Abstract
This manuscript explores how the changing policy context of common standards may have influenced the provision of curriculum materials in the United States. Many educational reforms do little to change the nature of classroom instruction, and prior research has argued that this constancy is, at least in part, due to the common use of instructional materials from a small set of large publishing companies (Rowan in J Educ Change 3(3–4):283–314, 2002). However, common standards have been in place in many states since 2010, creating the potential for states to create and share curricular materials with each other, as well as for new organizations to enter the curriculum marketplace. Instructional materials provide a direct link to the instructional core, and recent research demonstrates that individual teachers, schools, and districts are increasingly selecting instructional materials from a variety of online sources, including databases of open educational resources and open-access, yearlong curricula. These materials are created, curated, and/or disseminated by state education agencies, nonprofit organizations, for-profit companies, and education employees. In this essay, we describe this new context and provide several cases of the shifting landscape of supply and demand related to curriculum materials. Various configurations of organizations are taking innovative approaches to providing curriculum materials in the context of the Common Core State Standards, as well as to influencing the materials school systems adopt. Finally, we discuss the implications of this backdrop for curriculum policy and practice.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Note: The dashed lines encircling “endowment-based” and “transactions with granting agencies”, and the dashed line connecting them, indicate that there is not a direct relationship between granting agencies as seekers of curriculum materials from endowment-based organizations. (Color figure online)
Note: The line between curriculum suppliers and demand influencers is dotted to illustrate that though demand influencers primarily influence the behavior of curriculum demanders (indicated by a solid line), there may be an indirect feedback loop with suppliers in that suppliers may change their materials if the reviews determine the demand for their materials. The curriculum marketplace is quickly evolving, and these groups, as well as their transactional relationships, will likely continue to shift. (Color figure online)
Note: Dotted lines indicate past transactional relationships; solid lines indicate current relationships. Types of organizations that are not prominent in the curriculum marketplace are denoted in gray (membership-based organizations and granting agencies). Types of curriculum suppliers that are new to the curriculum marketplace are encircled with the dotted/dashed lines (government-based and education employees). Each color denotes a particular organization: Green = LearnZillion; Brown = National Council of Teachers of English; Blue = Open Up Resources; Purple = EngageNY/UnboundEd; Red = Teachers Pay Teachers. (Color figure online)
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
According to Ujifusa’s (2017) map, the states of Arizona, Arkansas, Indiana, Louisiana, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, West Virginia will rewrite or have rewritten their standards. Alaska, Nebraska, Texas, and Virginia never adopted the standards.
References
Atkins, D. E., Brown, J. S., & Hammond, A. L. (2007). A review of the open educational resources (OER) movement: Achievements, challenges, and new opportunities. Menlo Park: William and Flora Hewlett Foundation. https://doi.org/10.1128/MCB.05690-11.
Bliss, T. J., & Patrick, S. (2012). OER state policy in K-12 education: Benefits, strategies, and recommendations for open access, open sharing. Vienna: International Association for K-12 Online Learning.
Burch, P. (2009). Hidden markets: The new education privatization. New York: Routledge.
Cohen, D. K., & Moffitt, S. L. (2009). The ordeal of equality: Did federal regulation fix the schools? Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Cohen, D. K., & Spillane, J. P. (1992). Policy and practice: The relations between governance and instruction. Review of Research in Education, 18(1), 3–49. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X018001003.
Crunchbase. (2019). Teachers Pay Teachers. Retrieved January 3, 2019, from https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/teacherspayteachers-com.
Crunchbase Inc. (2017). Overview: LearnZillion. Retrieved October 31, 2017, from https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/learnzillion.
EdReports. (2018). Our mission. Retrieved January 3, 2019, from https://www.edreports.org/about/our-approach/index.html.
Edreports.org. (n.d.). EdReports.org quality instructional materials tool: English language arts 3–8 review tool. Retrieved April 22, 2019, from https://www.edreports.org/reports/rubrics-evidence.
Elmore, R. F. (2004). School reform from the inside out: Policy, practice, and performance. Cambridge: Harvard Education Press.
Freeman, J., & Hannan, M. T. (1989). Setting the record straight on organizational ecology: Rebuttal to Young. American Journal of Sociology, 95(2), 425–439.
Geith, C., & Vignare, K. (2008). Access to education with online learning and open educational resources: Can they close the gap? Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 12(1), 105–126.
Halpern, L. (2014). Learning List makes its entry into national market. Austin: Learning List.
Haydel, E., & Carmichael, S. B. (2015). Uncommonly engaging? A review of the EngageNY English language arts Common Core curriculum. Washington, D.C.: Fordham Institute.
Heitin, L. (2014). Common-core math textbooks to get online ratings. Education Week, 34(1), 1–18. Retrieved from https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2014/08/15/01curriculum.h34.html?r=2017646263.
Heitin, L. (2016a). Free teaching website expands on EngageNY’s mission. Education Week, 35(2), 8. Retrieved from https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2016/06/01/free-teaching-website-expands-on-engagenys-mission.html.
Heitin, L. (2016b). Creators of EngageNY start new archive of free Common-core materials. Education Week, May 18. Retrieved from https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2016/05/18/creators-of-engageny-start-new-archive-of.html.
Hodge, E. M., Salloum, S. J., & Benko, S. L. (2016). (Un)Commonly connected: A social network analysis of state standards resources for English/language arts. AERA Open, 2(4), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858416674901.
Honig, M. I. (2004). The new middle management: Intermediary organizations in education policy implementation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 26(1), 65–87. https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737026001065.
Iasevoli, B. (2018, August 23). Will new curricula jump-start a renaissance in Detroit? [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/curriculum/2018/08/will_new_curricula_jumpstart.html.
Jacobson, L. (2017). Administrators consider teachers’ professional learning needs in using digital, OER resources. Education DIVE, September 25. Retrieved from https://www.educationdive.com/news/administrators-consider-teachers-professional-learning-needs-in-using-digi/504588/.
Johns Hopkins School of Education Institute for Education Policy. (2018). Using the RFP process to drive high-quality curriculum: Findings from the field. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins School of Education Institute for Education Policy.
Johnson, S. (2017). Open Up Resources announces first full math curriculum—and its plans for profitability. EdSurge, August 24. Retrieved from https://www.edsurge.com/amp/news/2017-08-24-open-up-resources-announces-first-full-math-curriculum-and-its-plans-for-profitability.
Kanwar, A., & Uvalić-Trumbić, S. (2011). A basic guide to open educational resources (OER). Paris: Commonwealth of Learning, UNESCO. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01378.x.
Kaufman, J. H., Davis, J. S., II, Wang, E. L., Thompson, L. E., Pane, J. D., Pfrommer, K., et al. (2017). Use of open educational resources in an era of common standards: A case study on the use of EngageNY. Santa Monica: RAND Corporation.
Kaufman, J. H., Thompson, L. E., & Opfer, V. D. (2016). Creating a coherent system to support instruction aligned with state standards: Promising practices of the Louisiana Department of Education. Washington, D.C.: RAND Corporation. https://doi.org/10.7249/RR1613.
Kornhaber, M. L., Barkauskas, N. J., & Griffith, K. M. (2016). Smart money? Philanthropic and federal funding for the Common Core. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 24(93), 1–33.
Kornhaber, M. L., Barkauskas, N. J., Griffith, K. M., Sausner, E., & Mahfouz, J. (2017). The Common Core’s promises and pitfalls from the perspectives of policy entrepreneurs and ground-level actors. Journal of Educational Change, 18(4), 385–412. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-017-9306-z.
Kornhaber, M. L., Griffith, K. M., & Tyler, A. (2014). It’s not education by zip code anymore—But what is it? Conceptions of equity under the Common Core. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 22(4), 1–30.
LaVenia, M., Cohen-Vogel, L., & Lang, L. B. (2015). The Common Core State Standards Initiative: An event history analysis of state adoption. American Journal of Education, 121(2), 145–182.
Learning List. (2015a). Homepage. Retrieved January 17, 2019, from https://learninglist.com.
Learning List. (2015b). Our service. Retrieved January 17, 2019, from https://learninglist.com/our-service.
LearnZillion. (2017). Homepage. Retrieved October 31, 2017, from https://learnzillion.com/.
Loewus, L. (2016a, May 5). Popular K-6 math curriculum deemed unaligned to Common Core [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/curriculum/2016/05/popular_math_curriculum_unaligned_common_core.html.
Loewus, L. (2016b, June 28). Major publishers get poor reviews for high school Common-core math books [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/curriculum/2016/06/major_publishers_high_school_common_core_math_textbooks.html.
Loewus, L. (2017, Feburary 24). Common-core materials continue to vary in quality, according to textbook review [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/curriculum/2017/02/common-core_materials_vary_quality_edreports.html.
Louisiana Department of Education. (2017). Louisiana Guidebooks purchasing information. Retrieved January 3, 2019, from https://www.louisianabelieves.com/docs/default-source/curricular-resources/louisiana-guidebooks-purchasing-information.pdf.
McDonnell, L. M., & Weatherford, M. S. (2013a). Evidence use and the Common Core State Standards movement: From problem definition to policy adoption. American Journal of Education, 120(1), 1–25.
McDonnell, L. M., & Weatherford, M. S. (2013b). Organized interests and the Common Core. Educational Researcher, 42(9), 488–497.
McDonnell, L. M., & Weatherford, M. S. (2016). Recognizing the political in implementation research. Educational Researcher, 45(4), 233–242.
Open Up Resources. (2017a). Open Up Resources announces two new free, openly licensed curricula in development. Retrieved January 17, 2019, from https://openupresources.org/open-up-resources-announces-two-new-free-openly-licensed-curricula-in-development/.
Open Up Resources. (2017b). Our history: How we came to develop new, openly-licensed core curriculum for K-12. Retrieved October 31, 2017, from http://openupresources.org/open-up-resources-history/.
Opfer, V. D., Kaufman, J. H., & Thompson, L. E. (2016). Implementation of K-12 state standards for mathematics and English language arts and literacy: Findings from the American Teacher Panel. Santa Monica: RAND Corporation.
Partelow, L., & Shapiro, S. (2018). Curriculum reform in the nation’s largest school districts. Washington, D.C.: Center for American Progress.
ProPublica. (n.d.). EDREPORTS ORG INC. Retrieved January 3, 2019, from https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/471171149.
Rowan, B. (2002). The ecology of school improvement: Notes on the school improvement industry in the United States. Journal of Educational Change, 3(3–4), 283–314.
Sawchuk, S. (2017a, August 24). Can an “open” math curriculum compete with commercial publishers? [Blog post]. Retrieved from http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/curriculum/2017/08/can_open_math_curriculum_compete.html.
Sawchuk, S. (2017b, September 1). Watchdog gives a scarlet letter to some high school literature curricula [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/curriculum/2017/09/watchdog_edreports_gives_mixed_ratings_to_high_school_lit_series.html.
Sawchuk, S. (2018, November 9). California approved nearly 30 science textbooks. But are they truly aligned to standards? [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/curriculum/2018/11/california_adopts_science_materials_are_they_aligned.html.
Sparks, S. D. (2017). What is OER? Answers to 5 questions about open educational resources. Education Week, March 28.
Teachers Pay Teachers. (n.d.-a). About us. Retrieved January 3, 2019, from https://www.teacherspayteachers.com/About-Us.
Teachers Pay Teachers. (n.d.-b). Payout rates and fees. Retrieved January 3, 2019, from https://www.teacherspayteachers.com/Help/Payout-27/Payout-Rates-and-Fees.
Tepe, L., & Mooney, T. (2018). Navigating the new curriculum landscape: How states are using and sharing open educational resources. Washington, D.C.: Council of Chief State School Officers, New America.
Turner, C. (2014). Teachers hit the Common Core wall. NPR Ed: How Learning Happens Blog, June 3. Retrieved from https://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2014/06/03/318246129/teachers-hit-the-common-core-wall.
Tyack, D., & Cuban, L. (1995). Tinkering towards Utopia: A century of public school reform. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Ujifusa, A. (2017). Map: Tracking the Common Core State Standards. Education Week, September 18. Retrieved from http://www.edweek.org/ew/section/multimedia/map-states-academic-standards-common-core-or.html.
UnboundEd Learning, Inc. (2017). Winter 2018 Standards Institute. Retrieved October 31, 2017, from http://www.standardsinstitutes.org/institute/winter-2018#tab–details.
U.S. Department of Education Office of Educational Technology. (2018). #GoOpen districts. Retrieved October 30, 2017, from https://tech.ed.gov/open/districts/.
Wiley, D., Hilton, J. L., Ellington, S., & Hall, T. (2012). A preliminary examination of the cost savings and learning impacts of using open textbooks in middle and high school science classes. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 13(3), 262–276.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hodge, E.M., Salloum, S.J. & Benko, S.L. The changing ecology of the curriculum marketplace in the era of the Common Core State Standards. J Educ Change 20, 425–446 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-019-09347-1
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-019-09347-1