Indicator: Access to quality, culturally responsive curricula

Definition

Schools and instructors use a standards-aligned core course curriculum that meets quality standards (as defined by EdReports) and is culturally relevant, leveraging students' lived experiences and their linguistic, cultural, and community knowledge.

Recommended Metric(s)

Percentage of teachers regularly using standards-aligned, culturally responsive curricula

Type(s) of Data Needed

Surveys

Why it matters

A high-quality curriculum can shape instruction and student learning. For example, there is evidence that using skill-based curricula in early childhood education is linked to large improvements in children’s cognitive abilities,1 and in K–12, a growing body of experimental research shows that different curricula can lead to better academic achievement outcomes for students.2 At the postsecondary level, curricula typically are not standardized, though there is some movement toward redesign and standardization of gateway courses to better promote student success.3 However, there is limited information on what makes curricula effective, largely because curriculum information is not collected systematically. Available evidence suggests that content richness and standards alignment are common qualities of effective curricula, and that curricula prioritizing student engagement may have positive effects on student achievement. In particular, students may benefit from seeing their culture represented positively within the curriculum.4, 5, 6 Research emphasizes the importance of “culturally relevant”7  and “culturally sustaining”8 instruction for students of color and demonstrates that all students’ achievement is positively impacted by culturally relevant instruction,9 however, research is limited on how to assess cultural responsiveness in curriculum materials.

What to know about measurement

The field lacks a standardized approach to measuring access to quality, culturally responsive curricula, although there are ongoing advances in the field. Of note, a 2024 National Academies report outlined the characteristics of high-quality, equity-driven pre-K curricula10 and EdReports11 rates K–12 curricula based on coherence, standards alignment, and usability. Also useful are review rubrics, such as those published by Louisiana Department of Education.12  Generally, there are no applicable rubrics to rate the quality of college curricula, although Courseware in Context provides a framework for assessing the quality of digital courseware in higher education.13

Framework users can look to RAND for one potential approach to measuring curriculum use. RAND administers an annual American Instructional Resources Survey (AIRS), which examines the use of standards-aligned curricula by a nationally representative sample of teachers. The survey offers a list of curriculum materials and asks teachers to report which materials they use at least once per week. RAND then uses EdReports ratings to code whether in-use materials are standards-aligned, partially aligned, or not aligned, offering insights into the use of standards-aligned curricula by grade and subject. Schools or districts could take a similar approach to understand what curricula teachers are using and the extent to which the curricula align with standards.14

However, assessing standards alignment does not sufficiently address cultural responsiveness or relevance. Framework users interested in measuring cultural responsiveness may also consider assessing in-use curricula against tools such as the Culturally Responsive Curriculum Scorecards developed through a collaboration between researchers, parents, students, and educators in New York City. However, we caution that this tool relies on subjective assessments (that is, it asks raters to indicate their level of satisfaction with various dimensions of a curriculum, which may vary individual to individual). Mathematica has also developed a culturally responsive curriculum review tool, though it is specific to math curricula.15

An alternative to using surveys to measure this indicator could be to use administrative data on curricula adoption at school or district levels; however, data on which curricula are in use in pre-K programs, K–12 schools, and postsecondary institutions currently are not collected systematically. Researchers acknowledge challenges to collecting and analyzing curriculum data, including that curriculum implementation varies widely at the classroom level as teachers supplement formally adopted curricula with additional resources.16, 17 We encourage systems to begin systematically tracking which curricula are in use as an important step toward measuring this indicator more widely.

Finally, we note that how curriculum materials are implemented affects how students experience them. If a district or teacher reports adopting a high-quality, culturally relevant curriculum but does not implement it as intended, the benefits of that curriculum may not be fully realized. Research has identified several common barriers to effective implementation of high-quality curricula, including lack of buy-in from teachers and a lack of professional learning supports on how to implement new materials. When adopting high-quality, culturally relevant curriculum materials, school and district leaders should also establish comprehensive plans for supporting teachers implementing those materials in their classrooms.18, 19

Source frameworks

Ten source frameworks reviewed for this report include a measure of access to quality, culturally responsive curricula for instruction. Our recommendation to emphasize cultural relevance as a critical component of curriculum quality is consistent with recommendations put forth by StriveTogether, the National Research Council,  the Alliance for Resource Equity, and Center on Enhancing Early Learning Outcomes in collaboration with the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO).

References