High School - Multilingual Learner Supports

The instructional materials reviewed for Grades 9-12 of myPerspectives partially meet the criteria of amplifying rather than simplifying texts while maintaining complexity to provide access for Multilingual Learners (MLLs) without watering down the content. Adapted versions of core texts are included to provide access to content; however, they are written in a combination of original and simplified, lower-level content, depriving students of authentic language. Other scaffolds and language supports assist students in making meaning of the texts, but they are applied inconsistently and rarely amplify English language functions and forms.

The materials include Bridge Texts, described as “adapted versions of the literary and informational texts in each unit and include vocabulary support and audio with word-by-word highlighting.” However, in adapting the texts, complexity is lost. For example, in Grade 10, Unit 1, the materials list the original text of “The ‘Four Freedoms’ Speech” as having a Lexile Level of 1300L. The materials list the Bridge Text for “The ‘Four Freedoms’ Speech” as having a Lexile of 710L. Additionally, MLLs lose exposure to the authentic texts, and sometimes to Close Read activities, through the adaptations. In Grade 12, Unit 4, one of the Whole Class Close Read notes directs students to “Annotate: In paragraph 4, identify details that describe the issue between the two warring parties in Lilliput.” The Teacher Facing Note directs teachers to “Model the Close Read of paragraph 4 using the following think-aloud format,” which reads, “As I read paragraph 4, I notice details about why people in LIlliput are fighting. The animosity between the two parties seems to center on whether the heels of the shoes they wear are high or low.” The Bridge Text version, however, summarizes much of this paragraph, including the section noted in the Teacher Edition that includes the details to be annotated. In this case, using the Bridge Text might provide access to the broad strokes of the core text, but it limits MLLs’ ability to participate in the grade-level Close Read task and restricts access to authentic academic vocabulary.  The Teachers Edition references the Bridge Texts in each Selection Overview, noting for teachers that “Students may benefit from:  . . . Beginning with the Bridge Text version of the story and then transitioning to on-level version when ready.” However, no additional guidance is provided for teachers on when and how this transition should occur, increasing the likelihood that simplified texts may replace the authentic, grade-level materials.

The Teacher Edition provides a Selection Overview for each text, which includes a list of Prereading Differentiation scaffolds for all students tailored to each text’s qualitative complexity in meaning, structure, language, and knowledge demands (Refer to Indicator 2c in the full content report for additional details). This section also includes a How Can I Support Multilingual Learners section, with Lesson Preview suggestions, Vocabulary and Language Support, and Transition into English. These supports assist MLLs in making meaning of the texts, but only sometimes guide teachers to support MLLs through multiple modalities, methods, and representations, and rarely involve amplifying English Language structures and forms.

For example, in Grade 11, Unit 1, Whole Class Learning, students read The Declaration of Independence. The How Can I Support Multilingual Learners section in the Selection Overview reads:

• “Lesson Preview:

  • Provide more background for students who are not familiar with American history. Help them understand that the Declaration of Independence signaled the start of the United States as its own country.

  • Invite students to describe for the class the foundational documents of their home countries. On what principles are those documents based? 

• Vocabulary and Language Support:

  • Point out the words unanimous, declaration, and dissolve in the first two paragraphs of the Declaration. Discuss the meaning of the words, and elicit synonyms from students’ home language(s).

  • Multilingual Learner notes in the Teacher’s Edition provide differentiated strategies for helping students read the selection and complete core tasks.

  • An additional Language Support lesson, which includes a suggested language target for this selection, is available on Realize.

• Transition into English

• Make a summary of the text available to students in their home language(s).

• Assign the text in the Interactive Student Edition. There, students can use the eText Translation tool and receive translation support for more than 100 languages.”

Each of these suggestions supports some MLLs in making meaning of The Declaration of Independence. Previewing the text and providing translation options for those students who are literate in their home language are both helpful strategies, but do not amplify or enrich the text to provide greater depth, clarity, or complexity to support comprehension and language development. The Language Support Lesson, a supplementary lesson separate from core instruction and found on the Realize platform, most closely aligns with amplifying language structures and forms. In this lesson, students zoom in on three paragraphs to detect archaic diction, syntax, and punctuation using various strategies to comprehend the text. The strategies provided, however, rely mostly on teacher explanations of vocabulary, rather than other means of enhancing and enriching the text.

Additional supports are available for students using the digital Realize Reader, including audio, text translation, and the Language Coach. At the beginning of each text, teachers are guided to “Encourage students to use Language Coach in the Interactive Student Edition for point-of-use support with:

• Word, sentence, and discourse levels of language

• language comprehension development

• knowledge building

These features provide some amplification of texts, but are often linguistically demanding themselves.  For example, in Grade 9, Unit 2, students read Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” speech.  At the end of paragraph 2, the Language Coach provides the following information for students:  “Sometimes writers use figurative language to make their writing vivid and memorable. In paragraph 2, Dr. King calls the Emancipation Proclamation a ‘great beacon light of hope.’ A beacon light is a signal that helps guide others, such as a lighthouse that guides ships safely to shore. To be ‘seared in flames’ means to be burned and withered, like meat. Here, Dr. King is showing the harsh, painful effects of injustice on enslaved people and the bright hope that the Emancipation Proclamation promised.”  This explanation is followed by a paraphrased version of the paragraph.  While the Language Coach provides valuable information unpacking the figurative language in this paragraph, this explanation may not be accessible to many MLLs, particularly those at lower proficiency levels, due to the length and linguistic complexity.  Similarly, hyperlinked definitions for individual words may prove less supportive when the definitions are not student-friendly.  For example, in the same text, in paragraph 14, the word “redemptive” is hyperlinked to the definition “serving to deliver from sorrow or to make amends.”  Students do have the opportunity to translate these words and their definitions into fourteen different languages, providing an additional point of access for students literate in those languages. Definitions are also available in audio form in both English and Spanish. The interactive reader offers some instances of text amplification and support, but these benefits are limited to students who are able to access their linguistic complexity and have the necessary technology to use the Realize Reader instead of the student edition textbook.

While the materials provide some support to aid comprehension, they rarely enrich or amplify English language structures and forms. Bridge Texts and adapted materials often significantly reduce text complexity and limit exposure to authentic academic language. The engineering of the Bridge Texts sometimes inadvertently excludes MLLs from key instructional tasks like Close Reads. This approach reflects a missed opportunity to amplify grade-level texts through text engineering rather than simplify them. Overall, the materials provide only sporadic amplification of texts, missing opportunities to support language development through rigorous, scaffolded engagement with complex texts.

The instructional materials in Grades 9-12 of myPerspectives partially meet expectations for providing support for Multilingual Learners’ (MLLs’) full and complete participation in text-based questions, tasks, and assignments, as well as the demonstration of their thinking in various formats. While the materials include some targeted supports, such as differentiated strategies for students at light, moderate, or substantial levels of English proficiency, these supports often occur in isolation from core instruction and do not consistently align with the academic tasks assigned to the broader student group.

In many instances, MLL-specific activities differ significantly from those assigned to the rest of the class. As a result, MLLs have fewer opportunities to engage meaningfully with peers in shared academic discourse. For example, in Grade 10, Unit 3, Whole-Class Learning, students read “The Metamorphosis,” by Franz Kafka. In the first read, students read the text for basic comprehension and enjoyment. Reading Strategy and Comprehension Check questions provide supports as they read.”However, the materials do not provide MLL-specific supports for these questions. One of the Read On and Reread questions, the reading strategy for this text, does include general differentiation suggestions in the Teacher Facing Notes; however, there are no linguistic scaffolds or other MLL strategies provided to meet the needs of linguistically diverse students. During the second read, students respond to the Close Read notes. The first Close Read note guides students to identify details that relate to Gregor’s physical transformation in paragraphs 3-5, and asks the question, “Why does Kafka devote so much more space to Gregor’s thoughts than to his physical change?”  The Differentiation – Multilingual Learners call-out box in the Teacher Facing Notes on this page directs teachers to “Help students use prior experiences to understand the selection.” Each of the three levels of support focuses on helping students make personal connections to Gregor’s feelings and actions. However, the call-out box does not provide any support to help students answer the Close Read Question tied to core instruction. There are thirteen additional Close Read Questions throughout the remainder of the text, but none are accompanied by a Differentiation – Multilingual Learners call-out box in the Teacher Facing Notes.

Furthermore, the Differentiate – Multilingual Learners call-out boxes frequently suggest supports that do not align with what the rest of the class is working on, resulting in tasks for MLL students that are not only different but also disconnected from the main instructional flow. For example, in Grade 9, Unit 3, Whole-Class Learning, “The Tragedy of Romeo and Juliet, Act III,” the Close Read Note for the second read instructs all students to annotate scene i, lines 90–101, identifying examples of Mercutio’s wordplay and jokes, and to respond to the question, “What emotional effects does Mercutio’s wordplay have in this speech?” The Differentiate – Multilingual Learners call-out box in the Teacher Edition guides teachers to “have students demonstrate their comprehension by summarizing the text in their own words,” with a focus on lines 93–101. The leveled supports all assist students in summarizing the section that the rest of the class is analyzing for literary effect. While checking MLLs’ comprehension is important, these supports do not extend to helping students engage in the grade-level analytical work required by the Close Read question. These design choices can lead to different academic outcomes for different groups of students.

While the Differentiate - Multilingual Learners call-out boxes in the Teacher Facing Notes do address text-dependent questions, they do not provide supports that facilitate MLLs’ full and complete participation in answering the questions. For example, in Grade 11, Unit 3, Analyze and Interpret, Declaration of Sentiments, the Differentiate - Multilingual Learners call-out box guides teachers to “Help students read the text and answer the Close Read questions. Review ways students can get support: ask questions, respond to questions, discuss ideas in a text to clarify meaning, and ask about unfamiliar words.” The leveled supports focus on developing MLLs’ ability to ask for support, not their ability to read the text and answer the close read questions. For teachers to implement that aspect of the guidance, they would have to create those supports themselves.

Additionally, the materials provide support for comprehension, such as vocabulary glossaries or WIDA alignment references, but lack clear instructional guidance or integration into core lesson routines, including text-based questions, tasks, and assignments. Without consistent scaffolds that build toward grade-level work or help MLLs navigate and complete complex, text-dependent tasks, opportunities to demonstrate thinking across speaking, listening, reading, and writing are limited. As a result, although the materials do allow for some MLL engagement in some text-based questions and tasks, they fall short of ensuring full and complete participation alongside peers in rigorous, text-based academic work.

The instructional materials reviewed for grades 9–12 of myPerspectives partially meet the expectations for providing support for Multilingual Learners’ (MLLs’) full and complete participation in developing their ability to comprehend complex ideas within and across texts through their full and complete participation in opportunities to analyze and evaluate text. While supports for MLLs are present in some units and lessons, they are inconsistently applied across grade levels and are often limited to surface-level language access rather than deeply supporting students’ full and complete participation in analyzing and evaluating complex texts.

The materials provide occasional language support for MLLs through vocabulary previewing, word study, differentiated instructions, and translation tools. However, these supports are not systematically embedded throughout the program and often fail to connect language scaffolding with the deeper comprehension and analysis required by grade-level texts and tasks. The Teacher Edition includes differentiated supports across three levels—substantial, moderate, and light. While these scaffolds help MLL students access key vocabulary and meaning, they sometimes occur in isolation from the core task, which may lead to a fragmented experience rather than full integration.

At the beginning of each unit, in the Unit Introduction, the materials provide teachers with a Language Checkpoint - Multilingual Learners call-out box in the Teacher Edition. These Language Checkpoint call-out boxes provide options for matching MLLs to supports for each language domain (reading, listening, writing, and speaking) throughout the unit. Based on their performance on the QuickWrites and Icebreakers in the Unit Introduction, teachers are guided to match students with substantial, moderate, or light supports found in the Differentiate - Multilingual Learners call-out boxes in the Teacher Edition. The guidance for teachers provided often helps MLL students access key vocabulary and meaning, which sometimes supports their analysis of the text. For example, in Grade 10, Unit 1, “Harrison Bergeron,” students complete their first read of the text “for basic comprehension and enjoyment,” do a close read for the second read, and respond to the Close Read notes. The readings are followed by a “Build Insight” activity, including a peer discussion of First Thoughts, summarizing for a comprehension check, and answering analysis questions. The Differentiate - Multilingual Learners call-out box in the Teacher Edition is connected with the Build Insight activity guides teachers to “Support students in demonstrating comprehension of the story as they respond to the Build Insight questions.” The differentiated supports for the Substantial level focus on basic comprehension support: paraphrasing questions and explaining vocabulary like state or circumstances. Moderate/Light Support suggests that MLL students work in pairs as they read and respond to the questions and look up any unfamiliar words. Meanwhile, the analysis questions in the Build Insight activity ask all students to analyze societal themes and make inferences, neither of which is directly facilitated by the comprehension supports provided for MLLs.

Mentor texts and differentiated support boxes offer scaffolds like sentence frames or paraphrasing strategies for reading, writing, speaking, and listening tasks. For example, in Grade 12, Unit 4, students read a novel excerpt from Gulliver’s Travels. The Speaking and Listening Assignment connected to this reading is for all students to “Write and present a persuasive speech about the power of satire. Develop a claim addressing these questions:  Can satire contribute to social change? Are any of its powers dangerous? Should satire be unchecked, or should it be regulated? Support your claim with valid reasoning and evidence.”  The first step for students is to “Conduct Research: Review examples of recent and historical satire (You may find examples of modern-day satire in sketch comedy, which often holds up people, events, and institutions to ridicule.) Determine the target of the satire and whether it led to actual social change.”  Students then formulate their claims, organize and write their speeches, and rehearse and deliver them. In preparation for this presentation, the Differentiate – Multilingual Learners call-out box in the Teacher Edition guides teachers to “Support students as they plan their speeches. Help them to include specificity and detail in their arguments.” Both the Substantial and Moderate level supports suggest providing the sentence frame “In my view, _____. I think this because _____.” Light support has students work in pairs to discuss specific details. While this guidance supports learning language forms and structure, it is not clearly tied to core opportunities to analyze or evaluate satirical texts.

Similarly, the Bridge Texts provide simplified and shortened versions of the core texts with vocabulary and audio support to help MLLs better understand the material. They serve as a helpful tool for accessibility, especially for SIFE/SLIFE students or those at lower proficiency levels. However, these texts are largely summarized, limiting MLL students’ exposure to rich academic language structures and nuanced ideas present in the original texts. The abridged nature and limited rigor of the Bridge Texts may compromise opportunities for deeper analysis of original texts. 

While some units include differentiated supports that scaffold student understanding toward grade-level expectations (e.g., sentence frames, partner discussions, word walls), these strategies are not always embedded within the core academic tasks. Instead, they may redirect MLLs into alternate activities or simplified content, which can hinder their full and complete participation. For example, in Grade 9, Unit 2, all students read “I Have a Dream” first for basic comprehension and enjoyment, and then complete a close read. One Differentiate - Multilingual Learners call-out box accompanies this selection. It includes guidance for teachers to help students identify the present perfect tense across three levels of support. However, the materials do not help students connect the grammatical form to King’s rhetorical message, which is a focus of the core instruction, missing a critical opportunity to link language structure to textual meaning, which is central to text analysis. 

Similarly, Bridge Texts—summarized or simplified versions of core readings—offer audio and translation features, allowing students to highlight and annotate texts. While these are helpful for initial comprehension, the simplified nature of the Bridge Texts can limit MLLs’ exposure to authentic complex language, reducing opportunities to engage with nuanced ideas or literary analysis.

Throughout the materials, MLL students are provided with opportunities to engage in structured academic discourse. However, even when academic discourse is explicitly encouraged, the supports provided are often limited to helping students ask clarification questions, rather than fully participating in analytical dialogue about the text’s themes or arguments. For example, in Grade 10, Unit 1, Peer Group Learning, after reading “Harrison Bergeron,” the task is to discuss the following question: “In what ways do laws both protect and limit personal freedom?” The Differentiate - Multilingual Learners call-out box in the Teacher Edition guides teachers to “Help students seek clarification of spoken language during the group discussion. Explain that if students do not understand something they hear, they can ask questions, ask a speaker to repeat a statement, or ask a speaker to speak more slowly.”  The recommendations that follow for Substantial, Moderate, and Light support all focus on clarifying meaning rather than analysis related to the question under discussion.

Although the materials do not consistently provide strategies and supports, they offer some opportunities and guidance for MLLs to develop their ability to comprehend complex ideas and analyze texts. Support is differentiated through a three-tiered structure (Substantial, Moderate, Light) based on language proficiency. Vocabulary instruction incorporates varied approaches, including home language connections, visual support, and context-based analysis. MLLs regularly engage in reading, writing, and discussion, especially in reflection and narrative tasks. While MLL support is not fully integrated into every lesson, the materials include thoughtful scaffolds that promote content access. These reflect a growing awareness of MLL needs but would benefit from greater consistency and stronger alignment with rigorous tasks. Additionally, the simplified format of the Bridge Texts limits opportunities for MLLs to engage in deeper analysis of complex texts.

The instructional materials reviewed for Grades 9-12 of myPerspectives partially meet the criteria of consistently providing strategies and supports for Multilingual Learners (MLLs) to fully and completely participate in evidence-based discussions about the texts they are reading. The materials directly support MLLs in some text-based discussions, but not others.

In some cases, the materials support MLLs in part, but not all, of a text-based discussion. In Grade 10, Unit 2, Peer-Group Learning, students read a collection of poems. After reading, students engage in a panel discussion where they answer a prompt about transformation as it is expressed in one of the poems, chosen by the class. The accompanying Differentiate - Multilingual Learners call-out box supports students’  listening comprehension, but not the linguistic demands of an evidence-based discussion. The call-out box directs teachers to “help students prepare to demonstrate listening comprehension as they respond to questions and requests from the class,” followed by leveled supports:

• Substantial:  As a class, choose one of the assignment options. Allow students to rehearse responses to questions about their ideas. Ask questions that require single-word or yes/no answers, such as: Is the speaker’s transformation in ‘Windigo’ good or bad? Do you agree?

• Moderate: As a class, choose one of the assignment options. Display these questions: Do you agree? Why, or why not? Have small groups of students use these questions to ask about each other’s ideas. Encourage students to answer in complete sentences. Support students as needed by providing sentence starters.

• Light: Have students work in small groups to share their opinions about the assignment and consider questions that listeners are likely to ask. Have them prepare responses to these questions. 

While these leveled supports touch on some of the language MLLs might need for this discussion, they fail to address the questions posed to all students to support them in developing their own interpretation of the poem, which they then use to draft their opening statement:

• Is the transformation physical, emotional, or both?

• Is the transformation positive, negative, or neutral?

• Which details support your interpretation?

The Differentiate - Multilingual Learners call-out box also lacks support for two key conversation moves that the materials highlight for all students for collaborating effectively: Build on Others’ Ideas and Contribute Relevant Information. By targeting only a limited aspect of the discussion, the supports fall short of enabling MLLs’ full and meaningful participation in evidence-based discourse.

In other places, the materials provide no MLL supports at all for evidence-based discussions. For example, in Grade 11, Unit 4, Whole-Class Learning, students read an excerpt from Mark Twain’s “Life on the Mississippi.” After reading, they participate in a partner discussion on the question, “To which part of the United States does Mark Twain most ‘belong?’” The materials do not provide any guidance for differentiation in general or for MLLs for this activity.

While some lessons include leveled supports that address aspects of academic discourse, such as listening comprehension and simple responses, these supports often do not extend to the full demands of the task, such as interpreting texts, constructing arguments, or using key conversation moves. In other cases, no MLL-specific supports are provided, resulting in inconsistent opportunities for meaningful participation in evidence-based discussions.

The instructional materials reviewed for Grades 9-12  of myPerspectives partially meet expectations for supporting Multilingual Learners’ (MLLs’) full and complete participation in the explicit instruction of independent word-learning strategies and key vocabulary to build knowledge within and across texts. Vocabulary is routinely presented in lessons, and some supports, such as glossaries, word banks, and pronunciation guidance, are included. However, these supports are not consistently aligned with the words all students are studying, nor are they embedded in instructional routines in ways that allow MLLs to engage with peers or participate in whole-class learning. 

In many instances, vocabulary instruction for MLLs appears in separate call-out boxes or teacher-facing notes, suggesting implementation alongside rather than within the core instruction. While these supports may be considered embedded based on their placement on the page, their separation from the primary student tasks can make them feel more like standalone elements, which may reduce their effectiveness in fostering authentic integration. For example, in Grade 11, Unit 3, after reading “I Make Video Games, I Won’t Let My Daughters Play Them,” students complete a Study Language and Craft activity including Concept Vocabulary. There is a Differentiate - Multilingual Learners call-out box in the Teacher Edition on this page. Although the differentiation box is present, it does not include targeted scaffolds or routines that would help MLLs access and apply key vocabulary within the lesson. The support is limited to a generalized suggestion to “Continue to help students build their English vocabulary by reviewing the concept vocabulary words and providing additional opportunities for students to practice using them.” For Substantial support, materials guide teachers to “Reteach the words, as needed, pointing out a base word, root, or other word part within the longer word. Then, ask students to explain the meanings or functions of those word parts.” The materials guide teachers to move those students into the activity for the Moderate/Light support group: “Confirm understanding of the words disorder and impairment by having students use both words in sentences. Then, help students find additional words that fit the concept.” While these supports facilitate student understanding of the Concept Vocabulary words, it is unclear how MLLs are meant to fully participate in the whole-class Concept Vocabulary activity. This includes tasks such as answering questions about how the vocabulary words help you understand the negative effects of playing video games, finding antonyms for some of the vocabulary words, and writing a sentence with two of the words that a veterinarian might put into medical notes after examining a pet dog. Without direct scaffolds and supports provided for MLLs for the Concept Vocabulary activity, MLLs cannot fully participate in that portion of the vocabulary instructional routine. In addition, without support provided or other prompts to do so, teachers who are new to instructing MLLs may not realize that students should participate in grade-level vocabulary instruction and may instead supplant that instruction with what is in the Differentiate - Multilingual Learners call-out box.

In other instances, no linguistic supports are provided for MLLs. In Grade 9, Unit 1, Whole-Class Learning, before reading “Through the Tunnel,” students complete the Concept Vocabulary task. Teacher Guidance states, “Read the concept vocabulary words aloud and provide context sentences, as needed, to clarify word meanings. Then, call on volunteers to share their predictions about what the story might be about, based on the concept words.” There are no supports provided for MLLs for this activity.

Many selections (most of those designed for Whole-Class Learning and for Peer-Group Learning, but none designed for Independent Learning) include a Language Support Lesson available on the Realize platform only. Teachers must find the reference in the “How Can I Support Multilingual Learners?” section of the Selection Overview and find the lessons associated with the selection title on the Realize Platform. The first page of each Language Support Lesson includes an overview of the MLL supports provided within the Teacher Edition, Student Edition, and digital course for the selection. The second section supports students in a Language Target focused on the text, but otherwise unrelated to what the whole class is learning. Frequently, the focus includes vocabulary, but never supports MLLs’ full and complete participation in the explicit instruction of independent word-learning strategies and key vocabulary to build knowledge within and across texts within core, grade-level instruction.

In summary, while the materials offer some tools to support vocabulary development for MLLs, these supports are often peripheral rather than fully integrated into core instruction. The separation of MLL guidance from primary lesson activities, inconsistent scaffolding, and limited alignment with whole-class tasks hinder MLLs’ full participation in vocabulary instruction. Additionally, the reliance on separate Language Support Lessons—often located on a different platform and disconnected from the main instructional flow—further fragments access. As a result, the materials fall short of providing MLLs with consistent, explicit, and integrated vocabulary instruction needed to build deep, transferable word knowledge across disciplines.

The instructional materials reviewed for Grades 9–12 of myPerspectives partially meet the criteria of providing support for Multilingual Learners’ (MLLs’) full and complete participation in the practice of independent word-learning strategies, and newly taught vocabulary words. The materials provide support for MLLs for some practice of word-learning strategies and newly taught vocabulary words. However, these supports are inconsistently employed across units and do not consistently ensure full and complete participation by MLL students in core vocabulary-related tasks.

The materials provide explicit support for MLLs to develop and apply independent word-learning strategies and to engage meaningfully with newly taught vocabulary in places. Some lessons include scaffolds and differentiated guidance at varying proficiency levels; however, these supports are not consistently embedded across all units, and supports for MLLs to independently practice word-learning strategies are limited. For example, each Whole-Class and Peer-Group Learning Selection Overview includes a section entitled “How Can I Support Multilingual Learners?” The section includes a subsection for Vocabulary and Language Support, as well as Lesson Preview notes for teachers and guidance for Transition into English. In the “How Can I Support Multilingual Learners?” section, in Grade 12, Unit 5, for Poetry Collection 1, the materials direct teachers to help students build a word wall, use home language synonyms, and preview unknown vocabulary. These supports help students familiarize themselves with new vocabulary before engaging with the reading selection. By asking students to identify unfamiliar words, define them, and find a synonym from their home language, the materials foster both vocabulary awareness and cross-linguistic connections.

The materials also include guidance around vocabulary acquisition and practice for MLLs within lessons, but they often fall short of providing enough support for MLLs to fully and completely participate in grade-level learning. For example, in Grade 10, Unit 5, during the Whole-Class Learning close read of “The Necklace,” there is a Differentiate - Multilingual Learners call-out box in the Teacher Edition. This box contains tiered support for the word resplendent found in the text. At the substantial level, teachers model the word’s use and provide sentence frames (e.g., “I saw resplendent jewelry at the art gallery”) for practice. Students are guided to use the word in connection with personal experience, encouraging meaningful use of newly introduced vocabulary. Students needing moderate and light levels of support engage in group discussion and share personal examples, reinforcing word knowledge in context. While this example shows one way that materials provide MLLs with tools to engage with new vocabulary, it is not directly connected to a vocabulary practice activity for the whole class, but rather an additional lesson provided specifically for MLLs’ deeper comprehension of one of the six concept vocabulary words for this selection. A Concept Vocabulary activity follows the reading, including all six Concept Vocabulary words, but no additional support for MLLs.

The materials offer limited support for MLLs in developing independent word-learning strategies. While vocabulary supports provide accessible entry points, they rely heavily on teacher-led instruction with minimal emphasis on student-driven or sustained independent learning. Tasks such as Academic Vocabulary and Word Study offer some practice for all students, including MLLs, but appear inconsistently. Some tools, such as translation features in mentor and bridge texts, support comprehension by allowing students to access vocabulary in their home language. These features offer some opportunities for independent learning, but consistent routines for building word-learning strategies are lacking.

Although the materials include occasional supports for MLLs to independently practice vocabulary, these are inconsistently applied, sometimes simplified, and not well integrated into the core instructional sequence. This limits their effectiveness in supporting MLLs’ full participation in grade-level tasks.

The instructional materials reviewed for Grades 9-12 of myPerspectives partially meet the criteria of providing support for Multilingual Learners’ (MLLs’) full and complete participation in the explicit instruction of sentence composition appropriate to grade-level standards, embedded in what students are studying in the unit. The materials provide supports in some instruction of sentence composition, but not others.

In some sentence composition lessons, the materials provide MLL supports that directly connect to the sentence composition instruction. For example, in Grade 10, Unit 3, students write an argumentative essay as the unit’s written Performance Task. As part of this task, students complete a Coherence and Craft activity where they work on sentence variety. The materials provide a Differentiate - Multilingual Learners call-out box that guides teachers to “Help students learn to write using a variety of sentence lengths. After students have drafted their paragraphs, point out the examples in the box under Vary Sentence Lengths. Explain that variety in sentence lengths is a feature of effective writing.”  Differentiated supports follow:

• Substantial: Display two short sentences, such as: Pedro moved here last year. He felt like an outsider. Model combining the sentences into a compound sentence using and. Have students copy the new sentence. Review other conjunctions used to make compound sentences. Point out where students can combine sentences in their drafts.

• Moderate: Model combining sentences to form either a compound sentence or a complex sentence. Help students find sentences in their drafts to combine into compound or complex sentences.

• Light: Have pairs review the sentences in their drafts. Challenging them to create a variety of sentence lengths by combining shorter sentences. Provide assistance as needed.

This targeted guidance helps MLLs build coherence in their writing by providing accessible, scaffolded practice aligned to the lesson’s sentence composition goals.

Other lessons, however, provide no MLL supports for sentence composition instruction. For example, in Grade 9, Unit 4, Peer-Group Learning, students read an excerpt from “The Hero’s Adventure.” After reading, students complete a grammar activity about commas. The materials provide no MLL supports for this lesson. They do provide Teacher Facing Notes, prompting teachers to 1. Check for Readiness, 2. Differentiate, and 3. Monitor Progress. None of these three prompts includes guidance on supporting students with different language proficiencies. The Differentiate step suggests teachers reinforce how commas indicate pausing for both the Substantial and Moderate support levels, which is not sufficient to ensure MLLs can fully and completely participate in this grade-level sentence composition activity.

In some lessons, materials include targeted, leveled scaffolds that align with the sentence composition instruction. However, other lessons lack MLL-specific supports altogether, and general differentiation guidance does not address varied language proficiency levels. This inconsistency limits MLLs’ access to grade-level sentence composition instruction across the program.

The instructional materials reviewed for grades 9-12 of myPerspectives partially meet expectations for supporting Multilingual Learners’ (MLLs’) full and complete participation in evidence-based opportunities for sentence composition practice and editing of their own writing, appropriate for their grade level. The materials provide supports and strategies for MLLs for sentence-composition activities; however, they are not consistently integrated or clearly aligned with the core writing instruction provided to the entire class. 

In some instances, such as during a whole-class review of an argumentative writing checklist, the support for MLLs is directly connected to the core task for all students. For example, in Grade 12, Unit 2, Writer’s Handbook, all students are directed to “Use the strategies in the Revision Checklist to focus on each element of your essay.” The Differentiate - Multilingual Learners call-out box in the Teacher Edition provides the following guidance: “As students revise their drafts using the Revision Checklist, help them learn to write using a variety of sentence lengths.” The Substantial and Moderate levels of support focus on supporting students in combining sentences. The Light support challenges students to “create a variety of sentence lengths by splitting longer sentences or combining shorter sentences.”  One of the points for evaluation in the Revision Checklist for Explanatory Essay used by all students is “Sentence Variety: Review the lengths and types of sentences you’ve used in each paragraph.” The MLL differentiation guidance provides direct support for this task. However, these moments of alignment are infrequent, and there is a general lack of clarity about how and when to implement MLL-specific strategies, particularly for teachers new to teaching MLLs.

The materials include some responsive supports designed to target student needs, which could benefit MLLs. However, these supports are not clearly designated for MLLs nor differentiated by language proficiency level. For example, in Grade 10, Unit 1, Whole-Class Learning, students read an excerpt from the “Four Freedoms’ Speech” by Franklin Delano Roosevelt. After reading, they complete a Study Language and Craft activity on two types of phrases: noun phrases and verb phrases. After learning about both, students practice labeling noun phrases and verb phrases in sentences from Roosevelt’s speech. Then, students edit three simple sentences about the content of the speech, “us[ing] noun and verb phrases to add detail and depth to each” sentence. There is no specified MLL support in the Teacher Edition, but there are prompts to “1. Check for Student Readiness, 2. Differentiate,” the latter of which includes Substantial and Moderate supports. While some MLLs may benefit from these general supports, the lack of specific linguistic scaffolds and differentiation by language proficiency requires teachers to either omit these supports or develop them independently.

Furthermore, in many cases, the differentiation tasks designed for MLLs are separate from what their peers were doing, with no clear explanation of when or how teachers should implement those activities within the flow of whole-class instruction. For example, in Grade 11, Unit 4, for the written Performance Task, students write an Explanatory Essay. All students are prompted to consider their audience from the beginning of the task. Students receive concrete prompts as part of their essay planning to “keep your audience, or readers, in mind when you write,” along with specific tips and questions to consider their audience for the essay. The Differentiate - Multilingual Learners call-out box in the Teacher Edition  directs teachers to “help students generate examples of memorable places with specificity and detail as they begin writing their essays.” While this is an important support for MLLs to complete the essay task, it does not address the grade-level expectation that “students focus on what is most significant for a specific purpose and audience.” All students continue to consider their audience as they plan in the pre-writing and planning activity and in the Revision Checklist for Explanatory Essay. The MLL supports provided for these two tasks focus on the transfer of home language and revision for sentence lengths, with no mention of the audience. This lack of connection between MLL-specific supports and core academic tasks leaves MLLs without entry points to the grade-level activity.

Additionally, while the materials include supports encouraging students to draft or brainstorm in their home language before rewriting in English, there is no guidance provided on how to scaffold this practice, especially for students who are not literate in their home language. The materials provide no additional guidance for teachers as to how to use home language to support their completion of editing activities as part of the writing process (for more information home language use in the materials, see Indicator 3.2.MLL-1). These activities allow students to practice and apply sentence composition skills by examining their drafts with a particular instructional focus and revising sentences to make improvements. Leveraging students’ home languages as a bridge to learning is a valuable strategy; however, its effectiveness is limited by the lack of integration throughout the writing process. Without clear teacher guidance as to how to match students appropriately with this support, this strategy is impractical and inequitable in all classrooms and for all MLL profiles, such as Students with Limited or Interrupted Formal Education (SLIFE) or long-term MLLs.  

In conclusion, while the materials include some supports for sentence composition and editing, they fall short of ensuring MLLs can fully and completely engage in these writing activities alongside their peers. Supports are inconsistently integrated and are frequently disconnected from core instruction. Without clear guidance for implementation, teachers are left to create additional resources on their own. 

The instructional materials reviewed for Grades 9–12 of myPerspectives partially meet the criteria of providing support for Multilingual Learners’ (MLLs’) full and complete participation in all instruction of varied writing processes. While the materials incorporate writing instruction across multiple genres and emphasize the use of the writing process—prewriting, drafting, revising, and editing—the supports for MLLs are inconsistent, occasionally underdeveloped, and not always aligned with the academic and linguistic demands of the writing tasks.

For example, in Grade 9, Unit 2, during a writing lesson that compares Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech and “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” the materials offer some general guidance on how to support students in the Teacher Edition. This guidance provides tips for each step of the assignment, including to “Monitor and Adjust if students need assistance with choosing an organizing structure, then work individually with them to determine which best supports their purpose.” The Teacher Edition includes a Differentiate - Multilingual Learners call-out box for this assignment. This call-out box suggests supporting MLLs with reviewing and editing for pronoun-antecedent agreement. At the Substantial level, students underline pronouns in the drafts and draw an arrow to the antecedent, and then read the sentence aloud to listen for agreement. At the Moderate support level, students read their drafts independently, underlining each pronoun and its antecedent to check for agreement. At the Light support level, students are encouraged to read drafts in pairs and listen for agreement errors. These three levels of support are not tailored to the writing task itself. This grammatical focus does not directly support students in understanding or producing the higher-level analytical language necessary for a comparative literary analysis. These omissions limit the effectiveness of support, particularly for students developing academic writing in a second language.  

This lack of directly connected support for writing skills also occurs during the written Performance Tasks. In Grade 10, Unit 1, the Performance Task assigns students to “write a focused, well-structured, and coherent explanatory essay.” Yet, the materials lack specific supports for MLLs to understand and produce explanatory essays. There is guidance for MLLs provided alongside this task, including writing drafts in their home language, emphasis on the importance of considering your audience, and revision supports for coherence and adjective clauses. While supports for the writing assignment retain appropriate rigor, the instructional materials offer minimal guidance to scaffold language development around organizing ideas logically, using relevant evidence, or developing a clear thesis—key skills that MLLs must master to fully engage in explanatory writing. The materials sometimes suggest associated peer or group work but do not include embedded language development goals or structured opportunities to practice relevant language in speaking and writing.

The instructional design assumes that all students, including MLLs, can access writing tasks without a consistent, intentional approach to language scaffolding. The few supports that do exist are often general (e.g., sentence starters) and are not clearly aligned to the grade-level writing demands, such as building claims in argument writing or integrating text evidence in analysis. The lack of more advanced scaffolds limits students’ ability to internalize and replicate complex academic writing structures.

The materials consistently expect students to follow a structured writing process (prewriting, drafting, revising, and editing). However, the accompanying language support for MLLs during these stages is inconsistent. In some cases, teachers are encouraged to monitor student understanding or clarify instructions, but explicit guidance on how to scaffold grammar, syntax, or genre-specific discourse to support full MLL participation is uneven. As a result, students may struggle to understand the expectations of writing tasks or lack the academic language needed to successfully complete them. These missed opportunities undermine the goal of equitable access to writing tasks.

While the materials include some attempts to support MLLs during writing instruction, these supports are often too general, inconsistently applied, and insufficiently aligned to the specific demands of grade-level writing tasks. The lack of targeted language scaffolds—particularly those embedded within each stage of the writing process—limits MLLs’ ability to fully engage in and succeed with complex academic writing. 

The instructional materials reviewed for Grades 9-12 of myPerspectives partially meet the criteria of providing support for Multilingual Learners’ (MLLs’) full and complete participation in opportunities to practice the writing process using evidence-based strategies, embedded in what students are studying throughout the unit.  The materials provide some strategies to support MLLs during writing instruction; however, these supports are limited and inconsistent. Throughout the writing process, the materials provide five Differentiate - Multilingual Learners call-out boxes in the Teacher Edition. 

Some lessons include MLL supports directly related to the step in the writing process that all students are working on. For example, in Grade 10, Unit 1, all students complete an explanatory essay as their written Performance Task. During Drafting, the lesson on Coherence and Craft for all students focuses on transitional words and phrases and conjunctive adverbs to create smooth transitions. The Differentiate - Multilingual Learners call-out box in the Teacher Edition provides differentiated support for transitions. These supports, at the Substantial, Moderate, and Light levels, guide students to write using a variety of connecting words to combine phrases, clauses, and sentences. These supports represent one of several strong examples of how the materials support MLLs in practicing the writing process; however, such supports are not consistently embedded across all writing activities.

Across the writing process, MLL supports appear intermittently. For example, in Grade 12, Unit 1, the written Performance Task assigns students to: “Write a focused, well-structured, and cohesive argumentative essay. Throughout the writing process, the materials provide five Differentiate - Multilingual Learners call-out boxes in the Teacher Edition. One focuses solely on vocabulary unconnected to the task all students engage in at the beginning of the writing process: Take a Closer Look at the Assignment. The other four Differentiate - Multilingual Learners call-out boxes directly support the steps of the writing process in which they are embedded. However, key steps in the writing process—such as prewriting and planning, organizing an argument, and publishing or presenting—remain unsupported. Without guidance for these essential phases, MLLs cannot fully and effectively participate in the complete writing process.

While the materials include some instructional supports for MLLs within the writing process, they are limited in scope and inconsistently applied across writing tasks. In some cases, the materials provide differentiated guidance for a few steps in the writing process, but lack supports throughout the full writing process. As a result, MLLs do not receive the comprehensive scaffolds needed to practice the writing process from start to finish successfully.

The instructional materials reviewed for Grades 9-12 of myPerspectives partially meet the criteria that materials consistently provide strategies and supports for Multilingual Learners (MLLs) to fully and completely participate in opportunities to practice evidence-based writing (by drawing from the texts and knowledge built throughout the unit) to explain what the text says explicitly and implicitly. While materials include opportunities for students to engage in various modes of writing, including research and analytical writing, the supports provided do not consistently ensure that MLL students can fully and meaningfully participate in these writing tasks alongside their peers.

Some strategies, supports, and accommodations support MLLs’ regular and active participation in speaking, listening, reading, and writing. These include general references to bilingual glossaries, suggestions for extended time, and options for multimodal responses. Additionally, some writing activities provide differentiated supports specifically for MLLs, like targeted grammar instruction and graphic organizers. 

For example, in Grade 10, Unit 4, after reading The Tempest, Act V, all students write an interpretive essay in which they “analyze The Tempest’s uneasy ending.”  The assignment calls for students to “consider how one of these two elements of discord complicates the harmony of the resolution,” to “use specific literary terms,” and to “Use text evidence to support your analysis and interpretation.” The accompanying Differentiate - Multilingual Learners call-out box in the Teacher Edition guides teachers to help students edit for subject-verb agreement across all three levels of support. While the materials provide this grammatical support for MLLs as part of the revision process for this argument writing task, this task lacks any support for MLLs to cite textual evidence to support their analysis or to craft strong claims. The supports provided help build grammatical skills, but they are not fully aligned to the academic writing demands of the task, and thus do not fully support MLL students’ access to or engagement in evidence-based writing.

The materials provide some strategies to support all students, including MLLs, in engaging with grade-level content. However, these supports tend to be generic in nature and often appear at the beginning of units as suggested practices for all lessons. These include general scaffolds such as extended time, peer support, and the use of visual aids. While these supports have the potential to provide access, they require significant teacher customization to align with the specific writing tasks and do not consistently help MLLs understand the task, navigate the academic content, or demonstrate their learning through writing.

The materials do not consistently go beyond vocabulary and grammar to address language functions and disciplinary practices tied to evidence-based writing. Most of the supports focus heavily on vocabulary development, such as bilingual glossaries, word translation tools, and vocabulary graphic organizers like the Frayer Model. While these can assist with word-level comprehension, they do not provide the functional language or structured opportunities needed for students to engage in making claims, citing evidence, or explaining inferences from texts.

In summary, while the materials include some intentional supports, they do not consistently support MLLs’ full and complete participation in evidence-based writing tasks. The materials place disproportionate emphasis on vocabulary, with insufficient attention to the specific language demands required for students to successfully complete grade-level writing tasks. As a result, MLLs cannot fully and completely participate in evidence-based writing practice as outlined in the materials.

The instructional materials reviewed for Grades 9–12 of myPerspectives partially meet the criteria of providing support for Multilingual Learners’ (MLLs’) full and complete participation in the explicit instruction of research skills that guide research and writing projects to develop students’ knowledge using multiple texts and source materials. The materials include opportunities for students to engage in research and writing tasks using multiple sources, but the specific supports and scaffolds necessary to ensure full and complete participation by MLLs are inconsistently present and not sufficiently developed across the program.

The materials offer some models and protocols for research instruction; however, they do not consistently consider the specific scaffolds needed by MLLs. Teachers are given general guidance for facilitating research projects and assignments, such as steps for inquiry, organizing evidence, and developing presentations. In some cases, students are directed to use digital tools and graphic organizers to plan their research. However, the teacher-facing materials rarely include language-specific strategies or structured support plans tailored for MLLs, such as differentiated sentence frames, research vocabulary supports, or culturally responsive approaches to research content. This makes it difficult for educators to implement research instruction in a way that promotes full MLL participation without developing their own extensive modifications.

For example, in Grade 12, Unit 6, students write a research report as the written Performance task on the prompt “Write a focused, well-structured, and cohesive research report in which you explore a research question related to the concept of finding home, as expressed in literature in the 20th and 21st centuries.” To answer the prompt, students consider the works of several of the writers from the unit. The Teacher Edition breaks down the research and writing process into multiple steps, including general differentiation for all students and supports designed explicitly for MLLs. Some of this guidance directly supports MLLs’ full and complete participation in writing their research papers. For example, in Prewriting and Planning, for the Organize Your Report: Make a Plan activity, the Differentiate - Multilingual Learners call-out box in the Teacher Edition guides teachers to “Help students explain their theses with increasing specificity and detail as they outline their research reports.” Detailed guidance on Substantial, Moderate, and Light supports for outlining follows. However, the other MLL support for this performance task provides guidance for teachers to differentiate the Focus on Sentences activity during editing. The other steps in the writing process, including Write and Refine Your Research Question, Locate Sources and Evaluate Information, and Drafting, lack any MLL-specific supports. The general supports provided are limited to helping struggling students determine relevant sources and do not include any linguistic scaffolding or other guidance for teachers on supporting students who understand the concepts but may not be able to access the material. In this example and throughout grades and units, only some MLL supports focus on those skills essential to reaching grade-level research standards by addressing the language functions required to complete the assignment. 

In addition, many of the texts include additional activities titled Build Knowledge. These activities often provide teachers with guidance on how they can support students in facilitating further learning related to the text under study across different topics such as science, social studies, and history. However, this guidance never mentions MLLs, effectively limiting their access to this activity.

The materials include multiple writing and research-based tasks throughout the program. For instance, the Writing and Research Center offers mini-lessons on grammar and writing-related topics such as active vs. passive voice and argumentative writing skills. These lessons include closed-captioned videos and multiple-choice comprehension checks. While these tools can support general writing development, they do not include language-specific scaffolds or differentiated instruction to meet the varying needs of MLLs. For example, when the materials direct students to identify strong claims or revise sentences, there is limited explicit instruction on how to use academic language or sentence structures to support research-based writing. The focus remains on general language development rather than the specific demands of research.

Where supports are present, they do not go far enough in assisting students in producing the language needed to demonstrate their understanding. There is minimal use of language models or frames that would help MLLs construct research questions, summarize evidence, or write findings using the appropriate academic register. Supports tend to be general, often focused on reading comprehension or writing mechanics rather than on discipline-specific language needed for research synthesis and communication. They are not consistently aligned with the linguistic functions required to conduct and present research, such as arguing a claim, citing sources, or evaluating the credibility of information. Additionally, the materials do not adequately integrate opportunities for students to develop language across all four domains—speaking, listening, reading, and writing—during the research process. While students do engage in writing and sometimes present findings, there are few explicit supports to help MLLs listen for, talk through, or read complex research-related content with appropriate scaffolding. Opportunities to use language collaboratively or reflect on and revise language choices are especially limited.

There are missed opportunities to help students build on new learning through structured revisions of their research and writing. Though research projects often include drafting and editing stages, the materials do not guide teachers in providing feedback that addresses both content understanding and language use for MLLs. Nor are there language-specific checkpoints or strategies to help MLLs monitor their use of academic vocabulary, syntax, or text structure over multiple drafts.

This partial implementation results in a missed opportunity to fully support MLLs in accessing and producing the language needed for research writing. While all students are expected to complete research-based tasks with academic rigor, the absence of systematic and intentional scaffolds undermines full participation for MLLs. The tasks are not oversimplified or watered down, but they do not adequately support students in building the language skills necessary to meet the academic expectations.

While the materials offer multiple opportunities for students to learn research skills, they lack the consistent, targeted scaffolding needed for MLLs to fully engage in and demonstrate understanding through integrated speaking, listening, reading, and writing. The absence of explicit support for language production and the coordinated use of all four language domains limits MLLs’ ability to access and benefit from research instruction on par with their peers.

The instructional materials reviewed for Grades 9–12 of myPerspectives partially meet the criteria of providing support for Multilingual Learners’ (MLLs’) full and complete participation in opportunities to apply research skills to develop knowledge of a topic by confronting and analyzing different aspects of a topic. The materials include lessons and tasks that ask students to apply their research skills, but support for MLLs is limited and inconsistently applied, limiting MLLs’ opportunities to apply research skills to develop their knowledge of topics.

In the places where the materials provide MLL supports for participation in applying research skills, they do not sufficiently support students in completing the full scope of the task. For example, in Grade 11, Unit 3, students write a research report on the broad unit focus on power and language to effect change as the unit’s written Performance Task. The materials guide students through the steps in the research process, which include: 

• Completing the “Am I ready to write?” checklist

• Prewriting and Planning with the substeps: Write to Refine Your Research Question, Locate Sources and Evaluate Information, Clarify Your Response, and Organize Your Report: Make a Plan

• Drafting

• Revising

• Editing

• Publishing and Presenting

The materials only include MLL supports for the “Am I ready to write?” checklist, Editing, and Publishing and Presenting. While some scaffolds built into core instruction, like graphic organizers, support MLLs’ participation in tasks like creating a research report outline, the absence of targeted linguistic supports limits the ability of MLLs at different language proficiencies to complete this performance task in its entirety.

Furthermore, many of the texts in the program include additional activities titled Build Knowledge. These activities often provide teachers with guidance on how they can support students in facilitating further learning related to the text under study across different topics such as science, social studies, and history. However, this guidance never includes differentiation considerations, nor does it mention MLLs.

While the program includes research tasks and some supports for background knowledge, support for MLLs’ full and complete participation in opportunities to apply research skills to develop their knowledge of topics is limited and inconsistently applied.

The instructional materials in Grades 9-12 of myPerspectives partially meet the criteria of intentionally developing language in ways valued by disciplinary practices over time, through lessons, units, and throughout the course. The materials include both broad and targeted recommendations for fostering language development. However, these supports focus mainly on vocabulary and rarely on functional language development, are applied inconsistently, and are not present across all grade-level resources.

The materials provide limited intentional plans to develop language in ways valued by disciplinary practices over time. In Grade 11, Unit 5, two objectives involve citing textual evidence, one for supporting inferences and the other for supporting analysis (RL.1). To support the reading of “The Crucible, Act 1,” a differentiation Teacher Facing Notes entitles Vocabulary Development prompts teachers to provide practice in the form of “show-you-know” sentences. The first part of the sentence uses the vocabulary word in its context. The second part of the sentence, the show-you-know part, clarifies meanings. The suggestions provide examples in the form of stems. This is one way the program supports student understanding and application of academic vocabulary as part of language development valued by disciplinary practices.  

For example, at the beginning of each unit, in the Selection Overview, the materials provide Teacher Facing Notes, including a call-out box answering the question “How can I support my Multilingual Learners?” with a “Vocabulary and Language Support” section. Teachers are guided to use the extra instructions in the Vocabulary development notes, including a high-utility word list. Teachers can also use the Multilingual Learner (MLL) notes in the Teacher Edition to provide differentiated strategies for helping students read the selection and complete core tasks. Teachers are also directed to the additional Language Support Lesson.  Although each Language Support Lesson has its own individual guidance on language, it is not intentionally developed in ways valued by disciplinary practices over time, across lessons, units, and throughout the course. 

Overall, resources and supports are present, but it is up to the teacher to implement them in a meaningful and helpful way for MLLs. As noted in the report for 2.2.MLL-2, the materials do not include a scope and sequence for language development, which limits the guidance available to teachers on when and how to implement language supports coherently over time. Throughout the lessons, the materials encourage teachers to refer to the Teacher Facing Notes as a way to differentiate and provide differentiated language support for MLLs at all proficiency levels. However, the supports lack intentional organization and coherence, which may cause educators to perceive them as supplemental or feel uncertain about how to use them effectively. The materials do not provide a clear progression for language development or the domains of language across lessons within a unit. Establishing a coherent set of linguistic supports for functional language that spans all lessons would represent a meaningful improvement toward more effective and equitable language instruction for MLLs.

The instructional materials reviewed for grades 9-12 of myPerspectives partially meet the criteria of providing teacher guidance to support Multilingual Learner (MLL) students and to utilize the strategies, supports, and/or accommodations found. The materials offer some guidance for teachers on implementing the provided strategies and supports; however, this guidance is often general. Fully enacting the MLL strategies often requires background knowledge and expertise in teaching MLLs, making it challenging for those new to teaching this student population to enact.

At the beginning of each unit, teachers are provided with Language Checkpoint boxes for reading, speaking, listening, and writing. These checkpoints use WIDA-aligned descriptors— Beginning/Entering, Developing/Expanding, and Bridging/Reaching—to assess student proficiency after engaging with the Mentor Text. Teachers are guided to match students to levels if they can do specific aspects of the task. For example, in Grade 12, Unit 6, the Language Checkpoint for Reading instructs teachers to “Have students complete the Mentor Text summary. Evaluate proficiency using these criteria:

• Beginning/Entering - If summaries show:

  • Limited understanding of structures of informative texts, such as topic sentences and integration of evidence

  • Misstatement of central idea or evidence

  • Errors in word usage and sentence formation

Then consider using the Multilingual Learner Substantial Scaffolds offered throughout the unit.

• Developing/Expanding - If summaries show:

  • Basic understanding of structures of informative texts, such as topic sentences and integration of evidence

  • Mostly accurate description of central idea or evidence

  • Limited errors in word usage and sentence formation

Then consider using the Multilingual Learner Moderate scaffolds offered throughout the unit.

• Bridging/Reaching - If summaries show:

  • Command of elements of structures of informative texts, such as topic sentences and integration of evidence

  • Accurate descriptions of central idea or evidence

  • Few or no errors in word usage and sentence formation

Then consider using the Multilingual Learner Light Scaffolds offered throughout the unit.

This structure is a strength, as it establishes a potential foundation for differentiation and provides teachers with concrete guidance in noticing student moves relative to content and language. 

While the guidance for teachers starts strong in each unit, guidance for teachers throughout the unit consists of brief explanations of how to enact supports in the Differentiate - Multilingual Learners and Multilingual Learner Support call-out boxes. This guidance usually supports teachers in enacting that specific support with MLLs leveled by the Language Checkpoints from the unit introduction activities. For example, in Grade 10, Unit 3, during Peer Group Learning, while reading “The Soldier of Mictian,” teachers receive the following guidance: “As students read ‘The Soldier of Mictian,’ help them use the linguistic supports in the selection to read with greater understanding. Point out the blue, boldface words in the text and the pronunciations in the side column.”  Specific supports for each level - Substantial, Moderate, and Light - follow. Additionally, each text includes a list of ways teachers can support MLLs in the How Can I Support Multilingual Learners section of the Selection Overview.  These suggestions are general and offer minimal guidance to teachers on how to implement them effectively.  They often include reminders to teachers of other kinds of supports offered throughout the selection. For example, in Grade 9, Unit 3, students read “The Tragedy of Romeo and Juliet - Act 1” as part of Whole Class Learning.  The How Can I Support Multilingual Learners section of the Selection Overview has three sections: Lesson Preview, Vocabulary and Language Support, and Transition into English.  The Vocabulary and Language Support suggestions are as follows:

• Tell students they will encounter figurative language and figures of speech such as oxymorons (e.g., bittersweet) in the drama. Help students create and maintain a Word Wall.

• Mutilingual Learner notes in the Teacher’s Edition provide differentiated strategies for helping students read the selection and complete core tasks. 

• An additional Language Support lesson, which includes a suggested language target for this selection, is available on Realize.

Neither of these types of supports, however, includes guidance on how to support productive struggle, anticipate language demands, or notice student moves, and respond with flexible, goal-aligned questions and feedback that support language development across levels of proficiency.

Additionally, the materials do not include guidance that differentiates support for teachers based on their experience level. New teachers are not provided with foundational explanations, and experienced teachers are not offered opportunities to refine their practice. As a result, educators at all levels may struggle to understand when and how to implement the strategies and supports embedded in the curriculum.

While the materials include helpful guidance, such as the Language Checkpoints, which show teachers how to respond to MLLs’ needs in response to content, overall guidance is general and often limited to brief explanations tied to specific call-out boxes. The materials lack support for helping teachers anticipate language demands, notice student language moves, or provide flexible, goal-aligned responses that promote language development. Furthermore, the guidance does not differentiate for teacher experience, offering neither foundational explanations for novice teachers nor opportunities for experienced teachers to deepen their practice. As a result, implementing the MLL supports consistently across the curriculum may be challenging for many educators.

The instructional materials reviewed for Grades 9-12 of myPerspectives partially meet the criteria of guiding teachers on how to match students with language supports, progress along a continuum, and be responsive to students’ current language development in relation to the content. The instructional materials provide some support for teachers to align language supports with Multilingual Learners’ (MLLs’) proficiency levels and current language development in relation to the content.

The materials partially meet the criteria for guiding teachers in matching language supports to MLLs’ English proficiency. While the materials include some strategies for addressing MLLs’ current language development in relation to the content, this guidance is limited. Supports are primarily presented in call-out boxes in the Teacher Edition, offering only minimal direction on how to align them with specific levels of English proficiency.

For example, in Grade 12, Unit 4, the Language Checkpoint call-out box in the Teacher Edition prompts teachers to use the suggested criteria (beginning/entering, developing/expanding, and bridging/reaching) to evaluate students during the icebreaker activity. Each level includes suggestions for support phrased as “If students can... then consider using…” and follows with which level of supports would be appropriate for students throughout the unit. For example, the Developing/Expanding level suggestion is:

If students can:

• Contribute to the discussion, responding to questions

• Use some variation in sentence patterns and grammatical structures to convey ideas

• Understand and use general vocabulary with some academic and concept terms

Then consider using the Multilingual Learner moderate Scaffolds offered throughout the unit.

This Language Checkpoint is specific to Speaking and Listening, but the Unit Introduction section also includes Language Checkpoints for Reading and Writing. This example allows teachers to consider student proficiency levels and to adjust the learning activities accordingly. However, student language development in relation to content is never revisited throughout the unit. MLLs who need substantial support at the beginning of the unit may not continue to require that level of support throughout the unit for every task.

Within the units, there are Differentiate-Multilingual Learners call-out boxes in the Teacher Edition with supports at the Substantial, Moderate, and Light levels, helping teachers match students with appropriate support using their evaluations from the Language Checkpoints in the unit introductions. For example, in Grade 9, Unit 5, for the Close Read of “There Will Come Soft Rains,”  there is a differentiated call-out box guiding teachers to “Model for students how to use support from peers and teachers to understand” the text. Substantial support suggests that teachers read the text aloud to students, stopping to prompt for predictions orally. Moderate support suggests that students read the text aloud with teacher support and then write predictions in pairs with teacher support. Light support also suggests that students read the text aloud, with students writing predictions independently with peer support. This example shows that the materials contain specific scaffolds that allow teachers to consider MLLs’ language proficiency levels and the level of support MLLs may need. However, teachers are not prompted to consider how to match MLLs with these supports throughout the unit, as their language needs may change over time and in response to content.

The Language Checkpoints provide some guidance for teachers on providing supports based on MLLts’ current language proficiency. However, the supports do not provide a continuum to monitor language development. The call-out boxes in the Teacher Edition are helpful, but they lack additional guidance for teachers on how to match students to supports as their language progresses throughout the unit. 

The instructional materials reviewed for Grades 9-12 of myPerspectives partially meet the criteria of including guidance for intentional and flexible grouping structures for Multilingual Learners (MLLs) to ensure equitable participation. The materials provide some opportunities for structured group work, including scaffolds for MLLs, but they do not consistently support intentional and flexible grouping across lessons.

Specifically, in Grade 11, Unit 2, the Differentiate - Multilingual Learners box included as students start to read “There is a Solitude of Space” suggests teachers have students who need moderate-level supports read the poem in small groups, explain difficult terms, and support each other in answering Close Read questions through discussion. At the light-support level, teachers are encouraged to pair students and guide them to ask and answer Close Read questions together. These strategies promote collaboration but rely on general pair or group formats without additional teacher guidance on grouping decisions. These scaffolds support MLLs’ comprehension through collaboration but do not include specific strategies for grouping MLLs based on proficiency or need. Additionally, within this reading and throughout units and grades, there are Grouping Opportunity call-out boxes that guide teachers in leading group activities, but do not facilitate grouping structures, nor do they mention MLLs.

In Grade 12, Unit 4, where Peer-Group Learning Strategies are introduced, teachers and students are guided through many aspects of peer-group learning for the specific purpose of engaging in small group discussions around the thematic question, “In what ways is growing up a process of finding one’s own vision?” The materials encourage students to ask questions, challenge one another, and provide evidence. The teacher guide advises reviewing peer-group strategies with students and includes a video to help students understand collaborative expectations. A call-out box entitled Facilitating Peer Group Learning focuses on forming groups, reminding teachers that “A good mix of abilities can make the experience of Peer-Group Learning dynamic and productive.” However, this guidance does not mention MLLs at all or their specific needs as a consideration for group formation. The inclusion of these slides and videos to build collaborative skills shows a thoughtful approach to peer learning. Yet, the absence of guidance on forming groups for students requiring language support limits the effectiveness of these strategies for MLLs.  

The materials provide structures to encourage peer dialogue and collaborative learning, which can help students engage meaningfully with content and develop academic discussion skills. However, there is a missed opportunity to embed clear guidance for teachers on how to form intentional and flexible groups that support all learners, especially MLLs. Although the materials did not include detailed grouping strategies, they did offer collaborative tools, such as question prompts, learning strategies, and instructional videos, which reflect a thoughtful attempt to promote peer interaction.

The instructional materials reviewed for Grades 9–12 of MyPerspectives partially meet the criteria of providing guidance to encourage teachers to draw upon students’ home language to facilitate learning. The materials provide opportunities for teachers to integrate Multilingual Learners’ (MLLs’) home languages into instruction through scattered supports, but these are not consistently embedded or accompanied by sufficient guidance for effective implementation.

Some of the opportunities for teachers to integrate MLLs’ home languages into instruction include:

• In Grade 11, Unit 2, the How can I support Bilingual Learners? call-out box provides a Lesson Preview activity that prompts teachers to ask students to express key concepts from the upcoming texts in their home language. Additionally, a related section titled “Transition into English” encourages teachers to share summaries of the texts with students in their home language, promoting comprehension and access to complex content.

• In Grade 12, Unit 4, the Language Spotlight addresses the use of Spanish-English cognates, such as revelación (revelation) and inanimado (inanimate). This section offers explicit instructional guidance for teachers to help Spanish-speaking students recognize and use cognates, strengthening vocabulary development and cross-linguistic awareness.

• Additionally, authentic Spanish-language texts aligned with unit themes are available, but only in select units. These resources must be manually assigned; however, the program does not provide guidance for whom these assignments are most appropriate, nor how teachers should implement or differentiate their use based on student language needs or proficiency levels. Texts aligned with unit themes are not available in languages other than Spanish.

These examples demonstrate that materials guide to encourage teachers to draw upon students’ home language to facilitate learning in places. While the Lesson Preview and Transition into English components in the “How can I support Bilingual Learners?” call-out box acknowledge the value of home language, the lack of deeper guidance or scaffolding limits their usability, particularly for novice educators. The Language Spotlight demonstrates a strong approach to leveraging home language connections through cognate recognition. This targeted support encourages cross-linguistic transfer and affirms students’ linguistic identities. However, these tools are limited to Spanish speakers, leaving out students from other language backgrounds and suggesting a need for broader multilingual application.

In selected lessons, MyPerspectives includes clear prompts and vocabulary supports that affirm and build upon students’ existing language resources. The use of bilingual summaries, home language discussion, and cognate instruction facilitates comprehension and strengthens vocabulary through students’ first language. The materials consistently provide academic vocabulary support and, in some cases, link these to students’ linguistic backgrounds. When implemented effectively, these strategies reflect an asset-based approach to multilingualism. However, there is a missed opportunity to offer more robust and consistent guidance for teachers, particularly in helping them differentiate and implement home language supports across various language backgrounds and ability levels. While Spanish-language texts are available in some units, the lack of instructional guidance limits their impact, and not all units offer equivalent resources for all students.

While the materials include meaningful attempts to integrate home language use, the supports are neither consistent across grade levels nor comprehensive in instructional design. There is minimal guidance on when and how to use the available materials, which could hinder effective classroom integration, especially in linguistically diverse settings. The materials also lack any teacher guidance on how to garner information that will aid in learning, including the family’s preferred language of communication, schooling experiences in other languages, literacy abilities in other languages, and previous exposure to academic or everyday English. The materials do not provide systematic or comprehensive support for all MLLs; they include promising strategies such as home language previewing and cognate instruction, which support vocabulary development and concept comprehension. These attempts demonstrate a thoughtful, though limited, approach to addressing the use of students’ home language.