Review Tools

image link to video: How the EdReports Review Process Works

Quick Links

Educator-Led Review Teams

Each report found on EdReports.org represents hundreds of hours of work by educator reviewers. Working in teams of 4-5, reviewers use educator-developed review criteria, evidence guides, and key documents to thoroughly examine their sets of materials.

After receiving over 25 hours of training on the EdReports review tools and process, teams meet weekly over the course of several months to share evidence, come to consensus on scoring, and write the evidence that ultimately is shared on the website.

All team members look at every grade and indicator, ensuring that the entire team considers the program in full. The team lead and calibrator also meet in cross-team professional learning communities to ensure that the review tools are being applied consistently among review teams. Final reports are the result of multiple educators analyzing every page, calibrating all findings, and reaching a unified conclusion.

Review Criteria Design

The EdReports review criteria supports a sequential review process through three gateways. These gateways reflect the importance of standards alignment to the fundamental design elements of the materials and considers other attributes of high-quality curriculum as recommended by educators.

Advancing Through Gateways

Materials must meet or partially meet expectations for the first set of indicators to move along the process. Gateways 1 and 2 focus on questions of alignment. Are the instructional materials aligned to the standards? Are all standards present and treated with appropriate depth and quality required to support student learning?
Gateway 3 focuses on the question of usability. Are the instructional materials user-friendly for students and educators? Materials must be well designed to facilitate student learning and enhance a teacher’s ability to differentiate and build knowledge within the classroom. In order to be reviewed and attain a rating for usability (Gateway 3), the instructional materials must first meet expectations for alignment (Gateways 1 and 2).

Key Terms Used throughout Review Tools and Reports

EdReports Review Tools are the combination of Review Criteria and a corresponding Evidence Guide.
- The Review Criteria identifies the indicators for high-quality instructional materials. The criteria support a sequential review process that reflects the importance of alignment to the standards then consider other high-quality attributes of curriculum as recommended by educators.
- The Evidence Guide complements the criteria by elaborating details for each indicator including the purpose of the indicator, information on how to collect evidence, guiding questions and discussion prompts, and scoring criteria.
Indicator - Specific item that reviewers look for in materials.
Criterion - Combination of all of the individual indicators for a single focus area.
Gateway - Organizing feature of the evaluation rubric that combines criteria and prioritizes order for sequential review.
Alignment Rating - Degree to which materials meet expectations for alignment, including that all standards are present and treated with the appropriate depth to support students in learning the skills and knowledge that they need to be ready for college and career.
Usability - Degree to which materials are consistent with effective practices for use and design, teacher planning and learning, assessment, and differentiated instruction.

Review Tools by Version

EdReports is committed to continuous learning and innovation to meet the evolving needs of the education community. We examine our review tools and review process on an ongoing basis, updating them as needed to ensure our reports provide maximum value to the field.

Version 2.0 Review Tools

In 2024, EdReports revised all its review tools for evaluating comprehensive instructional materials for K–12 ELA, math, and science. Our teams of educator reviewers will begin the first reviews using the revised criteria in early 2025, with the first reports and version 2.0 Evidence Guides expected later in the year.

Please note that, while all version 2.0 Review Criteria represent a robust foundation, they remain subject to ongoing refinements until the publication of the first reports using the updated criteria. Over the course of the review process for each content area and grade band, we will fine-tune the criteria to maximize clarity and practical use for our educator reviewers.

To learn more about version 2.0 tool revisions, including the introduction of multilingual learner (MLL)-specific tools, see this article and Frequently Asked Questions page.

ELA Review Tools: Version 2.0

Version 2.0 ELA tools use a single core content tool per grade band, each of which comprises three gateways (or groups of criteria):

Gateway 1: Foundational Skills (in relevant grades)
Gateway 2: Comprehension Through Texts, Questions, and Tasks
Gateway 3: Teacher and Student Supports

EdReports continues to review the same range of ELA materials formats. In previous tool versions, we used different ELA tools to review different formats. But, in version 2.0, we have a single tool that can be applied to all formats based on the areas that each program is designed to cover. For example, a K–2 foundational skills supplement will be reviewed against Gateway 1 (Foundational Skills) and Gateway 3 (Teacher and Student Supports), but not Gateway 2.

Please note that the ELA-MLL tools linked below evaluate ELA materials for MLL supports in all ELA areas except for foundational skills. Additional indicators to evaluate MLL supports for foundational skills content are currently in development. We are developing these indicators separately from other ELA indicators because the intersection of the science of reading and MLL supports is an evolving area of interdisciplinary research and collaboration, and we are working to ensure that our MLL indicators for foundational skills reflect the latest expert consensus.

ELA | Core Content

ELA | Multilingual Learner Supports

ELA: Multilingual Learner Supports | K–12 Review Criteria

* Version 2.0 review tools for K–2 ELA foundational skills supplements were revised in 2023 with tools and first reports published in June 2024.

Math Review Tools: Version 2.0

Math | Core Content

Math | Multilingual Learner Supports

Math: Multilingual Learner Supports K–12 Review Criteria

Science Review Tools: Version 2.0

Science | Core Content

Science | Multilingual Learner Supports

Science: Multilingual Learner Supports | K–12 Review Criteria

Version 1.5 Review Tools

Version 1.5 review tools were developed between 2020 and 2023, with inaugural v1.5 reports released in 2021. Learn more about the changes introduced in version 1.5 tools here.

Dedicated tools for evaluating the quality of multilingual learner (MLL) supports were introduced in version 2.0 review tools. In version 1.5, MLL criteria are included in gateway 3.

ELA Review Tools: Version 1.5

Please note that review tools for foundational skills supplements progressed directly from version 1.0 (2019) to version 2.0 (2024). For an overview of the K–5 materials formats that EdReports reviews, see this article.

ELA | K–2

ELA | 3–8

ELA | 9–12

Math Review Tools: Version 1.5

Math | K–8

Math | 9–12

Science Review Tools: Version 1.5

Science | K–5

Science | 6–8

Science | 9–12

Version 1.0 Review Tools

Version 1.0 review tools were developed between 2014 and 2019, with inaugural v1.0 math reports released in 2015.

ELA Review Tools: Version 1.0

For an overview of the K–5 materials formats that EdReports reviews, see this article.

ELA | K–2

ELA | 3–8

ELA | 9–12

Math Review Tools: Version 1.0

Math | K–8

Math | 9–12

Science Review Tools: Version 1.0

Please note that the first review tools for high school science were introduced in version 1.5 (see above).

Science | K–5

Science | 6–8

Interim Assessment Review Tools: Version 1.0

EdReports developed review tools for evaluating ELA and math interim assessments covering grades 3–8 between 2016 and 2023. While we were unable to review products due to lack of publisher participation, we believe there is value in providing the rigorously developed tools to the field to support local decision-making. To learn more, see this article.

ELA Interim Assessments | 3–8

Math Interim Assessments | 3–8