommended best practice for schools/districts to routinely evaluate the quality of their curricular materials to determine the extent to which their current materials are still well serving all their students.
Q. What's the future of CURATE? Will you be evaluating new editions and versions of products as they are released? What about other subject areas and grade spans?
A: For the foreseeable future, CURATE will continue to review submitted digital literacy/computer science, ELA/literacy, history and social science, mathematics, science, and other products that meet our threshold for review. We consider LEAs' interests and publisher submissions to determine which content panels and grade spans to convene each semester. Additional subject areas and grade spans will be considered for a CURATE review depending on the result of their landscape analyses and gateway evaluations.
Q: Is there any public place that districts can share what they find successful/challenging when implementing high-quality instructional materials (HQIM)? That information is important and difficult to gather.
A: CURATE incorporates input from Massachusetts teachers with experience implementing the specific product under review when available and shares publisher information about the specific product in every published CURATE report. We recognize that variability in school/district context influences the specific successes and challenges they experience during implementation of high-quality instructional materials; the Department's Curriculum Data Collection Report exists not only to support understanding of the curricular materials being used in Massachusetts but also to encourage cross-LEA learning and collaboration among those using the same HQIM or who are further along in implementing HQIM.
Additionally, the Leaders Networks offered by the Center for Instructional Support provide opportunities to connect, collaborate, and learn with and from other educators from across the Commonwealth who also may be implementing high-quality instructional materials. Explore our Instructional Support Program Catalog for information about these networks and other instructional support resources.
Q: How can I get involved with CURATE?
A: There are three main ways educators can support and/or be involved with the CURATE project.
Last Updated: September 3, 2024
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 135 Santilli Highway, Everett, MA 02149
Voice: (781) 338-3000 TTY: (800) 439-2370
Disclaimer: A reference in this website to any specific commercial products, processes, or services, or the use of any trade, firm, or corporation name is for the information and convenience of the public and does not constitute endorsement or recommendation by the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education.