• 8:00-8:15 Day outline
• 8:15-9:30 Curriculum 1
• 9:30-9:45 Curriculum 1 debrief
• 9:45-10:00 Break
• 10:00- 11:15 Curriculum 2
• 11:15-11:30 Curriculum 2 debrief
• 11:30-12:10 Lunch
• 12:15 - 1:30 Curriculum 3
• 1:30-1:45 Curriculum 3 debrief
• 1:45 - 3:30 Additional debrief and reflections of all curricula options and proposal for curricula to bring forward to staff and community for further input

On 12/5/24, the committee reviewed three additional K-2 foundational literacy skill curricula, adding them to the initial two from the first meeting. While each had strengths, the committee narrowed down the options for broader community input on 1/17/25. The curriculum that will be available for viewing and input are listed below. Additionally, since Minnesota has approved only one foundational skills curriculum for grades 3–5, some committee members have volunteered to begin piloting this program.

Considerations being brought for 1/17/2025:

• K-2:

1. UFLI + Benchmark Advanced (2022)

2. Benchmark Advanced Phonics + Benchmark Advanced (2022)

3. UFLI + Wit and Wisdom

• 3-5:

1. Functional Morphology + Wit and Wisdom

2. Functional Morphology + Benchmark Advanced

Descriptions of why certain programs were removed from consideration are outlined below:

• Magnetic Phonics: The program is resource-heavy, relies on workbooks, and lacks hands-on components like manipulatives or whiteboards. It exceeds the district's 30-minute instructional time limit, requiring key elements like writing and handwriting to be cut. Integration with existing programs and small group schedules is challenging, and the slide decks are visually distracting. While the program has strong content, it does not align with the district's needs

• Open Up: Difficulty navigating open access links, lack of alignment and consistency, and an overwhelming number of activities. The extensive small group time raised concerns about students being left behind and the challenge of fitting the curriculum into available instructional minutes. The open-ended structure, poor presentation, and less user-friendly materials further contributed to its impracticality for district-wide implementation.

• Functional Phonics: The Functional Phonics program for K-2 has scheduling challenges, requiring cuts to essential components like handwriting. It feels overwhelming compared to other options, with limited professional development support. Additionally, the high cost per person restricts broader access

These evaluations were based on alignment with district needs, teacher load, instructional time, and overall feasibility for implementation.

Coming Up: The committee will reconvene on 1/7/25 to develop a rubric for gathering public and in-district feedback on the programs under consideration. We invite you to share your thoughts during our open viewing day on 1/17/25 at Oak Park Learning Center. We are also working to create a virtual option for in-district feedback. More information to come following winter break. Your input is greatly valued!

As we reflect on our journey with Letterland, I want to take this opportunity to acknowledge the dedication and commitment our teachers have demonstrated in implementing this curriculum.

The time and energy you’ve invested in bringing Letterland to life in your classrooms is extraordinary. From mastering the program’s unique elements to creatively engaging students with its characters and activities, your hard work has made this curriculum an integral part of our learning environment. We recognize the countless hours spent preparing lessons, tailoring activities to meet the needs of your students, and ensuring that every child had the opportunity to engage with literacy in meaningful ways. Your efforts have been a cornerstone of this program’s success, and for that, I am deeply grateful. As we transition to new approaches, we carry forward the lessons and experiences that have shaped our practices, knowing they were built on your unwavering commitment and hard work.

I have received additional questions as to why we must discontinue this curriculum. The Letterland curriculum is not approved by MDE/READ Act; it will be discontinuing. We are accepting Literacy Aid and therefore cannot pursue unapproved curricula. We are considering a curriculum that is up for re-review and has been adopted by multiple school districts who were early science of reading adopters and are getting excellent results. Due to this, MDE is reconsidering that curriculum for approval. Letterland was not approved and is not being considered for re-review. We are not getting results with this curriculum unless it is being delivered with additional Orton-Gillingham or LETRS science of reading strategies requiring substantial time for teachers to supplement.

Not only are we advised to discontinue this curriculum due to restrictions under the Read Act, I also want to call attention to some concerning stereotypes within the Letterland Curriculum that are incongruous with our district's commitment to Equity and Inclusion. The following are just a few examples:

• The letter q is represented as a quarrelsome queen. As a female leader, this stereotype is one that unfortunately resonants with me. In the newest Letterland updates, the quarrelsome queen has been changed to quizzing queen who must be quiet; this effort to make the curriculum more inclusive is still perpetuating cisgender norms and stereotypical gender roles and attributes.
• The prominent Latino character, Fix-it Max, within Letterland is a handy man.
• The original Black female character is Talking Tess, who misses details often because she is overly talkative.