Performance Management — Quality Reviewer Self-Assessment

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

Initiated set up group text at inperson training Named our group text Brought beverages & snacks for our team Have called team members to provide additional support Timely response to text providing content and job knowledge to questions

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

Log on to Zoom early to answer questions. Greet all members and ask about their week. Split up work taking on a larger portion if needed

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

Currently write elementary litetacy curriculum for FWISD and use this content knowledge. Finish gathering evidence early in the werk so team members can see the evidence. Have taught the Texas Reading Academy for the pass 7 years

Personal goal

Distinguish for all categories

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

Throughout the IMRA review process, I actively collaborated with fellow reviewers, facilitators, and project leads to ensure a consistent and high-quality review process. I participated in calibration and consensus discussions, helping apply rubric indicators consistently while engaging in thoughtful, evidence-based conversations about instructional materials. I regularly shared my expertise in TEKS alignment, curriculum development, and instructional materials evaluation to support team decision-making and help build consensus on complex review items. I maintained professional and respectful communication, listened to diverse perspectives, and clearly explained my reasoning and evidence when discussing ratings and recommendations. In addition to contributing to team discussions, I remained committed to continuous learning by completing all required reviewer trainings and calibration activities, seeking feedback from colleagues and facilitators, and applying that feedback to strengthen my review practices. I regularly reflected on my evaluations, refined my approach when needed, and continued expanding my knowledge of instructional materials evaluation and best practices. Drawing on my experience in curriculum leadership and professional development, I worked to improve the quality, consistency, and effectiveness of my reviews while fostering a collaborative, supportive, and positive review environment. Artifacts are: QR score report, consensus meetings, Evidence tracking sheet, emails, IMRA certificates kick off meetings.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

I actively engaged with the review team and became very comfortable using the various tools and platforms required for the work. I used the IMRA review system to document ratings, upload evidence, track progress, and complete evaluations in a timely manner. As I reviewed materials, I navigated multiple publisher platforms and digital resources to locate and verify evidence aligned to the rubric indicators. To stay organized, I maintained detailed notes and records of my reviews, which helped ensure consistency and accuracy throughout the process. I also participated regularly in reviewer trainings, calibration sessions, consensus meetings, and team discussions, where I shared evidence-based feedback and collaborated with colleagues to reach consensus. I remained flexible and adaptable when working across different virtual platforms and communication tools, while maintaining regular communication with team members and facilitators. When colleagues had questions or needed support, I was happy to share strategies for locating evidence, organizing documentation, and navigating review materials. These experiences allowed me to contribute to a collaborative review environment while helping ensure high-quality, consistent evaluations. Some artifacts are -competency check score report, evidence tracking sheet.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

I drew on my experience with TEKS, curriculum development, and effective instructional practices to carefully evaluate instructional materials and ensure they met the expectations outlined in the rubric. I stayed organized, met all review deadlines, and made sure my ratings were supported by clear evidence from the materials rather than personal opinions or preferences. During calibration and consensus discussions, I worked closely with fellow reviewers to analyze evidence, discuss different perspectives, and reach consistent decisions. I regularly shared my knowledge of standards alignment and instructional quality while remaining open to feedback and collaboration. Most importantly, I approached every review with a focus on identifying high-quality instructional materials that would support student learning and provide meaningful resources for Texas teachers. By remaining objective, following the review process with fidelity, and contributing to thoughtful, evidence-based discussions, I helped support a fair, consistent, and rigorous review process.n Artifacts can include - TEA master teacher, curriculum writer, completed review assignment by deadlines, consensus meeting doc, review feedback, completed instructional material review, curriculum evaluation projects,

Personal goal

Involvement in IMRA Cycle 2026 provided an invaluable experience which helped me develop my expertise in analyzing instructional materials. While working in teams with other educators across Texas, I managed to improve my skills in approaching instructional materials from an objective viewpoint and conducting analysis with the help of evidence. Collaboration also emphasized the need for consistency and cooperation among reviewers. Being engaged in the discussion, we managed to make sure that all our decisions and conclusions were justified and based on our understanding of the criteria outlined in the rubric. Moreover, I was able to enhance my knowledge about the alignment with the state standards, teaching quality, and features of effective instructional materials. The most valuable aspect of the process was that I had the opportunity to collaborate with other educators to evaluate instructional materials in a consistent and fair way. It was crucial to establish a professional level of communication with my colleagues and learn more from them. In addition, I felt the need for constant professional development and commitment to the high standards of instructional materials. This experience turned out to be relevant to my work as an educator and a curriculum leader. While reflecting on my involvement in the process, I realize that I will need to work further on the improvement of my instructional materials analysis skills and keep up with innovations in the field. For example, I would like to develop expertise in such areas as accessibility considerations and new instructional strategies. Also, I am eager to participate in future review processes in the capacity of a reviewer mentor or a calibration participant.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - I invited others to lunch with me during in person training and brought table snacks to help build rapport. 1A - I make note of the personal details shared by others and keep them in mind when meetings begin to either follow up with them, or to just help me understand their decisions and opinions. 1B - Prior to the most recent consensus meeting, I made notes about points and evidence from team members that didn't align. During the meeting, I pointed out that I noticed point A with evidence A, point B with evidence B, and point C with evidence C and began the conversation with point A which seemed to be in consensus. After agreement on point A, I encouraged others to elaborate on the points that they chose. 1B - I try not to send any unnecessary communications, but I do make sure to communicate with my group through Group Me or individual text throughout the week when there is a question or new information needs to be shared. This promotes open communication and prevents confusion or extra work in revisions. 1C - I attend all in person trainings without distractions, follow leader direction, take notes, and apply learning appropriately. 1C - I take all asynchronous training as soon as I can when it is made available, read all provided materials, take notes, and pass all quizzes. I go back to look at the training materials, occasionally re-watch videos, and keep a notebook to make sure I am utilizing my learning during the review process..

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - I navigate the IMRA reviewer dashboard with no issues, and answer questions when other teammates have them. 2A - I navigate the Canva courses for training with no issues. 2A - I navigate the Google Drive and team workbook with no issues, and answer questions when other teammates have them. 2A - I provide assistant and respond promptly when team members or coaches reach out to me through the google workspace, group me, email, and/or text. 2B - I am present without distractions during virtual and in-person meetings. I also keep distractions for others to a minimum by muting my microphone when not speaking. 2B - Myself and one other team member kept track of places where votes were incomplete on standards alignment and took turns walking our team through the standards to complete the votes. 2B - As the writer for the team, I take time to highlight good evidence writing and give my team feedback on evidence that may be lacking specific details before we get to the consensus meeting.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - My 20 years of experience as a high school math teacher and 2 years of experience as a curriculum coordinator for 7 - 12 math have ensured that I have a deep and full understanding of the TEKS and ELPS. I know where to look for evidence based on the table of contents for the materials and have spent time finding and citing that evidence when the publisher citations are not quite accurate. 3B - I have meet every deadline, and consistently complete work early. When I complete work before others on the team, they are able to use my work as a guide without having to spend extra time looking for evidence not provided by the publisher. 3B - After I have completed my work, I take time to revisit the team work shortly before our meeting time to consider their evidence and opinions. I may realize that there was not enough detail or support in my evidence, or find where our opinions differ so that we can fully discuss the differences during the meeting. 3C - Each point that I award is backed up by evidence from the materials and clearly matches the rubric and the implications of indicator guidance. I make sure to point out which part of the guidance statement that I struggle with finding evidence when others are considering awarding points I don't think exist. When we come to consensus, I make sure to reiterate which point we awarded and which evidence matched that point so that everyone is assured we have made a clear decision. 3D - I regularly re-read the implications of indicator guidance while looking for evidence and make sure that I share my understanding with the group if we are unsure on qualifying a point. The goal is to make sure the material is of high quality so that students are able to learn the standards fully and with rigor.

Personal goal

I aim to try and use one device only for virtual meetings in the future so that I can easily share my screen when asked during meetings. I also want to make an intentional day each week to provide positive writing feedback for each team member.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - To ensure communication and make us a true team, I immediately created our group texts to include everyone at table 125 during kickoff and added a visual of the table sign to help us differentiate our communication amongst the different teams. Day-to-day, I respond to our group message notifications, even if it is just to acknowledge them and suggest we look into finding an answer. 1B - To keep us moving toward our consensus goals, I consistently respond when we are asked to share where we found evidence, yet I remain mindful to ensure equity of voice so that others are also given the opportunity to respond. 1C - I am intentional about taking notes when others explain their logic in the evidence they have found, or provide a citation that supports the decision they have made, even though I am a veteran teacher and coach. I believe we can still learn how to interpret things differently when we gain insight from others. In addition, I am continuously researching grade-level RLA TEKS differently to create district-level best practices PD.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - Being familiar with the IMRA review tools helps to develop expertise. I created and shared with my table a Google doc with visual aids and the links to include all the links (such as the evidence guide, the QRCs, the publisher’s products, and such) needed to complete our QRC, and provided our citations for the consensus meetings 2B - I am consistently able to contribute and easily provide my evidence to support my findings to share because I can easily navigate between the needed screens and prepare in advance, having had all of the work done and at my fingertips, as I have provided support to the team lead on occasion when, at first, others had difficulty locating the breakout rooms via Teams.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - In creating PD for the district, I must be able to give a general overview of the TEKS for a multiple-grade-level audience. In speaking of RLA TEKS, it helps to paint a simple picture of the seven integrated strands that support Reading, Writing, Speaking, and Listening, with these strands breaking down into an alphanumeric system and consisting of three categories: the Knowledge & Skills Statement, the student expectations, and the breakouts, and these are vertically aligned across the grade levels. In order to be effective in leading PD, I must be familiar with the organization of the TEKs for various grade levels and hw these are presented in said grade level. 3B - Having led three teams last year, I know how important it is to meet the deadlines, make the best use of the process, and present worthy work to contribute to the citations that support the consensus votes, as well as opening tickets IMRA to communicate with the publishers based on the findings that may need to be revisited. 3C - I have a good understanding of the TEKS and how they are organized. This familiarity helps to ensure that the language I am using to cite evidence remains close to the breakout and enables me to weed out that which is not breakout language, leading to consistency as well as presenting the evidence in an unbiased manner. 3D - As a district literacy coach who supports teachers, including new teachers, I can easily envision the faces of those educators who would be using the materials, and I can therefore put myself in their shoes and think of what supports they may need. Advocating for these educators means closely reviewing the materials and keeping a watch and commitment for support and determining HQIM.

Personal goal

Although I feel pretty comfortable with meeting the requirements to review without bias and believe that I can give a distinguished contribution to reporting on the quality of the product assigned to us, I still keep a growth mindset to learn from others or gain insight. It is my personal goal to continue to provide support for anyone on the team and help us make decisions as a team.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - I demonstrate vulnerability when I post questions related to the week's tasks to the team group message so others who may have the same question may see the responses. 1A - I share links to resources, such as the Suitability Flag Submission Form, to the team group message when members of the team ask for help finding these resources. 1B - When I was recently called out in a group message about being the final group member to complete a task (still before the deadline, though), I responded kindly and in a professional manner. 1C - I sought out professional development related to the new English Language Proficiency Standards when we were tasked with reviewing materials related to this new set of guidelines. 1C - I refer to the glossary of terms provided and share what I have learned with my teammates when we are reviewing the materials.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - When reviewing instructional materials, I dive deep into the product by accessing a student log in, practicing as a student, then switching to the teacher log in and referring to the reports and other resources available. 2A - I share links to resources, such as the Suitability Flag Submission Form, to the team group message when members of the team ask for help finding these resources. 2B - I keep my focus on the work and do not distract others with off-task conversation. 2B - I met today's deadline to review the QRC even though we were given less than 24 hours access to the resources. 2B - I contributed to our QRC Alignment document with rationale for accepting the resource (even though this is not required) so that the impending discussion can be rooted in evidence.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - I served on the TEKS writing committee for the current TEKS for mathematics. I bring a deep knowledge of the standards as well as vertical alignment of the concepts to the team. 3A - I spend an extensive amount of time accessing the materials as I provide high quality reviews of the resources. Beyond reading the supporting documents provided by the publisher, I seek to understand how the materials meet each required indicator by logging in as a student as well as a teacher and exploring the materials thoroughly. 3C - I provide unbiased evaluations related to each indicator as I review the materials. 3D - I thoroughly review the Evidence Guide and use that as the focus for each indicator as I explore the resources. I look for examples at the highest level of each indicator.

Personal goal

I will continue to improve my review as I look for high quality examples of the specific indicators as well as improve my evidence writing to include more specific examples from the resources.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - I have actively participated in team collaboration and consensus by attending all meetings and working cooperatively with my team through email and text messages. I ask my team questions when I need clarification, and I am also available in answering questions that others on my team may have. 1B - I respond to all communications quickly and professionally, and I ask for feedback from others on my team who have more experience with IMRA if I am unsure of procedures. When my team is not in consensus, I positively respond with appropriate evidence to support my position, but I am also willing to listen to evidence that does not coincide with mine. 1C - Since this is my first year, I am constantly seeking advice and using all resources available to me. I have spent countless hours going through all of the resources IMRA has shared with me in order to do the best review possible.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - I am able to effectively use all of the tools and technology necessary to fulfill my role during this review cycle. I am proficient with using Google, Zoom and TEAMS, and if I do not know how to do something, I find ways to figure it out. For example, I was getting bogged down with all the different tabs that needed to be open at once, so I created bookmarks for myself to make things easier and more efficient. I also found that using two computers during online meetings helps me be even more efficient and adaptable during these meetings. 2B - I am always engaged during meetings, and I spend a great deal of time working with my team through text and email when we are not in a meeting. During meetings, I am engaged and offer input, evidence and suggestions when needed. I am not afraid to share my opinion in a positive and productive manner.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - After 37 years in the classroom teaching grades 4 and 5, I feel I have a strong understanding of TEKS. This knowledge allows me to make sound decisions when evaluating instructional materials for rigor and accuracy. I have also taught several years in a dual language program, so I feel very proficient in ELPS. My experience allows me to evaluate these materials from both perspectives. 3B - I have met all deadlines and even been one of the first to complete reviews. I have sought out resources to ensure my evidence and reviews are of high quality. 3C - As I write my evidence, I consistently avoid using any opinions and ensure my evidence is based on facts found in the materials. I also actively listen during meetings to evaluate evidence found by others on my team to assist in my decision making. 3D - Having just retired, I know the importance of high quality materials for students and teachers in Texas. I know what it is like to work with poor quality and insufficient materials, and I know how beneficial it is to have high quality and effective materials. As a mentor, I know how important it is to have materials that work for both new and experienced educators, and as a teacher of ELL, bilingual, G/T, and SpEd students, I know how important it is to have materials that work for ALL students in a regular education setting.

Personal goal

Since this is my first year working with IMRA, I have found it to be challenging and overwhelming at times. The in-person training was great, but it was also very frustrating when technology did not work in our favor. Losing hours of valuable work was disheartening, especially when that work needed to be made up at home. I have also done my due diligence in following the evidence guides, but when the guides get changed multiple times without any notice, it is very frustrating. I like to work ahead so that when I am in a meeting I have a clear understanding of what we are evaluating. I cannot tell you how many times someone has come after I have voted and added my evidence for my team to discover the evidence guide has changed. Although our coach has done a good job, I feel that even she is confused by misinformation or changing information. All of these things lead to inefficiency, which in turn causes more work for me and time wasted. My personal goal going forward is to continue being positive while actively seeking the necessary guidance and information I need to provide the best evidence for my quality review.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A – • During group text and chat, I keep an open mind to ideas of other team members about evidence for indicators and encourage discussion so that all members feel their contribution is valued. • Since this is my second year as a reviewer and only one other team member is a returning reviewer, I offer help when others are unsure of the process. 1B – • Respectful communication when responding to other team members regardless of their accuracy or level of input is one way that I make sure to be respectful and encourage others to voice their opinion. • When communicating to another team who scored an indicator differently; I reach out with encouragement in a respectful way and engage other team members in the conversation to come to a consensus. 1C – • During the review process, I have re-watched training videos to make sure that I am clear about procedures and directions, reread the manual and continually refer back to the rubric to stay grounded in the verbiage. • I also reach out to my reviewer coach and writing coach when I am unsure or just want verification.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A— • When there is a problem, I reach out to other team members to see if they are having the same issue, if so, I fill out a help desk ticket and reach out to my review coach. • I have made suggestions to my review coach about the workbook and settings to ensure that we all can be effective while using it. 2B— • During Teams meetings, text strands, and/or group me chats, I consistently participate and help others as much as possible. For example, during the latest meeting, one member did not see the exit ticket for the Learning Quality training on the PowerPoint, I sent the link to the exit ticket to her and explained that the slide did not stay up long. • I have reached out to team members to make sure they all corrected issues within the dashboard so that we could certify before the deadline. • Reached out to the coach when there was a glitch in the dashboard so that it could be corrected.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A— • As the Secondary Math Instructional Coach for my district, I deeply understand the TEKS, ELPS, and instructional materials ensuring rigorous and accurate reviews. It is my responsibility in my district to ensure our lessons include TEKS and ELPS alignment and are rigorous. • As well, I am responsible for creating all assessments 6th grade through Algebra 1 courses that meet the depth of knowledge required by the state assessment. 3B— • As a reviewer and writer, I have met all deadlines are expected timelines, usually earlier than due. I let me review coach and writing coach know when I have completed assignments so that they may start their part in a timely manner. • An example of my descriptive evidence summary 1 for 3.1a: “The materials provide on grade-level activities and lessons however do not provide teacher guidance for supporting students who are performing below grade level. The teacher edition provides a structured lesson with several components, such as: guided practice, independent practice and some suggestions for extensions, along with two different pathways to utilize materials. However, the same activities suggested in one pathway is then recommended for reteach purpose would have already been completed in a small group activity.” 3C— • Unbiased, evidence-driven thinking during all evaluations and discussions is a quality that reviewers must have in order to be fair and consistent. Even being familiar with the product I am reviewing, I make sure to look at the evidence for the indicators verses what I have seen from using the product in the past. 3D— • Again, my position in my district requires that I advocate for high standards and expectations from instructional materials to better serve the Texas students and teachers implementing the materials. I am continually researching instructional materials for the teachers in my district and collaborate with coaches from other districts to insure we are up to date on the latest trends and resources.

Personal goal

My goal for the IMRA Cycle 2026 is to provide the most professional and accurate review of the materials I have been assigned. Also, to meet deadlines and make sure all my evidence is fair and in line with the rubric.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - Evidence 4: Documented and summarized differing viewpoints during a complex team alignment meeting, ensuring all perspectives were captured fairly before finalizing the team's decision. 1A- Actively facilitated a consensus discussion when team members disagreed on a specific rubric indicator, successfully guiding the group to a unified score. 1B - Revised initial draft feedback to ensure the language remained strictly objective, constructive, and free of personal bias before final submission. 1C - Conducted a self-assessment after the first round of reviews, identifying a personal speed bottleneck, and implemented a new time-management strategy for the next cycle

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A- Logged and tracked 100% of review data, status updates, and final scores accurately within the designated project management tools without requiring formatting corrections. 2A - Mastered the complex navigation of the IMRA review platform, independently tracking, tagging, and submitting all evaluation metrics without requiring technical support or administrative corrections. 2A - Created a quick-reference Google Groups and notes over tabs for navigating the review platform, reducing data entry time for self, and did share option with peers. 2B - Maintained 100% on-camera engagement and active participation during all virtual alignment workshops and calibration sessions. 2B - Maintained an active, professional presence across all work environments, consistently modeling effective virtual etiquette to foster team rapport.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - Identified a subtle misalignment in a publisher's submission where the material claimed to cover a specific TEKS/ELPS standard but lacked the depth required for true mastery. 3A - Provided highly specific, text-based examples citing exact page numbers and paragraphs to prove how a lesson plan met or failed a content rigor standard. 3B - Followed the step-by-step review protocols precisely, ensuring no stages of the mandatory calibration or verification process were skipped. 3C - Stripped all subjective language (e.g., "I didn't like this activity," "This feels boring") from review notes, replacing them with objective, evidence-driven statements. 3C - Self-corrected an initial assumption about a piece of material by going back to systematically cross-reference it against the rubric's objective metrics. 3C - Explicitly separated personal pedagogical preferences from the official evaluation criteria when reviewing a teaching style different from their own.

Personal goal

To consistently perform at the Distinguished level during the IMRA review process by achieving a 90% or higher on all Quality Review competency checks while actively leveraging my background to model professional collaboration , master the digital review tools , and ensure all Texas instructional materials are held to the highest standards of rigor and TEKS alignment.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A: I displayed team collaboration and consensus building through you actively contributing notes as the writer, specifically on the QRC documents and always sharing important notes through our text message group chat so my teammates could have easy access. 1A: I displayed team collaboration and consensus building through coming off mute and sharing my evidence when we were on disagreement with a score and shared my insights while inviting others to do the same if they agreed or found different evidence. 1B: I displayed professional verbal and written communication through the text message group chat I created for my team so that I can always update them on information I received during writing meetings. 1C: I displayed continuous learning and growth by always completing required training materials. 1C: I displayed continuous learning and growth by keeping an open mind to when my evidence did not align with my teammates' score. I kept an open mind and always looked for areas to learn from.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A: I displayed Technical Proficiency & Use of Review Tools by successfully navigating through all the spreadsheets and all the curriculum materials to write a high quality written report. 2B: I displayed in In-Person Environments by attending the in-person training, taking notes, asking questions and always been engaged. 2B: I displayed in Virtual Environments by attending all team meeting, taking notes, asking questions and always been engaged, which were 3 weekly meetings in total as a writer. 2A: I displayed Technical Proficiency & Use of Review Tools by continuous technical adaptability as I successfully navigated a shift in writing reports last IMRA cycle to a new writing process this new cycle while maintaining focus and productivity.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A. I displayed Pedagogical & Content Knowledge by ensuring alignment of Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) or English Language Proficiency Standards (ELPS) and keeping those specific student in mind when reviewing instructional materials. 3B. I displayed Review Process Adherence & Timeliness by ensuring I submitted my evidence and my final written reports on time to my coach and then applied the feedback I was given. 3C. I displayed by Evidence-Based Thinking & Unbiased Decision-Making by ensuring I stayed unbiased as a writer and using the written evidence where team scores were justified by strong evidence, specific page numbers, quotes, or activity titles from the instructional materials, rather than subjective opinions. 3D. I displayed Commitment to High-Quality Instructional Materials by ensuring thorough evaluations of all instructional materials so that only those meeting high standards of depth and rigor are recommended for Texas classrooms by pushing my teammates to review those indicators I was not finding strong evidence for.

Personal goal

I scored myself distinguished as I was deeply committed to modeling evidence-driven thinking, maintaining absolute technical proficiency, and championing high-quality instructional materials aligned with Texas standards. Throughout this cycle, I focused on fostering inclusive collaboration during consensus calls, ensuring all feedback was objectively rooted in explicit criteria rather than personal bias. Moving forward, my personal goal is to transition from individual execution to systemic leadership within the IMRA structure, serving as a formal or informal mentor to help other reviewers navigate complex alignment deadlocks, master review tools, and effectively audit specialized material accommodations to support all Texas classrooms.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A- I excel at building strong team rapport and fostering open, effective communication. By proactively initiating private discussions to align on key indicators, I am consistently able to help the team navigate complex topics and reach a consensus. 1B- I consistently model professional and respectful communication, ensuring all voices are heard. For example, during our private text group conversations, I actively monitor the dialogue to make space for everyone. If I notice a team member hasn't contributed, I create a comfortable opening for their input. This inclusive approach has ensured that all participants are fully engaged and that our team decisions benefit from everyone's diverse perspectives. 1B- To me, professional communication means making sure a group chat doesn't just become an echo chamber for the loudest voices. Recently, in our private chat group group, we hit a roadblock where two distinct opinions were stalling progress. Instead of letting the conversation spin, I used a respectful approach to pause the debate, validate both sides, and intentionally ask the remaining participants for their input. Hearing those fresh perspectives broke the tie, ensured everyone felt heard, and allowed us to move forward with a unified strategy. 1C- I consistently and actively seek professional development and integrate that learning into the review process. For example, after learning the IMRA review process, I used those insights to evaluate our current framework at my district. Looking ahead, I have decided to implement a similar review process within my school district next year when evaluating future literacy curriculum, ensuring our material is backed by the RBIS.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A- I am highly proficient at using our technical tools to locate items within our product and assist others. Specifically, I have mastered using the Navigation Guide to track down exact components. If a teammate is having trouble finding something in the product, I use the guide to troubleshoot their search and get them back on track. 2A- I have strong technical skills when it comes to helping my teammates find information. For example, I am the go-to person for navigating the IMRA Drive. Whenever a colleague is stuck or can't locate a specific item, I can quickly troubleshoot the issue and help them locate the correct item. 2B- I fully and consistently collaborate in all settings, demonstrating both leadership and adaptability. For example, during both our in person original IMRA meetings and our regular virtual meetings, I am always engaged, actively contributing to the discussions, and helping the team work through our goals together. 2B- I show strong leadership and adaptability by keeping our team organized behind the scenes. In our private text group chat, I am consistently the first one to alert the team whenever we receive a new email from IMRA or our coach, ensuring everyone sees the update immediately so we can all stay on track.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A- I have a deep understanding of TEKS, ELPS, and instructional materials, which allows me to be highly accurate when comparing them to our product. For example, during our reviews, I can quickly spot exactly where our product aligns with state standards and where there are gaps, ensuring our alignment data is completely precise and rigorous. 3B- I consistently meet and exceed our deadlines while ensuring all reviews meet high-quality standards. In fact, I am regularly done before the actual deadline, which gives me extra time to double-check my work and guarantee that our reviews are accurate and fully aligned. 3C- I consistently use unbiased, evidence-driven thinking in all evaluations and discussions. For example, during our team reviews, I base my feedback strictly on the quality of our product and the official criteria rather than personal opinions. This ensures that our discussions remain objective, fair, and focused entirely on the facts. 3D- I consistently champion high standards to ensure that Texas educators and students receive the absolute best instructional materials. For example, I use my deep knowledge of TEKS and ELPS to strictly evaluate our product, catching any gaps or misalignments before it reaches the classroom. By holding our content to these rigorous benchmarks, I guarantee our materials truly support student success.

Personal goal

During the IMRA Cycle 2026, I am proving to be a highly reliable and proactive team member. I've mastered the IMRA Drive and the Navigation Guide, using them to quickly solve problems and find items/files for my peers. My deep knowledge of TEKS and ELPS ensure all product reviews are highly accurate and rigorous. By consistently beating deadlines and immediately flagging updates from coaches in our group chat, I demonstrate strong technical leadership. I will deepen my mastery of the instructional materials review process by identifying subtle alignment gaps between our product and the state standards. To achieve this, I will dedicate time to analyze complex TEKS and ELPS indicators, ensuring that all of my evaluations remain perfectly accurate, completely unbiased, and delivered ahead of schedule.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

During my weekly consensus meeting with my team, I consistently collaborate with my team members, discuss consensus by evaluating individual pieces of evidence from the material, and help reach consensus in a positive manner. I conduct myself in a professional and respectful manner, keeping an open mind to all feedback, and adjusting any necessary work and or evidence for the betterment of the team. I actively seek professional development by completing all of the required trainings and ask questions of my team lead on a need bases. Open communication as a whole supports the review process in full implementation with precision.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

Beginning with this year's review process, a few changes have been noted throughout the process for better flow of evidence collecting. I am flexible in the processes by supporting integration with my team members. I'm able to navigate our Google documents, and the program materials. I'm able to engage effectively in both virtual and in person work, keeping constant communication with my team lead.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

I fully understand the TEKS, ELPS, and instructional materials to support accurate reviews. I'm able to meet my weekly deadlines and my writing tasks, as I am the writer for my team. I use evidence driven data to support our team reports and seek out clarifications as needed. I'm fully aware of the importance of high standards reaching students in the classroom, in order to gain access to high quality instructional materials.

Personal goal

My goal for the IMRA cycle 2026 is to continue growing with my team, team building in our weekly meetings, and collaborating as a professional learning group to ensure high standards in instructional materials entering our Texas classroom. I have also invested in personal tools to help me navigate program materials more effectively, ensuring a smooth review process cycle.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - maintain communication and quick response with TEAM Q072 through GroupMe 1A - during consensus meetings will ground debate in rubric language to move away from personal feelings 1B - Continuously praise the review coach for TEAM Q072 via GroupMe. She is really performing her duties well and keeping the team on task. "I hope I tell you often this cycle how much I appreciate your leadership!" 1C - Continuous improvement over the past three IMRA cycles. As a writer, I set up structures and sentence starters to prepare for report writing for this cycle. This was new based off of past experience.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - I learned quickly this cycle that I need to write reports in a google doc before transferring to the workbook. I like the upgrade of the workbook; but several aspects hinder performance when compared to last year's version. 2A - when team members reach out via GroupMe and have a product question I don't hesitate to jump in search the product and help answer the question. 2B - I attend all meetings whether travelling or at home. I prioritize meeting all deadlines before the deadline. 2B - I pride myself in completing my writing corretly the first time to (hopefully) minimize work on the back end. Comment from writing coach, "No feedback at all. You make my job easier."

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - using the accepted evidence from the QRC, I am able to review accuracy of alignment to the indicator guidance when writing DES-1. Then the team either justifies their acceptance or re-adjusts score to partial acceptance. 3B - the review coach and the writing coach can both confirm that I meet all deadlines. 3C - as stated earlier during consensus and qrc review, I ground conversation back in the indicator language when it veers off track. 3D - as stated earlier during consensus and qrc review, I ground conversation back in the indicator language when it veers off track.

Personal goal

My goal is to continue to meet deadlines - especially during my Maui trip at the end of June. I would love to set a goal and say that the publishers are not going to come back with extra work for this team; but I am almost certain they will. It is still a goal, though!

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

Personal goal

I want to do better with prioritizing evidence collection.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A- Within and outside our meetings, I consistently attempt to collaborate with my team, within the writing team, and with my coaches. I have text threads with my coaches (individually and with both), with the writing team, and with my individual team to communicate updates (work-related), as well as casual updates (for team building and relationships). 1A- I have advocated for the needs and concerns of my team, reaching out to coaches and seeking advice on finding technical and overarching support. 1B- I have constant communication with texts with my team, as well as on teammates' individual tabs. I provide feedback, questions, and supports to finding additional evidence with locations. 1B- During meetings, even if someone does not agree with everyone else's vote, I invite that teammate's evidence, reasoning, and justification. I acknowledge the work, effort and time, even if that is not the decision we, as a team, go with on that indicator. 1C- I seek out advice and feedback from my coaches, as well as last year's coach. I do this because this work is important, it involves a lot of time, and I want to make sure that I am doing it right.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A- When I found out that the evidence guides differed between 4-5 and K-3, I informed my team and coaches to ensure that they had that information and were able to make adjustments as needed. 2A- As a K-5 product, we were to seek cross-alignment at certain dates; however, I recognized and informed all that our indicators were due at different time periods; therefore, could not be accomplished in that manner. 2A- When I discovered that ELAR Full-Product 4-8 evidence guides changed this week (to try to align with K-3, I am assuming), I made sure my team and my coaches were aware of these changes. 2B- I take responsibility and ownership in initiating off-line conversations with my team and coaches to ensure that meetings and reports are completed effectively and efficiently. 2B- During meetings, I am engaged in all conversations with consensus, QRC voting, and writing alignment.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A- I apply my 22 years of Texas content knowledge and expertise. When I want to build clarity for myself or my team, I lean in heavily on RBIS qualifiers, TEKS Guide, and the evidence guides. 3B- I have created and sent out a simplified calendar to my team to ensure we all know the expectations for certain deadlines and dates. Even when I went on vacation, I prepared in advance to not be a burden on my team or my coaches. 3C- I anchor decisions based on the language and descriptors in the evidence guides, TEKS, ELPS, and RBIS. When in doubt, throw out the feelings and anchor in the language. 3D- To make sure all points on the rubric are addressed, I have added to our separate cross-alignment document, indicating which pieces of evidence cover specific bulleted points from the scoring and evidence guide.

Personal goal

My personal goal is to question/prompt teammates more so that I do not take on too much ownership of the review.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A – Actively participated in team calibration and consensus discussions throughout the review cycle. Reviewed unresolved TEKS and ELPS disagreements, provided evidence-based recommendations, and helped the team reach consensus on multiple indicators. 1A – Created a Grade 4 and Grade 5 team vote-difference tracker identifying standards where reviewers were not aligned. This resource helped focus consensus conversations and supported efficient resolution of discrepancies. 1A – Collaborated with reviewers through comments and discussion threads to clarify interpretations of TEKS and ELPS breakouts and ensure consistent application of review criteria. 1A – Revisited indicators after team discussions, adjusted votes when evidence supported a different interpretation, and encouraged alignment across reviewers. 1A – Contributed evidence summaries that were referenced during consensus meetings as examples of strong rubric-aligned evidence writing1B – Wrote detailed, objective, rubric-aligned evidence summaries that clearly identified sources, locations, and alignment rationale. 1B – Maintained professional and respectful communication throughout review discussions, supporting productive collaboration among team members. 1B – Provided constructive feedback on citations and alignment decisions while remaining focused on evidence and rubric expectations. 1B – Communicated complex TEKS and ELPS alignment concerns clearly enough that facilitators and reviewers referenced examples during consensus meetings. 1B – Received positive feedback from coaches on the quality and clarity of evidence summaries.1C – Completed all required IMRA training sessions before assigned deadlines. 1C – Applied learning from calibration sessions and reviewer guidance to strengthen evidence summaries and alignment decisions. 1C – Sought clarification when indicators required deeper interpretation and incorporated team feedback into subsequent reviews. 1C – Continuously revisited TEKS and ELPS standards to strengthen content knowledge and improve consistency across reviews. 1C – Reflected on reviewer feedback and revised decisions when evidence supported a stronger alignment determination.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A – Effectively utilized IMRA review platforms, Google Sheets, Google Docs, and collaboration tools to complete assigned reviews. 2A – Created and maintained a standards alignment tracking document to monitor reviewer differences and support consensus discussions. 2A – Navigated multiple review resources simultaneously, including TEKS documents, ELPS guidance, instructional materials, reviewer workbooks, and consensus logs. 2A – Used review tools to document evidence, monitor progress, and organize team alignment conversations. 2A – Assisted the review process by identifying discrepancies and organizing information that supported team decision-making. 2B – Consistently participated in virtual training sessions, calibration meetings, and team discussions throughout the review cycle. 2B – Maintained active engagement in asynchronous collaboration through comments, discussion threads, and reviewer documentation. 2B – Demonstrated leadership by organizing unresolved standards and supporting team consensus efforts. 2B – Contributed regularly to collaborative review activities while meeting project expectations and deadlines. 2B – Adapted to changing review needs and participated in both independent review work and team-based calibration activities.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A – Demonstrated strong understanding of TEKS and ELPS standards through accurate alignment decisions and detailed evidence summaries. 3A – Reviewed instructional materials using both content knowledge and standards expertise to determine alignment. 3A – Identified nuanced differences between standards and consistently applied rubric expectations when evaluating evidence. 3A – Assisted team discussions by referencing TEKS language and instructional expectations to support alignment decisions. 3A – Produced evidence summaries recognized as strong examples during consensus meetings. 3B – Completed all required training activities before project deadlines. 3B – Completed assigned reviews and consensus activities within required timelines. 3B – Maintained accurate documentation throughout the review process. 3B – Followed IMRA review protocols and consistently applied established review procedures. 3B – Supported team progress by identifying unresolved standards and helping organize follow-up discussions. 3C – Grounded alignment decisions in cited evidence from instructional materials rather than personal preference. 3C – Re-examined materials and adjusted decisions when additional evidence supported a different conclusion. 3C – Used TEKS and ELPS language to justify recommendations during consensus discussions. 3C – Evaluated differing viewpoints objectively and contributed to consensus based on evidence rather than opinion. 3C – Provided detailed evidence summaries that clearly connected instructional materials to rubric expectations. 3D – Demonstrated commitment to high-quality instructional materials through thorough review and analysis of assigned indicators. 3D – Conducted additional verification of TEKS and ELPS alignment to strengthen review accuracy. 3D – Created tools and resources that supported review quality and consistency across the team. 3D – Participated actively in consensus discussions to ensure materials were evaluated fairly and accurately. 3D – Contributed evidence and analysis that supported rigorous, standards-aligned recommendations for Texas educators and students.

Personal goal

IMRA Cycle 2026 strengthened my understanding of standards alignment, evidence-based evaluation, and collaborative review practices. One of the most valuable experiences was participating in consensus discussions and working with reviewers to resolve differences in TEKS and ELPS alignment decisions. I also developed stronger skills in writing objective, rubric-aligned evidence summaries and using review tools to organize information and support team decision-making. My goal for the next review cycle is to continue deepening my knowledge of TEKS and ELPS, strengthen calibration skills across complex indicators, and further support team collaboration by sharing effective review practices and evidence-writing strategies.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A- I work collaboratively with my team, coaches, and writers to ensure the product evidence and reviews run smoothly. This includes messaging with my team to ask clarifying questions, discussions during unpacking and consensus, and during drafting meetings. 1A- I aide in identifying well written evidence through discussion with team members to ensure well written evidence is available for reports. 1B- I have an open dialogue with team members and coaches so that all members feel heard and valued. I ask clarifying questions if I am unsure of what they expressed. I respectfully disagree and have open discourse to reach consensus. 1C- I seek guidance when drafting reports to help grow my understanding of the review process. I take feedback and apply it to improve in all areas of my writing.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A- I navigate the workbook, products, and resources well and provide guidance for team members who are new to the review process. 2A- During kickoff my team was able to begin unpacking and evidence collection early. I was able to use my expertise to help my team work on the first unpacking and evidence collection from my prior knowledge of the workbook platform. 2B- During unpacking, consensus, and unpacking meetings I am able to contribute to the quality of the meeting. For example, during one of our meetings the coach was having internet issues, and I was able to help guide the teams through the remaining consensus pieces, so time was spent wisely. 2B- I work professionally and collaboratively in all settings wither it be virtually or in person. My previous work in the review process allows me to demonstrate leadership skills and help guide new members through the process more smoothly.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A- As an instructional coach by trade I know my TEKS and ELPS thoroughly. I am able to easily know if they have been successfully addressed and guide others as well through explanation. 3B- I meet all deadlines for unpacking, evidence collection, and report writing. I even complete early usually so that I can receive feedback ahead of time. 3C- I am very critical of what the rubric criteria states and can be very unbiased and evidence driven. I may not always agree with how material is presented by can truly refer back to the rubric to determine the score needed. 3D- I as a past classroom teacher and now district instructional coach value the need for high quality material and am happy to serve as a member of the IMRA review process to ensure the best is available for not only my students but all students.

Personal goal

I have learned the importance of high-quality materials and following the RBIS to ensure students have the best products possible for their education. I feel that as I learn more, I become a better reviewer and report drafter in the process. I am open to feedback from coaches and team members to help me continue in this growth.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A- I consistently build strong rapport and help teams reach consensus by making every reviewer feel heard, anchoring all discussion in the indicators, and facilitating a structured, transparent process that turns differing viewpoints into shared understanding. During consensus meetings, I actively listen, validate each reviewer’s rationale, and guide the team back to the rubric when conversations drift into opinion. I also capture all evidence in our shared workbook in a timely and organized manner, and I point reviewers to additional evidence sources when needed. This helps the team see patterns clearly, reduces confusion, and supports a smooth path to consensus. 1B- To stay current and continuously improve, I actively seek professional development. I attend IMRA webinars, calibration refreshers, rubric deep‑dives, and platform updates to stay aligned with evolving expectations. Before each cycle, I review new guidance documents, exemplars, and scoring clarifications to ensure my interpretations remain accurate and consistent. I also ask leads and fellow reviewers for feedback on my evidence tagging, rationale clarity, and scoring patterns so I can refine my approach. 1C-I regularly analyze previous consensus notes, flagged items, and discrepancies to identify areas for improvement. Beyond IMRA‑specific training, I read about instructional materials quality, equity indicators, and evidence‑based evaluation to deepen my understanding of what high‑quality materials should provide for Texas educators and students. I attend IMRA webinars, calibration refreshers, rubric deep‑dives, and platform updates to stay current on expectations.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A- I consistently demonstrate strong troubleshooting skills by helping reviewers resolve login issues, browser conflicts, and permission errors so they can rejoin the workflow smoothly. When teammates experience platform glitches, I guide them through refreshing their view, clearing cached data, or switching devices to restore functionality. I also communicate platform issues to the group and offer clear, step‑by‑step solutions so everyone stays aligned. During the internet downtime, I drew on my previous IMRA experience to keep the team moving by suggesting alternative technology options and shifting to shared notes so our workflow continued without delay. My ability to stay calm, think ahead, and provide practical solutions ensures that technical challenges never derail the review process. 2B- I collaborate fully and consistently by actively listening to all reviewers, validating their perspectives, and ensuring our discussions stay anchored in the indicator language. I demonstrate leadership by summarizing key points, identifying areas of alignment, and guiding the team toward shared, evidence‑based decisions grounded in documented examples. My previous IMRA experience has strengthened my ability to adapt my facilitation style based on team needs. I step in to clarify when the group needs direction, and I pull reviewers into the discussion when their voices are needed to reach consensus. When challenges arise, I remain calm, troubleshoot quickly, and help the team refocus on the evidence so we can continue progressing. I also support equitable participation by intentionally inviting quieter reviewers to share their rationale, ensuring all voices contribute to the final decision. This creates a collaborative, transparent environment where consensus is built through shared understanding and respect.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A- I deeply understand TEKS, ELPS, and instructional materials because of my background as a K–6 educator, my assessment and curriculum alignment experience, and my prior work as an IMRA reviewer. I analyze materials through the lens of vertical alignment, academic language development, and instructional rigor. I consistently anchor my evaluations in the intent of the TEKS and ELPS, gather precise evidence, and ensure materials support all learners. My IMRA experience has strengthened my calibration skills, sharpened my ability to identify misalignments, and reinforced my commitment to producing accurate, high‑quality reviews. 3B- I consistently meet deadlines and ensure high‑quality, standards‑aligned reviews by using a structured workflow, starting early, and breaking tasks into manageable steps. My previous IMRA experience has strengthened my calibration skills, deepened my understanding of TEKS and ELPS, and improved my ability to collect precise, defensible evidence. I review materials through a rigorous, instructional lens and double‑check my rationales for clarity and alignment. This combination of planning, expertise, and discipline allows me to deliver accurate, on‑time reviews every cycle. 3C- I consistently use unbiased, evidence‑driven thinking by grounding every evaluation in TEKS, ELPS, and IMRA indicators. I rely on documented evidence from the materials rather than personal preference, and I use a structured approach to ensure consistency across reviews. My previous IMRA experience has strengthened my calibration skills and taught me how to guide discussions back to the rubric when conversations drift into opinion. I focus on clarity, accuracy, and defensible evidence so that every review is fair, rigorous, and aligned to state expectations. 3D- I consistently champion high standards by holding all instructional materials to the full rigor and intent of TEKS and ELPS. My previous IMRA experience has strengthened my calibration skills, deepened my understanding of quality indicators, and reinforced my commitment to evidence‑driven evaluation. I review materials through both a standards lens and a classroom lens, ensuring they are rigorous, coherent, accessible, and instructionally meaningful for Texas educators and students. I maintain accuracy, objectivity, and consistency in every review so that districts receive materials that truly support high‑quality teaching and learning.

Personal goal

Throughout the 2026 IMRA cycle, I demonstrated strong collaboration, technical leadership, and a consistent commitment to high‑quality, evidence‑driven reviews. I built strong rapport within my teams by making every reviewer feel heard, validating their perspectives, and anchoring all discussions in indicator language. I facilitated clear, structured consensus by summarizing key points, identifying alignment, and ensuring equitable participation from all reviewers. I maintained accuracy and efficiency by capturing evidence in the shared workbook in a timely, organized manner and guiding teammates to additional evidence sources to reduce confusion and support alignment. My previous IMRA experience strengthened my ability to identify patterns, clarify misalignments, and uphold rigorous standards across indicators. I consistently resolved technical issues, including login errors, browser conflicts, stalled updates, and internet downtime by offering practical troubleshooting steps and alternative workflows to keep the team moving. I remained calm and solution‑oriented during challenges, helping the team stay focused on evidence and progress toward consensus. I actively pursued professional growth by attending IMRA webinars, calibration refreshers, rubric deep‑dives, and platform updates. I reviewed new guidance documents before each cycle, sought feedback from leads and peers, analyzed past consensus notes, and deepened my understanding of instructional quality, equity indicators, and evidence‑based evaluation. My goal is to enhance my facilitation skills in order to guide teams more efficiently through complex indicators and deepen evidence‑based discussions, and increase evidence synthesis efficiency to help teams identify patterns faster and reach consensus with greater clarity.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

Professionalism – Evidence Statements 1A – Team Collaboration & Consensus Building 1A: Facilitated cross‑functional meetings to align project priorities, ensuring all team members contributed and reached agreement on next steps. 1A: Supported team decision‑making by gathering input from stakeholders and summarizing options to help the group reach a shared solution. 1A: Collaborated with peers to resolve workflow challenges, promoting a positive team environment and shared accountability. 1B – Professional Verbal & Written Communication 1B: Delivered clear and concise project updates to leadership, ensuring expectations, timelines, and risks were well understood. 1B: Created structured written documentation that improved team understanding and reduced repeated questions. 1B: Communicated effectively with colleagues by adapting tone and detail level to the audience’s needs. 1C – Continuous Learning & Growth 1C: Completed professional development courses to strengthen technical and interpersonal skills and applied new knowledge to daily work. 1C: Sought feedback from peers and supervisors to identify growth areas and implemented changes to improve performance. 1C: Took initiative to learn new tools and processes that increased efficiency and supported team goals.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

Technical Skills – Evidence Statements 2A – Technical Proficiency & Use of Review Tools 2A: Utilized review platforms and internal tools accurately to complete tasks with consistency and minimal errors. 2A: Applied system features such as annotations, filters, and audit functions to improve review speed and accuracy. 2A: Identified and reported technical issues promptly, helping maintain workflow efficiency for the team. 2B – Engagement in Virtual & In‑Person Environments 2B: Actively participated in virtual meetings by contributing updates, asking clarifying questions, and supporting team discussions. 2B: Demonstrated strong engagement in both remote and in‑person settings by maintaining professionalism, responsiveness, and collaboration. 2B: Adapted communication style to suit virtual platforms and in‑person interactions, ensuring clear and effective participation.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

Quality – Evidence Statements 3A – Pedagogical & Content Knowledge 3A: Applied strong understanding of content standards to ensure instructional materials aligned with learning objectives. 3A: Identified misconceptions or unclear explanations in materials and provided corrections grounded in pedagogical best practices. 3A: Evaluated content for accuracy, clarity, and grade‑level appropriateness to support effective learning. 3B – Review Process Adherence & Timeliness 3B: Consistently completed reviews within required timelines while maintaining accuracy and attention to detail. 3B: Followed all review protocols and documentation steps to ensure consistency and compliance with project expectations. 3B: Managed workload efficiently by prioritizing tasks and meeting all deadlines without sacrificing quality. 3C – Evidence‑Based Thinking & Unbiased Decision‑Making 3C: Based review decisions on clear evidence from rubrics, guidelines, and instructional standards rather than personal preference. 3C: Demonstrated objectivity by evaluating materials using consistent criteria across all submissions. 3C: Provided rationale grounded in data and guidelines when recommending revisions or approving content. 3D – Commitment to High‑Quality Instructional Materials 3D: Ensured materials met high standards for clarity, accuracy, and student engagement before approval. 3D: Suggested improvements that enhanced instructional value, accessibility, and alignment to learning goals. 3D: Reviewed content with a focus on supporting equitable, high‑quality learning experiences for all students.

Personal goal

Reflection & Personal Goal for IMRA Cycle 2026 Reflecting on my experiences throughout the IMRA Cycle 2026, I recognize how my strengths in collaboration, communication, technical proficiency, and quality-focused review practices have contributed to consistent, reliable performance. Engaging with both virtual and in‑person environments has helped me build stronger connections with colleagues, while adherence to review processes has supported accuracy and timeliness. I’ve also continued to grow in evidence‑based decision‑making and in maintaining high standards for instructional materials. Looking ahead, my personal goal for the next cycle is to deepen my expertise in applying pedagogical frameworks and content‑specific standards to further strengthen the quality of my reviews. I aim to do this by seeking targeted professional development opportunities, reviewing updated guidelines more proactively, and engaging in peer discussions to broaden my perspective. By focusing on this goal, I hope to enhance both the precision and instructional value of the materials I support, ultimately contributing to stronger outcomes across the team.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A – Collaborated with statewide review teams during TEA Quality Reviewer and IMRA review cycles, contributing evidence-based feedback and helping teams reach consensus. 1A – Participated in calibration sessions and professional discussions that strengthened review reliability and alignment across reviewers. 1B – Produced clear, detailed, and professional written evaluations aligned to rubric expectations and review protocols. 1C – Completed reviewer trainings, calibration activities, and ongoing professional development to strengthen review practices. 1C – Applied feedback from review cycles and expanded expertise through multiple review initiatives and doctoral-level coursework.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A – Technical Proficiency & Use of Review Tools: Successfully utilized multiple review platforms and digital tools during TEA Quality Reviewer and IMRA review cycles to document evidence, complete rubric evaluations, track progress, and submit reviews accurately and on time. 2A – Technical Proficiency & Use of Review Tools: Demonstrated proficiency in navigating reviewer resources, digital evidence collection systems, calibration materials, and reporting tools across multiple content reviews. 2A – Technical Proficiency & Use of Review Tools: Assisted fellow reviewers by sharing navigation strategies, clarifying review processes, and troubleshooting platform-related questions when needed. 2B – Engagement in Virtual & In-Person Environments: Actively participated in virtual reviewer trainings, calibration sessions, and consensus meetings, contributing professionally and consistently to collaborative discussions. 2B – Engagement in Virtual & In-Person Environments: Adapted effectively between independent review work, virtual collaboration, and statewide review initiatives while maintaining quality and meeting deadlines. 2B – Engagement in Virtual & In-Person Environments: Demonstrated leadership and professionalism by engaging respectfully with diverse reviewers, contributing to productive dialogue, and supporting successful team outcomes across review settings.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A – Pedagogical & Content Knowledge: Demonstrated deep knowledge of the TEKS, ELPS, and evidence-based instructional practices while reviewing instructional materials across multiple TEA and IMRA review cycles. 3A – Pedagogical & Content Knowledge: Applied expertise as a classroom educator, literacy leader, and reviewer to evaluate instructional materials for alignment, rigor, usability, and support for diverse learners, including emergent bilingual students. 3B – Review Process Adherence & Timeliness: Consistently completed assigned reviews, calibration activities, and consensus-building tasks within established timelines while maintaining accuracy and attention to detail. 3B – Review Process Adherence & Timeliness: Followed all review protocols and evaluation criteria to ensure standards-aligned, high-quality review submissions across multiple review projects. 3C – Evidence-Based Thinking & Unbiased Decision-Making: Evaluated instructional materials using rubric-based evidence and established criteria, ensuring recommendations were grounded in objective analysis rather than personal preference. 3C – Evidence-Based Thinking & Unbiased Decision-Making: Participated in calibration and consensus discussions, using evidence to support decisions and remaining open to multiple perspectives when evaluating materials. 3D – Commitment to High-Quality Instructional Materials: Contributed to statewide efforts to identify and promote high-quality instructional materials that support positive outcomes for Texas students and educators. 3D – Commitment to High-Quality Instructional Materials: Demonstrated a commitment to continuous improvement by applying lessons learned from review cycles, professional learning, and classroom practice to strengthen future evaluations.

Personal goal

Participating in IMRA Cycle 2026 was a valuable opportunity to contribute to the evaluation of high-quality instructional materials that impact educators and students across Texas. Through this experience, I strengthened my understanding of the review process, deepened my knowledge of standards-aligned instructional materials, and further developed my ability to make objective, evidence-based decisions. I consistently collaborated with fellow reviewers, met project deadlines, and engaged in professional learning opportunities that enhanced the quality of my reviews. Moving forward, my goal is to continue refining my expertise in evaluating instructional materials, particularly those that support literacy development and emergent bilingual students, while mentoring and supporting others in the review process. I am committed to continuous growth and to ensuring that Texas educators have access to rigorous, high-quality instructional resources.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

Evidence 1: Facilitated cross-campus collaboration among middle and high school math leaders to align curriculum, assessment practices, and intervention supports, resulting in shared expectations and instructional consistency. Evidence 2: Led summer curriculum writing teams by establishing clear goals, fostering open communication, and guiding consensus around curriculum maps, power standards, and instructional resources. Evidence 3: Partnered with campus administrators, instructional coaches, and teachers to analyze student achievement data and develop action plans that addressed campus-specific needs while maintaining district alignment. Evidence 4: Designed and facilitated professional learning sessions that encouraged participant voice, collaboration, and problem-solving, leading to actionable next steps and shared ownership of implementation. Evidence 5: Built strong relationships across departments and campuses by providing ongoing support, listening to stakeholder feedback, and helping teams navigate differing perspectives to reach collective decisions focused on student success.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

Evidence 1: Served as a district resource for assessment and data platforms, providing guidance and troubleshooting support to campus leaders and teachers on Aware, MasteryConnect, MAP, and other instructional tools. Evidence 2: Trained and supported teachers and administrators in the effective use of district systems, helping users navigate platforms, interpret data, and implement instructional next steps. Evidence 3: Assisted campuses in resolving technical and procedural challenges related to assessments, reporting, scheduling, and instructional resources, ensuring minimal disruption to teaching and learning. Evidence 4: Leveraged multiple data and curriculum tools to analyze student performance, identify trends, and support data-driven decision-making at both the campus and district levels. Evidence 5: Modeled effective use of digital tools during professional learning, curriculum development, and campus support meetings, increasing stakeholder confidence and capacity to independently utilize district resources.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A – Pedagogical & Content Knowledge Evidence 1: Led the review and revision of secondary mathematics curriculum documents, ensuring alignment to the TEKS, appropriate rigor, and coherence across grade levels and courses. Evidence 2: Provided ongoing support to teachers, instructional coaches, and administrators in unpacking TEKS, identifying priority standards, and developing instructional strategies that promote conceptual understanding. Evidence 3: Facilitated professional learning focused on rigorous mathematics instruction, productive struggle, mathematical discourse, and effective implementation of district instructional resources. Evidence 4: Collaborated with curriculum writing teams to develop and refine assessments, intervention resources, and instructional materials that accurately reflect TEKS expectations and student learning goals. Evidence 5: Analyzed student performance data from STAAR, MAP, and district assessments to identify instructional gaps and recommend targeted actions that improve alignment between instruction, curriculum, and assessment.

Personal goal

The IMRA Cycle 2026 provided valuable opportunities to collaborate with reviewers, analyze instructional materials through the lens of TEKS alignment and rigor, and support others throughout the review process. My experiences reinforced the importance of balancing content expertise with effective collaboration to ensure high-quality and objective reviews. Through this work, I strengthened my ability to facilitate consensus, leverage review tools effectively, and apply deep pedagogical knowledge when evaluating instructional materials. Personal Goal: Moving forward, I will continue to refine my ability to provide actionable feedback and build reviewer capacity by mentoring others in the review process, deepening my understanding of instructional design, and staying current on best practices related to high-quality instructional materials. My goal is to help ensure reviews are not only accurate and rigorous but also contribute to stronger instructional outcomes for teachers and students.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A. Team Collaboration and Consensus Building Throughout the review process, I have intentionally fostered a collaborative environment built on trust, respect, and open communication. I maintain consistent communication with my team through email, text messages, and video conferencing to ensure that all members feel supported and informed. When differing opinions arise regarding an indicator, I proactively reach out to team members to discuss the evidence and reasoning behind our interpretations before our weekly consensus meetings. I listen carefully to each perspective, ask clarifying questions, and encourage productive dialogue focused on the evidence rather than individual opinions. These conversations often help us reach consensus prior to meeting with our coach, and when additional guidance is needed, I work collaboratively with the team to present our thinking and seek clarification. By building strong relationships and creating opportunities for open discussion, I have helped cultivate a team culture where members feel comfortable sharing ideas, asking questions, and working together to make informed decisions. 1B. Professional Verbal and Written Communication I consistently strive to model professional, respectful, and inclusive communication in all interactions with my review team. Whether communicating through email, text messages, virtual meetings, or consensus discussions, I ensure my communication is clear, constructive, and focused on supporting the team's success. I value the expertise and perspectives of my colleagues and intentionally create opportunities for all voices to be heard during discussions. When disagreements occur, I approach conversations with professionalism and a willingness to listen, ensuring that differing viewpoints are respected and considered. I also make a point to provide positive feedback and recognition to team members for their contributions, helping to foster a supportive and collaborative environment. By maintaining high standards for communication and professionalism, I contribute to productive discussions that lead to thoughtful, evidence-based decisions. 1C. Continuous Learning and Growth I am committed to continuous professional learning and intentionally integrate new learning into my review practices. Throughout the review process, I regularly access resources available within the project resource tab to strengthen my understanding of indicators and expectations. I frequently revisit notes from previous training, calibration activities, and coaching sessions to ensure that I am applying current guidance consistently and accurately. When new information or clarifications are provided, I reflect on how that learning impacts my work and make adjustments to improve the quality of my reviews. I also view collaboration with my teammates and coach as valuable opportunities for professional growth, seeking feedback and learning from different perspectives. This ongoing commitment to self-reflection, professional learning, and application of new knowledge has strengthened my ability to conduct accurate, evidence-based reviews while continuously improving my practice.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A. Technical Proficiency and Use of Review Tools I consistently demonstrate proficiency in utilizing the review tools and resources provided throughout the review cycle. When team members have questions regarding the workbooks, indicators, or evidence collection process, I serve as a resource by helping them navigate the materials and locate relevant guidance within the workbook and supporting documents. Rather than simply providing answers, I intentionally direct team members to the appropriate resources so they can deepen their understanding while maintaining the integrity and consistency of the review process. I regularly utilize workbook resources, training materials, exemplars, and project guidance to support accurate reviews and informed decision-making. Additionally, I help calibrate team understanding of indicators by referencing training notes, project resources, and examples from previous discussions. I frequently share strategies that strengthen the quality of evidence collection and written responses, while also supporting less experienced reviewers as they develop confidence with the review tools and processes. By helping troubleshoot questions, clarifying expectations, and guiding others toward available resources, I contribute to a more efficient and effective review process while supporting the growth and success of my team. This level of support aligns with the Distinguished expectation of demonstrating expertise with review tools while assisting others in their effective use. 2B. Engagement in Virtual and In-Person Environments I consistently engage as an active and collaborative participant in both virtual and in-person review environments. During team meetings, consensus discussions, and coaching sessions, I contribute thoughtfully by sharing evidence-based perspectives, asking questions, and supporting productive dialogue that advances the work of the team. When the team encounters uncertainty or requires clarification, I proactively collaborate with our coach to seek solutions and ensure that team members have accurate information to move forward confidently. I regularly communicate updates, guidance, and feedback from our writing coach to my team, helping them strengthen their written responses and improve the quality of their reviews. I also model effective use of project resources during discussions and encourage team members to utilize available supports to strengthen their understanding of indicators and expectations. Through consistent participation, collaboration, and leadership, I help foster an environment where team members feel supported, informed, and empowered to contribute. My ability to adapt across settings, facilitate communication, and support the professional growth of others reflects the Distinguished expectation of fully and consistently collaborating while demonstrating leadership and adaptability in all environments.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A. I consistently demonstrate a deep understanding of the TEKS, ELPS, and instructional materials, which allows me to conduct rigorous and accurate reviews while supporting the learning of my team members. When questions arise regarding standards alignment or indicator expectations, I am often able to explain the intent and rigor of the TEKS and ELPS in a way that helps others better understand the materials being reviewed. I regularly utilize project resources, training materials, and TEKS Guide to deepen my understanding and provide clarification when needed. By connecting standards expectations to the evidence found within the materials, I help ensure that discussions remain focused on instructional quality and alignment. This commitment to understanding and applying the standards reflects the Distinguished expectation of ensuring rigorous and accurate reviews grounded in a deep understanding of the TEKS, ELPS, and instructional materials. 3B. I consistently demonstrate professionalism and accountability by adhering to project expectations, maintaining high quality work, and meeting deadlines throughout the review cycle. To ensure that all responsibilities are completed on time, I proactively prioritize my workload and create a personal schedule that allows me to manage reviews, team collaboration, and consensus activities efficiently. By planning ahead and monitoring my progress, I am able to complete reviews thoroughly while maintaining the quality and accuracy expected of the process. My commitment to organization, consistency, and quality ensures that reviews are completed in a timely manner and remain aligned to project standards. This reflects the Distinguished expectation of consistently meeting deadlines while producing high quality, standards aligned reviews. 3C. I consistently approach reviews with an evidence based mindset and strive to ensure that all decisions are grounded in the materials rather than personal preferences or opinions. During team discussions, I actively listen to the perspectives of others and encourage open dialogue when differing interpretations arise. I use the evidence guides, rubric criteria, and evidence found directly within the instructional materials to guide conversations and support decision-making. When consensus is difficult to achieve, I help refocus the discussion on the documented evidence and project expectations, ensuring that conclusions are based on objective analysis rather than individual viewpoints. My consistent use of evidence to inform decisions aligns with the Distinguished expectation of applying unbiased, evidence driven thinking in all evaluations and discussions. 3D. I am deeply committed to ensuring that Texas educators and students have access to high quality instructional materials that support meaningful learning experiences and positive student outcomes. Throughout the review process, I remain focused on the importance of evaluating materials with fidelity because I believe all students deserve access to rigorous, engaging, and standards-aligned resources. This belief motivates me to carefully analyze materials, apply evaluation criteria consistently, and advocate for decisions that prioritize instructional quality. I recognize that the work we do has a direct impact on classrooms across the state, and I take that responsibility seriously. My commitment to ensuring that educators and students receive the best possible resources reflects the Distinguished expectation of championing high standards and high quality instructional materials.

Personal goal

Reflecting on IMRA Cycle 2026, I am proud of the contributions I made to support a rigorous and collaborative review process. Throughout the cycle, I consistently demonstrated professionalism, technical expertise, and a commitment to high-quality instructional materials. I actively collaborated with my team to build consensus, supported colleagues by sharing resources and clarifying expectations, and remained focused on ensuring that all decisions were grounded in evidence and aligned to the TEKS and ELPS. This experience strengthened my understanding of the review process and reinforced the importance of maintaining high standards for instructional materials that impact students and educators across Texas. As I look ahead, my personal goal is to continue growing as a leader and resource for other reviewers by deepening my expertise in standards alignment and instructional design. I want to further develop my ability to support calibration discussions, mentor team members, and contribute to consistent, evidence based decision-making across review teams. By continuing to learn from coaches, colleagues, and professional development opportunities, I hope to enhance my effectiveness as a reviewer and make an even greater impact during future IMRA cycles.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A – I have coordinated additional meetings to help get my team meet deadlines. On these meetings, I make sure that everyone’s voice is heard before we make a decision. 1A – I speak for my team at consensus meetings when clarification is needed on a decision that we made. 1B - I am the writing support quality reviewer for my team, which gives me an opportunity to be a model of the level of writing required. 1C – I have stayed longer on several meetings to ask clarifying questions in order to help my team be successful. 1C – I have emailed my review and writing coaches to get more information on a subject before making a decision.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A – I have clarified with review and writing coaches several times about review tools and best practices to make sure my team is following the guidelines and criteria provided. 2A - I assist my team with the process when they have a question or need help. 2B – I have taken on a leadership role within my team to ensure we stay on the timeline and that all voices are heard. 2B – My team consistently reaches out to me with questions and I respond in a timely manner. 2B – I actively participate in all meetings, collaborating with other teams in order to reach consensus.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A – I have been a Texas music educator for over ten years and deeply understand the TEKS and instructional materials that are needed for the curriculum. 3B – I have met or exceeded every deadline that has been provided so far in the IMRA process. 3B - The writing coach has given the writing team compliments on the quality of our performance this year. 3C – I use unbiased thinking by returning to the TEKS and the rubrics to ensure evidence-driven thinking in the discussions and evaluations. 3D – I have high standards for my students and have a proven track-record of high-quality instruction in my classroom. I always have high standards and expectations for my own work to ensure that students and educators receive high quality materials for their classrooms.

Personal goal

I have put a significant amount of time and effort into the IMRA process so far. I would like to continue to refine my process for evaluating the curriculum so that I need to revise less and continue to stay on schedule.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A – Participated in unpacking, consensus, and drafting meetings throughout IMRA Cycle 2026. Collaborated with fellow reviewers to discuss Quality Rubric Correlations, review evidence, and reach consensus on scoring decisions across multiple indicators and grade levels. 1B – Developed professional, objective, and rubric-aligned evidence summaries for Grade 4 and Grade 5 reviews. Communicated findings using specific lesson citations, student actions, teacher actions, and indicator language while maintaining respectful and unbiased written communication. 1C – Completed required IMRA reviewer trainings, including Learning Quality training. Applied training guidance regarding lesson-level evidence, rubric alignment, objective reporting, and evidence collection best practices to strengthen review quality and improve evidence-writing skills. 1A, 1B, 1C – Participated in reviewer meetings, consensus activities, calibration discussions, and evidence drafting sessions. Applied feedback, exemplars, and reviewer guidance to improve evidence collection and support consistent, high-quality review outcomes.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A – Utilized IMRA review tools, reviewer workbooks, evidence collection protocols, consensus resources, and source documentation to evaluate instructional materials and document findings aligned to rubric expectations. 2A – Applied review procedures across multiple grade levels by locating lesson-level evidence, documenting citations, and developing evidence summaries for Grade 4 and Grade 5 instructional materials reviews. 2A – Used reviewer guidance documents, scoring clarifications, Quality Rubric Correlations (QRCs), exemplars, and training resources to ensure accurate application of indicators and scoring expectations. 2B – Consistently participated in unpacking, consensus, and drafting meetings throughout IMRA Cycle 2026, engaging in collaborative review activities and calibration discussions designed to support scoring consistency. 2A, 2B – Adapted to multiple digital platforms, instructional resources, and review tools while maintaining active engagement in reviewer trainings, consensus-building activities, evidence collection, and report drafting processes.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A – Applied knowledge of instructional design, literacy instruction, differentiation, scaffolding, and grade-level expectations when evaluating instructional materials and determining alignment to IMRA indicators across Grades 4 and 5. 3B – Followed established IMRA review procedures, including participation in unpacking, consensus, and drafting meetings; utilized reviewer guidance documents and scoring clarifications; and completed assigned review activities according to project expectations and timelines. 3C – Developed evidence summaries supported by specific lesson-level citations, teacher actions, and student actions. Applied rubric language directly and distinguished between implementation quality and learning quality when evaluating instructional materials. 3C – Used evidence-based analysis rather than personal preference when making scoring determinations. Documented both strengths and limitations of materials and supported conclusions with objective evidence from submitted resources. 3D – Contributed to the evaluation of instructional materials against IMRA quality standards, including differentiated instruction, advanced learner supports, accessibility considerations, and alignment to grade-level expectations to support the identification of high-quality instructional materials for Texas educators and students.

Personal goal

Participating in IMRA Cycle 2026 has strengthened my understanding of high-quality instructional materials, evidence collection, and the importance of maintaining objectivity throughout the review process. Through unpacking, consensus, and drafting activities, I deepened my understanding of the distinction between implementation quality and learning quality and refined my ability to identify lesson-level evidence that aligns directly to rubric expectations. The review process reinforced the value of collaboration, calibration, and evidence-based decision-making. Working alongside fellow reviewers and engaging in consensus discussions helped strengthen consistency in scoring and broadened my perspective on evaluating instructional materials. Additionally, the training resources, exemplars, and reviewer guidance documents improved my ability to write precise, rubric-aligned evidence summaries grounded in specific teacher and student actions. My personal goal is to transfer the knowledge and skills gained through IMRA Cycle 2026 to better serve my district. As an instructional leader, I plan to apply my deeper understanding of high-quality instructional materials, evidence-based evaluation practices, and standards alignment to support curriculum decisions, strengthen implementation of instructional resources, and build educator capacity. I hope to use these experiences to help ensure students and teachers have access to rigorous, high-quality materials that support strong instructional outcomes and continuous improvement across the district.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A – Participated in unpacking, consensus, and drafting meetings throughout IMRA Cycle 2026. Collaborated with fellow reviewers to discuss Quality Rubric Correlations, review evidence, and reach consensus on scoring decisions across multiple indicators and grade levels. 1B – Developed professional, objective, and rubric-aligned evidence summaries for Grade 4 and Grade 5 reviews. Communicated findings using specific lesson citations, student actions, teacher actions, and indicator language while maintaining respectful and unbiased written communication. 1C – Completed required IMRA reviewer trainings, including Learning Quality training. Applied training guidance regarding lesson-level evidence, rubric alignment, objective reporting, and evidence collection best practices to strengthen review quality and improve evidence-writing skills. 1A, 1B, 1C – Participated in reviewer meetings, consensus activities, calibration discussions, and evidence drafting sessions. Applied feedback, exemplars, and reviewer guidance to improve evidence collection and support consistent, high-quality review outcomes.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A – Utilized IMRA review tools, reviewer workbooks, evidence collection protocols, consensus resources, and source documentation to evaluate instructional materials and document findings aligned to rubric expectations. 2A – Applied review procedures across multiple grade levels by locating lesson-level evidence, documenting citations, and developing evidence summaries for Grade 4 and Grade 5 instructional materials reviews. 2A – Used reviewer guidance documents, scoring clarifications, Quality Rubric Correlations (QRCs), exemplars, and training resources to ensure accurate application of indicators and scoring expectations. 2B – Consistently participated in unpacking, consensus, and drafting meetings throughout IMRA Cycle 2026, engaging in collaborative review activities and calibration discussions designed to support scoring consistency. 2A, 2B – Adapted to multiple digital platforms, instructional resources, and review tools while maintaining active engagement in reviewer trainings, consensus-building activities, evidence collection, and report drafting processes.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A – Applied knowledge of instructional design, literacy instruction, differentiation, scaffolding, and grade-level expectations when evaluating instructional materials and determining alignment to IMRA indicators across Grades 4 and 5. 3B – Followed established IMRA review procedures, including participation in unpacking, consensus, and drafting meetings; utilized reviewer guidance documents and scoring clarifications; and completed assigned review activities according to project expectations and timelines. 3C – Developed evidence summaries supported by specific lesson-level citations, teacher actions, and student actions. Applied rubric language directly and distinguished between implementation quality and learning quality when evaluating instructional materials. 3C – Used evidence-based analysis rather than personal preference when making scoring determinations. Documented both strengths and limitations of materials and supported conclusions with objective evidence from submitted resources. 3D – Contributed to the evaluation of instructional materials against IMRA quality standards, including differentiated instruction, advanced learner supports, accessibility considerations, and alignment to grade-level expectations to support the identification of high-quality instructional materials for Texas educators and students.

Personal goal

Participating in IMRA Cycle 2026 has strengthened my understanding of high-quality instructional materials, evidence collection, and the importance of maintaining objectivity throughout the review process. Through unpacking, consensus, and drafting activities, I deepened my understanding of the distinction between implementation quality and learning quality and refined my ability to identify lesson-level evidence that aligns directly to rubric expectations. The review process reinforced the value of collaboration, calibration, and evidence-based decision-making. Working alongside fellow reviewers and engaging in consensus discussions helped strengthen consistency in scoring and broadened my perspective on evaluating instructional materials. Additionally, the training resources, exemplars, and reviewer guidance documents improved my ability to write precise, rubric-aligned evidence summaries grounded in specific teacher and student actions. My personal goal is to transfer the knowledge and skills gained through IMRA Cycle 2026 to better serve my district. As an instructional leader, I plan to apply my deeper understanding of high-quality instructional materials, evidence-based evaluation practices, and standards alignment to support curriculum decisions, strengthen implementation of instructional resources, and build educator capacity. I hope to use these experiences to help ensure students and teachers have access to rigorous, high-quality materials that support strong instructional outcomes and continuous improvement across the district.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A. Team Collaboration & Consensus Building. I consistently attend all the meetings on time, participated actively, and helped reach consensus. 1B. Professional Verbal & Written Communication. I always offer a collaborative spirit within our team. I consistently strive to model professional and respectful communication, and I genuinely value the opinions and perspectives of my fellow reviewers and team leaders. 1C. Continuous Learning & Growth. I consistently and actively seek guidance and professional development opportunities. For instance, I ask for explanations during meetings and make it a point to implement what I learn.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A. Technical Proficiency & Use of Review Tools. I consistently demonstrate expertise in review tools, using the team workbook to review, track, and report my evidence. I possess the knowledge to resolve issues and am always available to assist the team. 2B. Engagement in Virtual & In-Person Environments. I consistently and fully participate and collaborate in all settings, whether in-person meetings where I share my opinions or virtual meetings where I present grade-level evidence. This demonstrates my commitment to leadership and adaptability to our team's demands.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A. Pedagogical & Content Knowledge. I deeply understand TEKS, ELPS, and instructional materials for Kindergarten and 1st grade levels, and I am committed to ensuring rigorous and accurate reviews for those grades. 3B. Review Process Adherence & Timeliness. I consistently meet deadlines for the review of my indicators, ensuring that my work is completed before our weekly consensus meeting on Monday afternoons. I also strive to maintain high-quality, standards-aligned reviews by double-checking my work upon completion. 3C. Evidence-Based Thinking & Unbiased Decision-Making. I consistently ensure that my work is based on objective information. I use critical thinking and approach discussions and evaluations with an open mind, seeking diverse viewpoints. 3D. Commitment to High-Quality Instructional Materials. I consistently set high standards to challenge myself in my review process. By establishing clear goals, I aim to ensure that Texas educators and students have access to high-quality instructional materials, which is crucial for improving educational outcomes.

Personal goal

Reflecting on the IMRA 2026 review project, I feel proud of the commitment, collaboration, and growth I demonstrated throughout the process. My participation reflects not only consistency and professionalism but also a deep sense of responsibility toward delivering high-quality outcomes that support Texas educators and students. While I have consistently contributed to the team’s success, I want to grow my influence by facilitating deeper content discussions.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A – I served as a mentor and support resource for new members of the review team, guiding them through the review process, answering questions, and providing ongoing support to ensure they felt confident in their work. I maintained open lines of communication outside of scheduled meetings and made myself available whenever assistance was needed. 1A – I helped facilitate team consensus by clarifying expectations, focusing discussions on evidence-based decision-making, and ensuring all team members had opportunities to contribute. When colleagues were unsure how to express their perspectives, I advocated for their viewpoints and helped the team reach productive agreements. 1B – As the primary writing support person for my team, I modeled professional written communication by helping reviewers develop high-quality descriptive evidence summaries. Team members frequently used my writing as an exemplar, and I provided feedback to ensure documentation met project standards and expectations. 1B – I consistently fostered respectful and inclusive communication by supporting all team members, especially newer reviewers, and creating an environment where questions, concerns, and ideas could be openly discussed and valued. 1C – I completed all required trainings and actively utilized the Program Workbook, Evidence Guide, and Writing Guidelines to strengthen my expertise. I applied this learning not only to improve my own reviews but also to support the growth of my team by ensuring our work reflected project expectations and high-quality standards.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A – I demonstrated proficiency with all review tools and resources, including the Standards Alignment Platform, reviewer workbook, and supporting review documents. I was able to efficiently navigate each platform and apply the tools effectively throughout the review process. 2A – I regularly provided technical support and guidance to team members who needed assistance navigating review platforms, locating resources, or understanding review procedures. This support helped our team work more efficiently and maintain momentum throughout the review cycle. 2A – I assisted my coach in understanding the technical and logistical components of the review process, helping clarify procedures, platform navigation, and workflow expectations to ensure the team remained aligned and productive. 2B – I consistently participated in virtual meetings and collaborative review sessions, maintaining active engagement and providing support to team members when questions or challenges arose. I remained accessible outside of scheduled meetings to ensure reviewers received timely assistance. 2B – I demonstrated leadership and adaptability by serving as a resource for both technical and procedural questions, helping reviewers overcome obstacles and contributing to a collaborative and productive virtual working environment.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A – As an ELAR content expert for grades 3–8, I bring extensive knowledge of the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) to the review process. In my home district, I develop curriculum resources and instructional materials aligned to state standards, giving me a deep understanding of both the rigor and intent of the TEKS. 3A – I regularly provide professional development to educators on understanding and implementing the TEKS, helping teachers recognize the complexity and expectations of the standards to ensure high-quality instruction for students. 3A – I also provide professional development on the English Language Proficiency Standards (ELPS), supporting teachers in effectively integrating language development into instruction. This expertise allowed me to evaluate materials with a strong understanding of both content and language acquisition requirements. 3A – Throughout the review process, I served as a resource for my team by answering questions related to standards alignment and helping reviewers interpret and apply the TEKS and ELPS accurately and consistently. 3B – I consistently met all project deadlines and maintained high-quality work products throughout the review cycle. My organization, attention to detail, and efficient workflow allowed me to complete reviews thoroughly while adhering to all project expectations and timelines. 3C – I approached every review with an evidence-based mindset, evaluating products against established criteria rather than personal preferences. My content expertise enables me to identify strengths and weaknesses objectively while ensuring that all conclusions are supported by evidence from the materials. 3D – I am deeply committed to ensuring that Texas educators and students have access to the highest-quality instructional materials available. I consistently advocate for rigorous, standards-aligned resources and maintain high expectations throughout the review process because I believe Texas students deserve instructional materials that fully support their success.

Personal goal

As I reflect on my experience during IMRA Cycle 2026, I am proud of the contributions I am making as both a reviewer and a collaborative team member. Throughout the process, I have been able to leverage my expertise in ELAR, standards alignment, and instructional materials to support my team and help ensure that reviews remain focused on evidence-based decision-making and the needs of Texas students. I particularly enjoy collaborating with colleagues, supporting newer reviewers, and helping facilitate productive discussions that lead to strong consensus decisions. One of the most rewarding aspects of this experience is the opportunity to evaluate instructional materials that will ultimately impact teaching and learning across Texas. As an educator who is passionate about high-quality curriculum and instruction, I value the opportunity to help ensure that teachers and students have access to rigorous, standards-aligned resources. Participating in this process continues to strengthen my understanding of instructional quality and reinforces my commitment to advocating for excellence in education. As the cycle continues and as I look toward future IMRA opportunities, my personal goal is to expand my leadership within the review process by pursuing a role as an IMRA Coach. Through my experiences this year, I have discovered that I enjoy mentoring others, supporting team collaboration, and helping reviewers navigate both the technical and instructional aspects of the work. I believe my content expertise, organizational skills, and commitment to supporting others would allow me to be successful in a coaching role. Moving forward, I hope to continue building my leadership skills while contributing to the ongoing success of the IMRA process and ensuring that Texas educators and students have access to the highest-quality instructional materials available.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A, 1B - Evidence 1: Collaboration on State Assessment Redesign (TEA) Active and collaborative participation with the Texas Education Agency (TEA) in July 2026 for the development of the new Student Success Tool (SST), the assessment set to replace STAAR. In this role, I leverage my pedagogical expertise to build consensus on item design and evaluation criteria aligned with new state standards. 1A, 1B - Evidence 2: Punctuality, Time Management, and Writer Support Consistent demonstration of operational professionalism through punctual attendance at all team meetings and the ahead-of-schedule completion of my deliverables. This efficient time management ensures the writer has the necessary buffer time to review, refine, and finalize her work smoothly, optimizing the collective workflow. 1A, 1B, 1C - Evidence 3: Leadership in National Standardized Assessment (College Board) Selected to serve for the 6th consecutive year (2026) as an official Reader/Scorer for the AP Spanish Language and Culture exams for the College Board. This role demands high-precision verbal and written communication to apply scoring rubrics uniformly and collaborate in consensus-building sessions with educators nationwide. 1C - Evidence 4: Completion of Advanced Graduate Studies (Doctorate) Successfully completed and earned a Doctorate in Education (Ph.D.), demonstrating a commitment to the highest level of continuous learning, advanced academic research, and the application of contemporary educational frameworks to improve institutional practices. 1A, 1C - Evidence 5: Specialized Professional Development (APSI) Enrollment and scheduled participation in the AP Summer Institute (APSI) in August 2026. This ongoing professional development allows me to update my methodological competencies, collaborate on best practices with the AP community, and integrate advanced pedagogical strategies into my current role.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A, 2B - Evidence 1: Active In-Person Collaboration & Onboarding Training Actively participated in the intensive 4-day in-person IMRA training session in May 2026. During this event, I fully engaged with my assigned group and the wider team, successfully navigating face-to-face team-building and alignment exercises to ensure a unified approach to our quality review standards. 2A, 2B - Evidence 2: Leveraging Past Cycle Experience to Drive Consensus Leveraged my extensive technical expertise from past IMRA review cycles during the May 2026 training to help onboard peers, resolve technical questions regarding review tools, and foster group collaboration. My familiarity with historical review allowed me to contribute actively to team discussions and ground-level consensus building. 2A - Evidence 3: Mastery of Specialized IMRA Quality Review Tools Demonstrate technical proficiency by utilizing specialized IMRA content review platforms and feedback tools to evaluate educational materials. My deep understanding of these platforms ensures high quality evidence, seamless navigation of review matrices, and strict adherence to technical quality compliance. 2B - Evidence 4: High-Engagement Virtual Teamwork and Workflow Synchronization By completing my technical quality reviews ahead of schedule, I provide the team's writer with ample buffer time to review feedback, streamlining the entire virtual pipeline. 2A, 2B - Evidence 5: Advanced Synthesis of Technical Criteria (Doctoral Framework) Seamlessly navigate complex grading rubrics and provide high-level, evidence-based feedback across both digital and collaborative workspaces.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A, 3D - Evidence 1: Subject Matter Expertise & District Curriculum Leadership Selected by my school district GCISD to review and edit the Advanced Spanish 2 and Spanish 3 curriculum. This role leverages my deep pedagogical and content knowledge to curate, refine, and champion high-quality instructional materials that align with rigorous language acquisition standards and foster advanced student proficiency. 3A, 3C - Evidence 2: Advanced Pedagogical Application & Data-Driven Choices Apply the advanced educational frameworks, data analysis methodologies, and synthesis skills developed during my recent Doctorate in Education directly to the quality review process. This academic foundation ensures that all my feedback and instructional evaluations are deeply rooted in current educational research and evidence-based thinking. 3B - Evidence 3: Strict Adherence to Review Timelines & Team Synchronization Consistently maintain an exemplary record of punctuality and strict adherence to protocol deadlines during IMRA review cycles. 3A, 3C, 3D - Evidence 4: Standardized, Unbiased Evaluation at a National Level (College Board) Serve for the 6th consecutive year as an official College Board AP Spanish Language and Culture Reader. This role requires an uncompromising commitment to unbiased decision-making, strict adherence to rigorous national scoring rubrics, and the ability to evaluate student materials objectively without personal or regional bias. 3B, 3C, 3D - Evidence 5: Alignment with State Standards and Future Assessments (TEA & IMRA) Utilize experience from past IMRA review cycles, the May 4-day intensive training, and my upcoming July collaboration with the Texas Education Agency (TEA) to ensure all evaluated materials strictly mirror state compliance standards. My review process is driven by objective, evidence-based criteria to guarantee that new instructional materials meet the highest benchmarks of quality.

Personal goal

Goal: To use my doctoral expertise and state-level assessment experience to take on a mentorship in future review cycles, while continuing to optimize my digital workflow. How I will achieve it: Bring in state-level insights: Use what I will learn in July collaborating with TEA on the new state exam to ensure the materials we review at IMRA are perfectly aligned with upcoming state standards. Support the team: Apply my 6 years of College Board calibration experience to help peers navigate complex rubrics and build quick consensus. Stay updated: Use my training at the AP Summer Institute (APSI) this August to bring fresh, tech-forward pedagogical ideas into our future review processes.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

Personal goal

During IMRA Cycle 2026, I reflected on my professional practices and the impact of my work on student learning and organizational goals. The process helped me recognize the importance of aligning evidence to rubric expectations and using specific examples to demonstrate growth and effectiveness. Moving forward, my goal is to strengthen my use of data and evidence to inform decision-making, document outcomes more consistently, and continuously improve the quality of my work to support student success.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A -led and participated in group chats and email threads during review to ask questions and get confirmation of understanding -added specific evidence so that others were able to follow easily to confirm understanding -made adjustments to my reviews after gaining knowledge from others' evidence -asked teammates for feedback during consensus meetings to make sure all participated in the consensus -clearly articulated my thinking, backed it up with evidence, and helped guide our team to confident decisions—even in gray areas. -demonstrated collaborative leadership and ability to explain findings in virtual settings to make the team stronger 1B -During consensus meetings, I listened to others' reasoning and affirmed their ideas before adding to the conversation. -asked questions to teammates who were more apprehensive to share ideas to make them more comfortable in engaging in conversation -answered questions asked by teammates to show willingness to collaborate -made meaningful contributions to the team -consistently showed up with thoughtful contributions -affirmed teammates' comments after discussion 1C -consistently asked for feedback throughout the review week to make adjustments before consensus -reviewed evidence guides and IMRA Glossary thoroughly when reviewing product specificity for each indicator -used IMRA resources to better my abilities in evidence writing so that my coach was able to clearly understand my evidence -engaged in conversations with my teammates, review coach, and writing coach to make sure I clearly understood indicators and requirements for writing effective reports

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A: -During in person training, I led my team to operate the workbook, rubrics, and resources. -When teammates struggled with toggling between documents, I offered troubleshooting suggestions. -used the QRC documents as guides to locate evidence -used search features and quickly navigated through the product resources -guided others to put in work tickets when our team needed assistance -used resources linked to the workbook to grow in learning the review process 2B -clearly articulated my thinking, backed it up with evidence, and helped guide our team to confident decisions—even in gray areas. -demonstrated collaborative leadership and ability to explain findings in virtual settings to strengthen the team -made meaningful contributions to the team -assisted teammates with time constraints -led discussions for discrepancies in our evidence -communicated effectively with IMRA leaders and presenters

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A -During the verification process, I consistently used tools to better understand the specificity of the TEKS. -When indicators referred to ELPS, I was able to understand and have knowledge of the application of the ELPS using the proficiency guide. -used each section of the instructional materials to ensure that evidence for each indicator was clearly reviewed and represented -I used the evidence guides’ overarching standards connections to better understand how the evidence represented the indicators. consistently used the precise wording of the rubric indicators to ensure my reviews were accurate 3B -carefully studied the indicators and the coach created slides before unpacking meetings -highlighted specific details in the rubric that would insure accurate understanding of the specificity of the indicators and took notes to participate in team discussions -prepared my evidence for each indicator to ensure participation in team discussions on or before the team's deadline of Monday, each week -reviewed feedback and made adjustments before our weekly consensus meetings -attended each unpacking, consensus, and drafting meeting weekly and on time -was prepared to discuss my teams' evidence and ask questions regarding my reports during drafting meetings -reports were always completed before given deadlines 3C -regularly referred to the quality rubric to ensure accurate evidence-based reasoning -used clear and concise language when writing reviews to remain consistent and unbiased -During consensus meetings, I offered reminders to my teammates that we were to remain unbiased when reviewing the materials. -consistently returned to language used in the indicators to move my team forward in discussion 3D -used the TEKS and IMRA Evidence Guides to champion high standards for Texas schools -I was committed to providing accurate and articulate reviews of the assigned product -unbiased, evidence based thinking led my team to consensus on the review of our product -My 24 years of being an educator in Texas encouraged me to be precise in reviewing the product to ensure Texas schools are provided the best instructional materials to guide our students to success. -I have spoken to the SBOE regarding the IMRA process and stressed its importance to the committee.

Personal goal

A personal goal that I have set in response to my experience this year is to educate other teachers on the importance of implementing high quality instructional materials. In guiding teammates this year, I have learned that many educators don't realize the importance of the IMRA process in ensuring that all students in Texas recieve an education based on rigor and quality. I've always strived to see success in my classes, but I now realize that it is even more important to guide other educators so that more students in Texas are successful.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1.A 1. I attend weekly team meetings and actively participate in collaborative discussions to support shared goals and initiatives. 2. I ask clarifying questions to ensure I fully understand expectations, processes, and team decisions. 3. I work effectively with colleagues by contributing ideas, sharing responsibilities, and supporting team success. 4. I maintain positive professional relationships and collaborate respectfully with others to complete tasks and solve problems. 1.B 1. I communicate clearly and professionally during weekly meetings to share information and contribute to team discussions. 2. I ask questions and seek clarification when needed to ensure accurate understanding and effective communication. 3. I use verbal and written communication to collaborate with colleagues, share ideas, and support team goals. 4. I maintain timely and respectful communication through conversations, emails, and other written correspondence to foster positive working relationships. 1.C 1. I actively pursue professional growth by participating in the CALT program to strengthen my knowledge and skills. 2. I continue to engage in IMRA review cycles to expand my expertise in instructional materials evaluation and feedback. 3. I share my learning with others by presenting professional development sessions at education service centers. 4. I seek opportunities to grow professionally through ongoing training, collaboration, and leadership experiences that enhance my effectiveness.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2.A 1. I effectively use review tools and the product platform to complete tasks, analyze materials, and support the review process. 2. I utilize Google Sheets to organize information, track progress, and collaborate efficiently with team members. 3. I actively participate in Teams meetings, Zoom meetings, and Google Meet sessions to communicate, collaborate, and stay informed. 4. I leverage a variety of digital tools and platforms to enhance productivity, maintain organization, and support successful project completion. 2.B 1. I actively engage in both in-person and virtual meetings to collaborate with colleagues and contribute to team goals. 2. I attended the four-day kickoff meeting to build relationships, deepen my understanding of expectations, and support team initiatives. 3. I regularly participate in virtual meetings approximately three times per week to stay informed, collaborate effectively, and maintain communication with team members. 4. I contribute to discussions during both virtual and in-person meetings by sharing ideas, asking questions, and supporting collaborative problem-solving.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3.A 1. I apply my knowledge of the TEKS and evidence-based instructional practices to inform my reviews and recommendations. 2. I deepen my understanding of pedagogy through ongoing professional learning, including participation in the CALT program and IMRA review cycles. 3. I use my knowledge of TEKS alignment and effective instructional practices to evaluate materials and support high-quality instruction. 4. I share my expertise in TEKS and pedagogy through presentations, collaborative discussions, and professional learning opportunities with educators. 3.B 1. I consistently meet established deadlines and complete assigned tasks within the expected timelines. 2. I respond promptly when revisions or changes are needed to ensure work remains accurate and on schedule. 3. I effectively manage my time and priorities to meet project expectations and deliver high-quality work by due dates. 4. I maintain flexibility and adapt quickly to changing timelines or feedback while ensuring tasks are completed in a timely manner. 3.C 1. I use evidence from review tools, rubrics, and instructional materials to support my recommendations and decision-making. 2. I analyze available data and supporting evidence to ensure my feedback is accurate, objective, and aligned to expectations. 3. I base my conclusions on documented evidence rather than assumptions, using examples from materials to justify my ratings and comments. 4. I thoughtfully evaluate information from multiple sources to make informed decisions and provide constructive, evidence-based feedback. 3.D 1. I demonstrate my commitment to high-quality instructional materials through my third year of participation in the review process and continuous professional learning. 2. I am currently participating in the CALT program to deepen my understanding of evidence-based literacy practices that support high-quality instruction. 3. I advocate for the adoption and effective implementation of HQIM within my district to improve outcomes for students and educators. 4. I use my experience reviewing instructional materials to promote the importance of high-quality, research-based resources and support informed decision-making.

Personal goal

I will continue to strengthen my IMRA review practices by grounding my ratings, comments, and recommendations in the evidence collection rubric, ensuring that all feedback is objective, accurate, and consistently aligned to review expectations.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A – Team Collaboration & Consensus Building During consensus discussions, I actively facilitated conversations by listening to differing viewpoints, asking clarifying questions, and helping the team reach agreement on scoring decisions. I encouraged all reviewers to contribute evidence and worked to ensure decisions reflected the collective understanding of the rubric. 1A – Team Collaboration & Consensus Building I supported team members by sharing evidence, explaining scoring rationales, and helping reconcile differing interpretations of indicators. My contributions promoted productive discussions and helped the team arrive at consensus-based recommendations. 1B – Professional Verbal & Written Communication Throughout the review process, I consistently communicated professionally and respectfully in meetings, written comments, and evidence summaries. I ensured my feedback was clear, evidence-based, and aligned to the rubric criteria while valuing the perspectives of all reviewers. 1B – Professional Verbal & Written Communication I modeled professional communication by providing constructive feedback, responding respectfully to questions and concerns, and ensuring all team members had opportunities to share their viewpoints during discussions and calibration activities. 1C – Continuous Learning & Growth I actively sought professional growth by participating in reviewer training sessions, studying the rubric guidance, and incorporating feedback from coaches and team discussions to improve the quality and accuracy of my reviews. 1C – Continuous Learning & Growth Throughout the review cycle, I reflected on scoring decisions, adjusted my understanding based on calibration activities and consensus discussions, and integrated new learning into subsequent evidence collection and report-writing processes.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A – Technical Proficiency & Use of Review Tools I consistently demonstrated expertise in the review platforms and tools by efficiently locating evidence, documenting findings, and completing scoring tasks accurately and on time. I used the available tools to organize information and support evidence-based decisions throughout the review process. 2A – Technical Proficiency & Use of Review Tools I assisted team members by answering questions about review tools, sharing strategies for navigating materials, and helping troubleshoot technical or procedural challenges that arose during the review process. 2A – Technical Proficiency & Use of Review Tools I maintained detailed and organized records of evidence, scoring rationales, and report drafts, ensuring that all findings were aligned with rubric requirements and supported by appropriate documentation. 2B – Engagement in Virtual & In-Person Environments I actively participated in virtual trainings, calibration sessions, consensus meetings, and collaborative work sessions. I consistently came prepared, contributed to discussions, and adapted to the needs of both virtual and in-person environments. 2B – Engagement in Virtual & In-Person Environments I demonstrated leadership and adaptability by helping facilitate discussions, supporting colleagues during collaborative work, and maintaining active engagement regardless of the meeting format. 2B – Engagement in Virtual & In-Person Environments I maintained consistent communication across multiple platforms, responded promptly to team needs, participated in scheduled meetings, and completed assigned tasks while supporting the overall success of the review team.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A – Pedagogical & Content Knowledge I applied my deep understanding of the TEKS, ELPS, and mathematics instructional practices to evaluate materials for alignment, rigor, and instructional effectiveness. I ensured that my reviews reflected both content accuracy and the intent of the Texas standards. 3A – Pedagogical & Content Knowledge I used my experience as a mathematics educator and instructional leader to analyze how materials supported student learning, progression of concepts, and grade-level expectations. I consistently identified strengths and gaps based on standards and instructional design. 3B – Review Process Adherence & Timeliness I consistently met project deadlines and completed assigned reviews on time while maintaining high-quality, standards-aligned work. I planned my review schedule to ensure evidence collection, scoring, and reporting were completed efficiently. 3B – Review Process Adherence & Timeliness I carefully followed all review protocols, calibration guidance, and reporting requirements throughout the process. I ensured my evidence and scoring decisions aligned with project expectations and established review procedures. 3C – Evidence-Based Thinking & Unbiased Decision-Making I based all scoring decisions on documented evidence from the instructional materials and rubric criteria rather than personal preferences or prior experiences. I consistently supported my recommendations with specific evidence and citations. 3C – Evidence-Based Thinking & Unbiased Decision-Making I remained open to differing perspectives during consensus discussions and adjusted my thinking when additional evidence warranted reconsideration. I focused on objective analysis to ensure fair and unbiased evaluations. 3D – Commitment to High-Quality Instructional Materials I demonstrated a strong commitment to high-quality instructional materials by thoroughly evaluating whether resources met the needs of Texas educators and students. I consistently advocated for rigorous, standards-aligned materials that support meaningful student learning. 3D – Commitment to High-Quality Instructional Materials I approached each review with the goal of ensuring educators have access to effective instructional resources. I carefully applied evaluation criteria and provided detailed feedback to support the selection of high-quality materials for Texas classrooms.

Personal goal

Participating in IMRA Cycle 2026 is a valuable professional learning experience that strengthens my understanding of the instructional materials review process and reinforces the importance of evidence-based decision-making. Throughout the cycle, I collaborate with reviewers from different backgrounds, engage in meaningful consensus discussions, and apply my knowledge of the TEKS, ELPS, and instructional best practices to evaluate materials with rigor and objectivity. One of the most rewarding aspects of this experience is working with my team to analyze evidence and reach consensus on complex indicators. These discussions challenge me to consider multiple perspectives, communicate my reasoning clearly, and remain focused on evidence rather than personal preferences. The process also deepens my understanding of how high-quality instructional materials support educators and improve student outcomes across Texas. Additionally, I strengthen my ability to navigate review tools, organize evidence efficiently, and meet project deadlines while maintaining the quality and accuracy of my work. Calibration sessions and feedback from coaches and peers help refine my evaluation skills and increase my confidence in making standards-aligned recommendations. Personal Goal: My goal is to continue developing my expertise in instructional materials evaluation by expanding my knowledge of review criteria across additional content areas and grade levels. I also seek opportunities to take a more active leadership role during consensus discussions by supporting newer reviewers, contributing to calibration efforts, and helping teams maintain consistency in evidence collection and scoring practices. By continuing to grow as a reviewer, I contribute to the selection of high-quality instructional materials that positively impact teaching and learning for Texas educators and students.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

Accomplished

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

Accomplished

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

Accomplished

Personal goal

To continue strengthening my ability to identify, analyze, and document efficiently and accurately.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A. Team Collaboration and Consensus Building Throughout the review process, I have intentionally fostered a collaborative environment built on trust, respect, and open communication. I maintain consistent communication with my team through email, text messages, and video conferencing to ensure that all members feel supported and informed. When differing opinions arise regarding an indicator, I proactively reach out to team members to discuss the evidence and reasoning behind our interpretations before our weekly consensus meetings. I listen carefully to each perspective, ask clarifying questions, and encourage productive dialogue focused on the evidence rather than individual opinions. These conversations often help us reach consensus prior to meeting with our coach, and when additional guidance is needed, I work collaboratively with the team to present our thinking and seek clarification. By building strong relationships and creating opportunities for open discussion, I have helped cultivate a team culture where members feel comfortable sharing ideas, asking questions, and working together to make informed decisions. 1B. Professional Verbal and Written Communication I consistently strive to model professional, respectful, and inclusive communication in all interactions with my review team. Whether communicating through email, text messages, virtual meetings, or consensus discussions, I ensure my communication is clear, constructive, and focused on supporting the team's success. I value the expertise and perspectives of my colleagues and intentionally create opportunities for all voices to be heard during discussions. When disagreements occur, I approach conversations with professionalism and a willingness to listen, ensuring that differing viewpoints are respected and considered. I also make a point to provide positive feedback and recognition to team members for their contributions, helping to foster a supportive and collaborative environment. By maintaining high standards for communication and professionalism, I contribute to productive discussions that lead to thoughtful, evidence-based decisions. 1C. Continuous Learning and Growth I am committed to continuous professional learning and intentionally integrate new learning into my review practices. Throughout the review process, I regularly access resources available within the project resource tab to strengthen my understanding of indicators and expectations. I frequently revisit notes from previous training, calibration activities, and coaching sessions to ensure that I am applying current guidance consistently and accurately. When new information or clarifications are provided, I reflect on how that learning impacts my work and make adjustments to improve the quality of my reviews. I also view collaboration with my teammates and coach as valuable opportunities for professional growth, seeking feedback and learning from different perspectives. This ongoing commitment to self-reflection, professional learning, and application of new knowledge has strengthened my ability to conduct accurate, evidence-based reviews while continuously improving my practice.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A. Technical Proficiency and Use of Review Tools I consistently demonstrate proficiency in utilizing the review tools and resources provided throughout the review cycle. When team members have questions regarding the workbooks, indicators, or evidence collection process, I serve as a resource by helping them navigate the materials and locate relevant guidance within the workbook and supporting documents. Rather than simply providing answers, I intentionally direct team members to the appropriate resources so they can deepen their understanding while maintaining the integrity and consistency of the review process. I regularly utilize workbook resources, training materials, exemplars, and project guidance to support accurate reviews and informed decision-making. Additionally, I help calibrate team understanding of indicators by referencing training notes, project resources, and examples from previous discussions. I frequently share strategies that strengthen the quality of evidence collection and written responses, while also supporting less experienced reviewers as they develop confidence with the review tools and processes. By helping troubleshoot questions, clarifying expectations, and guiding others toward available resources, I contribute to a more efficient and effective review process while supporting the growth and success of my team. This level of support aligns with the Distinguished expectation of demonstrating expertise with review tools while assisting others in their effective use. 2B. Engagement in Virtual and In-Person Environments I consistently engage as an active and collaborative participant in both virtual and in-person review environments. During team meetings, consensus discussions, and coaching sessions, I contribute thoughtfully by sharing evidence-based perspectives, asking questions, and supporting productive dialogue that advances the work of the team. When the team encounters uncertainty or requires clarification, I proactively collaborate with our coach to seek solutions and ensure that team members have accurate information to move forward confidently. I regularly communicate updates, guidance, and feedback from our writing coach to my team, helping them strengthen their written responses and improve the quality of their reviews. I also model effective use of project resources during discussions and encourage team members to utilize available supports to strengthen their understanding of indicators and expectations. Through consistent participation, collaboration, and leadership, I help foster an environment where team members feel supported, informed, and empowered to contribute. My ability to adapt across settings, facilitate communication, and support the professional growth of others reflects the Distinguished expectation of fully and consistently collaborating while demonstrating leadership and adaptability in all environments.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A. I consistently demonstrate a deep understanding of the TEKS, ELPS, and instructional materials, which allows me to conduct rigorous and accurate reviews while supporting the learning of my team members. When questions arise regarding standards alignment or indicator expectations, I am often able to explain the intent and rigor of the TEKS and ELPS in a way that helps others better understand the materials being reviewed. I regularly utilize project resources, training materials, and TEKS Guide to deepen my understanding and provide clarification when needed. By connecting standards expectations to the evidence found within the materials, I help ensure that discussions remain focused on instructional quality and alignment. This commitment to understanding and applying the standards reflects the Distinguished expectation of ensuring rigorous and accurate reviews grounded in a deep understanding of the TEKS, ELPS, and instructional materials. 3B. I consistently demonstrate professionalism and accountability by adhering to project expectations, maintaining high quality work, and meeting deadlines throughout the review cycle. To ensure that all responsibilities are completed on time, I proactively prioritize my workload and create a personal schedule that allows me to manage reviews, team collaboration, and consensus activities efficiently. By planning ahead and monitoring my progress, I am able to complete reviews thoroughly while maintaining the quality and accuracy expected of the process. My commitment to organization, consistency, and quality ensures that reviews are completed in a timely manner and remain aligned to project standards. This reflects the Distinguished expectation of consistently meeting deadlines while producing high quality, standards aligned reviews. 3C. I consistently approach reviews with an evidence based mindset and strive to ensure that all decisions are grounded in the materials rather than personal preferences or opinions. During team discussions, I actively listen to the perspectives of others and encourage open dialogue when differing interpretations arise. I use the evidence guides, rubric criteria, and evidence found directly within the instructional materials to guide conversations and support decision-making. When consensus is difficult to achieve, I help refocus the discussion on the documented evidence and project expectations, ensuring that conclusions are based on objective analysis rather than individual viewpoints. My consistent use of evidence to inform decisions aligns with the Distinguished expectation of applying unbiased, evidence driven thinking in all evaluations and discussions. 3D. I am deeply committed to ensuring that Texas educators and students have access to high quality instructional materials that support meaningful learning experiences and positive student outcomes. Throughout the review process, I remain focused on the importance of evaluating materials with fidelity because I believe all students deserve access to rigorous, engaging, and standards-aligned resources. This belief motivates me to carefully analyze materials, apply evaluation criteria consistently, and advocate for decisions that prioritize instructional quality. I recognize that the work we do has a direct impact on classrooms across the state, and I take that responsibility seriously. My commitment to ensuring that educators and students receive the best possible resources reflects the Distinguished expectation of championing high standards and high quality instructional materials.

Personal goal

Reflecting on IMRA Cycle 2026, I am proud of the contributions I made to support a rigorous and collaborative review process. Throughout the cycle, I consistently demonstrated professionalism, technical expertise, and a commitment to high-quality instructional materials. I actively collaborated with my team to build consensus, supported colleagues by sharing resources and clarifying expectations, and remained focused on ensuring that all decisions were grounded in evidence and aligned to the TEKS and ELPS. This experience strengthened my understanding of the review process and reinforced the importance of maintaining high standards for instructional materials that impact students and educators across Texas. As I look ahead, my personal goal is to continue growing as a leader and resource for other reviewers by deepening my expertise in standards alignment and instructional design. I want to further develop my ability to support calibration discussions, mentor team members, and contribute to consistent, evidence based decision-making across review teams. By continuing to learn from coaches, colleagues, and professional development opportunities, I hope to enhance my effectiveness as a reviewer and make an even greater impact during future IMRA cycles.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A- I consistently build strong rapport within our K-2 team through our consistent use of our group chat. We text with each other almost every day, are quick to answer questions, and make each other laugh as we grow and work together. Additionally, I foster strong rapport with the entire program team. During our in-person training, we often walked over to other tables to check in, say hi, share a funny moment, or encourage each other. 1A- I foster collaboration with our writing team when working with the other writers to edit the pre-writing we do. We discuss confusion, ask for clarification and are regularly seeking each other’s input. 1A- I help teams reach consensus by trying to mirror others’ language. When someone shares their opinion for a score, I try to give my response by first restating their view, saying “What I heard you say is ____, is that correct?” I am trying to make sure we really understand each other’s position as we work towards a collective decision. 1B- I consistently model professional and respectful communication via email. I have emailed our writing coach several times to ask questions, and I am sure to tell her I am thankful for her leadership and ask questions in a respectful manner. 1B- I consistently ensure that all voices are valued in our writing team by making sure that I intentionally let others speak first. I want others to feel as if they have space to speak, so I try to make sure I give that before I share. 1B- I consistently model professional communication in our zoom meetings. I use the “raise my hand” feature and try to ask questions that are focused on understanding others rather than just commenting to be heard. I consistently model professional communication by trying to ask my question in the chat so as not to interrupt the conversation if others are talking. For example, last week I asked about us seeking consensus on an indicator that we had previously talked about but not finished. 1C-I consistently seek professional development and integrate it into the learning process by completing all the asynchronous lessons and reviewing back to my notes as I move through different phases of the review process. I have been engaging heavily with the “resources” tab to read exemplars, to review writing guidelines, and to utilize the evidence collection best practices document. For example, I regularly look at the sentence stems to improve my writing. 1C- I continuously seek to integrate learning into my review by taking the feedback from Brenda and trying to immediately apply it to my next writing assignment. For example, she gave me some tips on a score summary and then I went through the rest to make sure that the tip she gave me was being integrated into all of them.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A- I consistently demonstrate expertise in review tools. I am the writer for my team, and our writing coach used one of my descriptive evidence summaries as an exemplar for the team. I am adept at having multiple tabs open to complete my review, including the QRCs, the evidence guide, the exemplars, TEA writing guides, as well as the publisher’s materials. I am able to navigate between these materials with ease. 2A- I consistently demonstrate expertise in troubleshooting issues as I was able to put in a help ticket several times. Also, when we were in person, I regularly talked with Safal IT as well as our standards review leader to help clarify technical issues on behalf of my team. 2A- I consistently demonstrate expertise in assisting others. My team regularly asks in our group chat about where something is or how to do it, and I try to answer them right away. For example, a member of my team couldn’t figure out why the consensus tab didn’t go past 3.1, and I pointed her towards the drop-down menu on the top left of the document. 2B- I fully and consistently collaborate in all settings, demonstrating leadership and adaptability. During our in-person kick-off, I took the lead of addressing technical issues as well as a missing breakout for the team. During our virtual unpacking workshops, I am focused on listening to others and making sure I understand their point of view. writing consistent and clear notes in the cross-alignment tab of the workbook for others to use when drafting the report. 2B- I fully and consistently collaborate in all settings, demonstrating leadership and adaptability by remaining flexible about the additional time that many meetings have used. We originally scheduled meetings to last one hour, but many last 2 hours or more, and I remain flexible and adaptable to this so we can create the best report possible.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A- I deeply understand TEKS, ELPS, and instructional materials, ensuring rigorous and accurate reviews by making sure I understand not only each grade level’s TEKS but how they move across the K-12 curriculum. This allows me to have a holistic view of the TEKS as well as a ground level view. Addititionally, I have been teaching elementary music or pre-service teachers for over 20 years, so I have the depth of experience to understand what is pedagogically and developmentally appropriate at each grade level. 3A-My years teaching in Title I and linguistically diverse classrooms mean I know what the ELPS ask for in practice. When reviewing the platform, I evaluated whether emergent bilingual students received linguistic accommodations commensurate with their proficiency level. For example, when the materials introduced academic music vocabulary without scaffolds such as visuals, gestures, or sentence frames, I documented that the content met the TEKS but did not fully support the ELPS, which kept my review accurate for the students Texas classrooms actually serve. 3B- I consistently meet deadlines for both the standards review and the quality review. For example, I have met every deadline for the asynchronous trainings we were asked to do. Additionally, I consistently meet my writing deadlines for the pre-writing required of us each week before the drafting meeting. For example, Brenda, our writing coach, commented in an email that she was impressed I was able to complete the task in such a timely manner. 3B- I consistently meet deadlines and ensure high-quality, standards-aligned reviews by checking in with the rest of my team throughout the week to ensure that we have found the evidence needed for me to draft the report in a timely manner. 3C- I consistently use unbiased, evidence-driven thinking in all evaluations and discussions. For example, I wrote for my DES 3.1d :“The materials include a “MusicFirst Elementary Assessment Guide K-5,” which provides additional guidance for teachers on adapting assessments for students with disabilities and those receiving special education services. For example, it suggests that formative assessments may use observable activity-based criteria rather than written responses. It also advises teachers to allow for alternative demonstrations of skills such as pointing, moving, using assistive devices, or responding verbally. Finally, it suggests using portfolio - when live observation is challenging.” Brenda, my writing coach, commented that this was a very strong piece of evidence which aligned with the evidence guide well. 3D- I consistently champion high standards, ensuring Texas educators and students receive the best instructional materials by evaluating whether a lesson is actually teachable in a real classroom, not just aligned on paper. For example, when a lesson technically met the standard but assumed more instructional time or prep than an elementary music teacher typically has, I documented that strong alignment in writing does not guarantee strong implementation for the teacher who has to teach. 3D- I consistently champion high standards, ensuring Texas educators and students receive the best instructional materials by diligently checking for any factual errors. I reported several throughout the material standards review, to make sure there was no confusion.

Personal goal

I have learned a lot throughout my IMRA Cycle 2026 experience. One goal I have for myself is to think more deeply about how a paper alignment does or does not translate to actual classroom practice. I think it is an important consideration and one that want to make sure I focus on with my preservice students I teach. My goal for the rest of the IMRA Cycle 2026 is to keep learning and developing as a reviewer and a writer.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A: Consistently encouraged participation from all team members and created an environment where diverse perspectives were welcomed and respected. • Helped facilitate evidence-based discussions that led to consensus when reviewers initially held differing interpretations of curriculum materials. • Synthesized feedback from multiple reviewers to identify areas of agreement and support collaborative decision-making. • Maintained positive working relationships and strong team rapport throughout the review process. 1B: Consistently communicated with professionalism, respect, and clarity during team discussions and review activities. • Ensured all team members had opportunities to share their perspectives and actively acknowledged diverse viewpoints. • Modeled active listening by seeking clarification, paraphrasing key points, and responding thoughtfully to colleagues' feedback. • Provided clear, evidence-based written comments that supported transparency and consistency in the review process. • Maintained a collaborative and constructive tone, even when discussing differing interpretations or ratings. • Encouraged respectful dialogue 1C: Consistently engaged in professional learning to deepen my understanding of high-quality K–5 mathematics instruction and curriculum evaluation practices. • Actively reviewed training materials, guidance documents, and rubric resources to strengthen the accuracy and consistency of my evaluations. • Applied new learning directly to the review process by refining evidence collection, analysis, and rating decisions. • Sought clarification and feedback when needed to ensure alignment with IMRA expectations and review criteria. • Demonstrated a growth mindset by reflecting on feedback and continuously improving my review practices.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A: Regularly and effectively used IMRA review platforms and tools to evaluate curriculum materials and document findings. • Maintained accurate and organized records of evidence, ratings, and reviewer notes throughout the review process. • Used tracking and reporting tools to monitor progress and ensure timely completion of assigned review tasks. 2B: Consistently participated fully in both virtual and in-person review activities, contributing thoughtfully and constructively to team discussions. • Demonstrated leadership by encouraging collaboration, facilitating productive conversations, and helping maintain focus on review goals. • Adapted effectively to varying meeting formats, schedules, and collaboration structures while maintaining high levels of engagement. • Utilized virtual collaboration tools efficiently to communicate, share evidence, and support team decision-making.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A: Demonstrated a comprehensive understanding of the TEKS and ELPS when evaluating curriculum alignment and instructional quality. • Applied deep knowledge of K–5 mathematics content and pedagogy to assess conceptual understanding, procedural fluency, and mathematical application within instructional materials. • Evaluated curriculum materials with a focus on rigor, coherence, and fidelity to grade-level expectations. • Analyzed how instructional resources supported diverse learners, including opportunities for language development and equitable access to mathematical content. 3B: Consistently met or exceeded all review deadlines while maintaining the quality and accuracy of evaluations. • Effectively managed time and responsibilities to ensure timely completion of assigned review tasks and documentation. • Adhered closely to IMRA review protocols, procedures, and evidence requirements throughout the review process. • Produced thorough, standards-aligned reviews supported by clear and well-documented evidence. 3C: Consistently based ratings and recommendations on documented evidence and established review criteria rather than personal preference. • Applied the TEKS, ELPS, and rubric indicators objectively to ensure fair and accurate evaluations. • Carefully reviewed and verified evidence before making decisions, ensuring conclusions were well supported and defensible. • Maintained an unbiased perspective when evaluating instructional materials, focusing on evidence within the curriculum rather than prior experiences or assumptions. 3D: Consistently upheld high expectations for instructional quality, rigor, and alignment throughout the review process. • Evaluated materials with a focus on ensuring strong alignment to the TEKS and support for meaningful student learning. • Advocated for curriculum resources that promote conceptual understanding, procedural fluency, problem-solving, and mathematical reasoning. • Maintained a student-centered perspective when reviewing materials, considering the impact on diverse learners and equitable access to grade-level content.

Personal goal

IMRA Cycle 2026 provided valuable opportunities to deepen my understanding of high-quality instructional materials and collaborate with a team of professionals committed to supporting Texas educators and students. Throughout the review process, I strengthened my ability to analyze curriculum materials through an evidence-based lens while ensuring alignment to the TEKS, ELPS, and IMRA review criteria. I found the collaborative nature of the work especially rewarding, as it allowed me to learn from colleagues, build consensus, and contribute to thoughtful, standards-aligned decisions. As I reflect on this experience, I am proud of my commitment to maintaining rigorous, objective reviews and fostering productive collaboration among team members. I also recognize the importance of continuous learning as instructional practices and curriculum resources continue to evolve. My goal for future review cycles is to further strengthen my expertise in evaluating supports for diverse learners, including multilingual learners and students with varying instructional needs, while continuing to contribute to high-quality, evidence-based reviews that support positive outcomes for Texas students.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A: I take an active role in meetings by encouraging impartial discussions to explain the rationale behind our agreements clearly. I practice active listening and ask questions to ensure I fully comprehend my colleagues' viewpoints on the content. I actively engage in appropriate discourse to reach a consensus. 1A: I uphold professional email communication to ensure clarity and effective interaction with the team. When a team member shares a persuasive argument, I acknowledge their contribution and either expand on their ideas or express my appreciation for their input. 1b: In meetings, I am committed to being an engaged participant, fostering insightful discussions that encourage collaboration and consensus among my colleagues. If my grading criteria differ from the majority, I am open to my team's viewpoints and quickly strive to reach a mutual agreement. 1b.I prioritize maintaining professionalism in all emails and group messages outside of meetings. This means keeping communications appropriate and centered on essential tasks and clarifications, which in turn supports our team in advancing toward our goals. 1C. I engaged in all online training sessions before the in-person training. During the training, I took notes, actively participated, and listened attentively to all the speakers. Furthermore, I asked questions for clarification to ensure I felt confident and knowledgeable in my role as a quality reviewer. 1C. Our reporting coach consistently offers us thorough summaries and explanations regarding the completion of our reviews. She works tirelessly to provide guidance, enabling us to enhance our writing and clarify our expectations effectively. I take her written and verbal feedback and immediately apply it to my writing. I have used her guidance to improve my writing and am now very confident that my writing is unbiased, detailed, and specific.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A. As soon as I identify an issue that could impact voting or the consensus process, I will submit a help desk ticket. I informed my team about the URL links in the dashboard. One grade level consistently had different URL links compared to the actual citation. When providing feedback, the URL link to the lesson was incorrect. I successfully guided my teammates to enhance their efficiency while also notifying the IMRA team by submitting a help desk ticket. 2A In addition, as the first person to begin voting on a grade level, I noticed some URL links. I quickly identified an error and informed the appropriate party.IMRA Request Description: In Middle School III Flat for Education - Middle School Music III: TEKS, the "description of location" is absent. It currently states "Test." This issue appears to be present only in the 1.1 A and 1.1 B breakouts. 2A When team members have questions regarding the dashboard or encounter technical issues, I am more than happy to offer support and guidance. For example, during a meeting, our review coach was uncertain about how to navigate between the various quality rubric correlations on the consensus tab. I was able to provide clear and effective guidance to help her navigate the workbook with ease. 2b. I have completed all the necessary training and will reference them for clarification when needed. I have devoted quality time to thoroughly reviewing all the resources available in the drive and workbook, making sure I am well-acquainted with the content and the review processes. 2b. I consistently provide review feedback and identify factual errors according to our platform's guidelines. For instance, when a piece of music matched the breakout but the lesson plan incorrectly stated “Key of G” instead of “Key of D,” I was the first to spot this typo and report it as a factual error. 2b. When providing feedback on citations, I take great care to frame my suggestions in a way that is both impartial and constructive. This approach aims to assist the publisher in improving the quality of the lesson, unit, and overall curriculum. For example, if a lesson focuses on sight reading, I provide detailed feedback on how to isolate new rhythms appropriate for a fifth-grade level. 2.b I responded to all communications from review coach, reporting coach, IMRA, and my team within 24 hours, well ahead of the expected 48-hour timeline.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A I have ensured that I am knowledgeable about TEKS at each grade level and reference them frequently to ensure I am evaluating the breakouts to the best of the grade level requirements. I utilize both the book provided at training and the resources provided in our Google Drive. I use the evidence guide as my primary resource to write accurate reviews. I use appropriate 3B. I have met every deadline ahead of time, and when my team is behind, I have ensured that I am still meeting deadlines. For instance, I completed Grade 5 well before the deadline and had Grade 6 completed in its entirety before the first provided deadline of May 30. Our team was granted an extension, and I still met the original deadlines ahead of time to allow for our review coach and reporting coach ample time to complete their work. 3B. The demands on our platform necessitate additional time to ensure high-quality outcomes. I am committing considerable effort to my responsibilities and ensuring thoroughness in my work, even though I am working more hours each week than originally discussed during training. My objective is to ensure that Texas educators have access to top-tier curricula and resources. Delivering essential feedback through the dashboard and performing detailed quality reviews continues to be my highest priority. 3C.For quality review writing, I use the evidence guide, examples, and look-fors to ensure I am unbiased in my writing. Our reporting coach has highlighted my writing as an exemplar for my team. For example, on QR 2.1a, my descriptive evidence was unbiased and evidence-driven: Lessons do not include specific formative assessment at the lesson level. For instance, in the lesson "Annotation - World Journey Suite," students are tasked with annotating the score. There is not a provided checklist, rubric, or grading criteria for the teacher to use when looking at students' annotated scores. The lesson does provide "rules," but a specific scoring guide for the teacher is not included. While this provides a different way to evaluate students, the teacher should be provided with grading criteria or a rubric to properly assess student knowledge. 3.D The platform we are assessing reveals multiple weaknesses. This creates a challenge in ensuring impartiality; nonetheless, my primary focus is to ensure that Texas students have access to a high-quality curriculum. Consequently, I am conducting my review with an open and unbiased perspective. I have meticulously analyzed each lesson plan, scope and sequence, and explored various features of the platform to fully grasp its strengths and shortcomings. It is crucial that we consistently pursue exceptional instructional materials and offer constructive feedback on how these resources can be improved to achieve superior quality in teaching.

Personal goal

I am extremely pleased with the high level of work I have accomplished thus far in the review process. I'm glad our team is able to function efficiently during our weekly meetings, allowing us to engage in meaningful conversations that drive our work forward, both in meetings and via email. I have enjoyed exploring a new potential curriculum for Fine Arts, and I’m excited to provide detailed feedback that can help the publisher enhance their content while also highlighting the strengths of their curriculum. Although this task can be tedious and demands a keen eye for detail, the time required for thorough research, evidence gathering, and reporting often surpasses expectations. I can dedicate 2 to 3 hours to a single quality indicator. My goal is to improve my efficiency while maintaining the quality of my work as we move to the Evidence Collection for Learning Quality. Moving forward, I aim to distribute my workload each week, allowing me to be productive in multiple shorter writing sessions.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - my communication with the teammates and the leaders has been professional. 1A - I collaborated with the teammates to find solutions when we face different opinions on voting. 1A - I listen to other colleagues' opinions when their thoughts are different from mine. 1A - I built a strong rapport with my teammates during our in-person training. 1B - I communicate with open mind. 1B - I communicate my opinions very clearly, however, when my colleagues thinks differently, I listen to their reasons. 1B - I value everyone's voice. 1B - I ask questions rather than pretend to know everything. 1B - When a teammate seem to be confused, I am willing to help. 1C - I keep my attitude positive even when the process does not go the way I think it should. 1C - I reached out to our leaders for help when I get stuck with one of the processes. 1C - I applied to my training to the voting process and quality reviews. 1C - I went back to the rubric and resources when I was confused in the process.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - I became familiar with the standard alignment voting process. 2A - I assisted other members for voting on the right citations and activities by inserting the numbers on the sandbox where all the members have access. 2A - I put the keywords in the search box on the textbook to search page numbers when I found the evidence for quality review. 2A - I shared how I search the evidences for quality review with my teammates. 2B - I was engaged in the in-person training. 2B - I was engaged in virtual meetings even throughout my trip to South Korea. It was 14-hour time difference but I was not late for any assignment or meeting times. 2B - I collaborated in all settings regardless of my situations. I even connected to the team meeting on the bus. 2B - I have been flexible in working with others. I connected with other members and respected their opinions highly.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - I had good understanding of TEKS with some minor confusion on vocabularies. Some definitions on TEKS were unclear to me. 3A - I applied TEKS on different grade levels very well. 3B - I met all deadlines. 3B - I was not late on any assignments. 3B - I kept the high standard in my reviews. 3B - I constantly went back to the quality evidence guide to ensure the accuracy. 3C - The evidences led me to make decisions. 3C - All discussions were based on the hard evidences. 3C - I avoided to input my personal opinions in the evaluations. 3C - I reviewed the evidences and examples that the publisher offered without any bias. 3D - I am committed to high standards in my evaluations on the instructional materials. 3D - I am committed to ensure Texas educations and students receive the best instructional materials. 3D - I made comments on how the publisher can improve their citations and activities during the voting process. 3D - I ensure our team stay critical and fair in the standard alignment process.

Personal goal

My goal is to ensure the whole process is fair and honest to deliver the best instructional materials to Texas educators and students. I will be thorough in my reviews and remain positive and encouraging throughout the remainder of the process.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - Team Collaboration & Consensus Building: I regularly establish and maintain outreach with peer groups and professional colleagues, fostering productive collaboration, information sharing, and consensus-building across educational and professional communities. 1A - Team Collaboration & Consensus Building: Through active engagement with my TEA IMRA reviewer group, Q22, I contribute to collaborative discussions regarding instructional material evaluation and support shared understanding of review expectations and processes. 1B - Professional Verbal & Written Communication: I have authored and co-authored more than 100 scholarly publications, demonstrating a sustained commitment to clear, professional, evidence-based written communication for diverse audiences. 1B - Professional Verbal & Written Communication: I actively participate in professional networks through LinkedIn and other professional organizations, sharing resources, engaging in thoughtful dialogue, and contributing to discussions that support education. 1C - Continuous Learning & Growth: I attended the 2026 CEN Rural Empowerment Conference this week in Grapevine, Texas to expand my professional knowledge and remain informed about emerging issues, best practices, and innovations that can inform my work as an educator.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - Technical Proficiency & Use of Review Tools: I have more than 20 years of experience using Microsoft Office and Google Workspace applications to manage projects, analyze information, facilitate collaboration, and communicate effectively across teams and organizations. 2A - Technical Proficiency & Use of Review Tools: I regularly assist colleagues in troubleshooting technology issues and provide guidance on effective use of digital tools to help improve their efficiency, productivity, and collaboration. 2A - Technical Proficiency & Use of Review Tools: I leverage advanced features within productivity platforms, including document collaboration, data management, reporting, and presentation tools, to support informed decision-making and project success. 2B - Engagement in Virtual & In-Person Environments: I consistently collaborate with colleagues, stakeholders, and professional networks in both virtual and in-person settings, adapting communication and engagement strategies to meet the needs of different groups. 2B - Engagement in Virtual & In-Person Environments: I regularly participate in virtual meetings, professional learning opportunities, and face-to-face events, which demonstrates my flexibility, professionalism, and commitment to effective collaboration regardless of setting modality.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - Pedagogical & Content Knowledge: Although my primary professional responsibilities are in higher education rather than K–12 settings, I applied my extensive background in curriculum, assessment, literacy, and educational leadership to evaluate instructional materials thoughtfully and effectively. 3B - Review Process Adherence & Timeliness: I dedicated significant time to studying the review materials, training resources, and evaluation criteria to ensure my feedback was accurate, thorough, and aligned with the goals of the review process. 3C - Evidence-Based Thinking & Unbiased Decision-Making: Throughout the review process, I focused on evidence and alignment rather than personal preference to ensure that recommendations were grounded in the rubric and supporting documentation. 3D - Commitment to High-Quality Instructional Materials: I volunteered to serve as a reviewer because I believe strongly in the importance of providing educators and students with high-quality instructional materials that support meaningful learning outcomes. 3D - Commitment to High-Quality Instructional Materials: Throughout my career, I have worked extensively in curriculum development, assessment, accreditation, and academic quality assurance. These experiences reinforced my commitment to rigorous standards and informed my approach to evaluating instructional materials.

Personal goal

As a personal goal, I intend to remain actively engaged with the IMRA community and pursue future opportunities to support the development and evaluation of high-quality instructional materials that positively impact teaching and learning.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A: Throughout the IMRA review process, I made it a priority to build strong connections with team members and create a positive, supportive environment where everyone felt comfortable contributing. I enjoyed collaborating with reviewers, talking through evidence, sharing ideas, and learning from different perspectives. When questions or differing opinions came up, I helped guide conversations back to the evidence while making sure everyone felt heard and respected. By fostering open communication, being available to support others, and working together toward common goals, I helped build trust within the team and contributed to a collaborative process that led to thoughtful, consensus based decisions. This can be verified with my team members and my coach and observable in my interactions and conversations in online meetings. I have text message exchanges where we all are conveying how grateful we are for each other and we have such an effective team. There is no one "star" but instead a cohesive team that works efficiently and effectively. 1B:Throughout the IMRA review process, I demonstrated professional and respectful communication by actively participating in team discussions, clearly sharing my thinking, and keeping conversations focused on the evidence and rubric criteria. I made sure to listen to different perspectives, acknowledge viewpoints from other reviewers, and help guide the group back to the materials when interpretations differed. In online meetings, I supported a collaborative environment by encouraging input from all team members and helping move discussions toward shared understanding and consensus-based decisions. Again, can be verified with my team members and coach. 1C:Throughout the IMRA review process, I consistently engaged in professional learning by carefully reviewing all training materials, participating fully in calibration and team discussions, and applying new guidance directly to my scoring and evidence analysis. I reflected on feedback from team conversations, adjusted my understanding when needed, and integrated updated expectations into my review decisions. I also remained open to ongoing learning throughout the process, using each review cycle as an opportunity to strengthen my alignment with rubric criteria and improve the accuracy and consistency of my evaluations. This is evident in my completion of all training and enthusiastically engaging in any learning related to the IMRA cycle. I also have had rich discussions with other coaches and seasoned teammates.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A: Throughout the IMRA review process, I regularly used the project tools effectively and became highly comfortable navigating the platform to complete reviews accurately and efficiently. I was able to troubleshoot minor issues independently by referencing guidance and adjusting my workflow when needed, which helped maintain consistency and progress during review cycles. I also supported team members by helping clarify tool functions and processes during discussions, contributing to smoother collaboration and shared understanding of the system. Over time, my growing expertise with the tools allowed me to work more efficiently while also helping others do the same. I consistently utilize the QRC and the workbook to provide my evidence and findings. I am able to navigate the dashboard independently as well as the publishers sample website with no outside assistance. I am able to guide others through my interactions with these tools. 2B:Throughout the IMRA review process, I consistently collaborated across all settings by actively engaging in team meetings, calibration discussions, and independent review cycles. I supported group alignment by helping guide conversations back to evidence and rubric criteria, especially when interpretations differed, and I contributed to building consensus by encouraging shared understanding among team members. I also demonstrated leadership by assisting others with tools, processes, and workflow questions, and by helping clarify expectations during discussions. In addition, I showed adaptability by adjusting my approach based on training, calibration feedback, and evolving guidance, applying new learning directly to my review decisions. Overall, I remained flexible, engaged, and supportive throughout the process, contributing to both team effectiveness and consistent outcomes.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A:Throughout the IMRA review process, I regularly applied my content knowledge to evaluate instructional materials against rubric criteria, carefully analyzing how lessons supported skill development across different components of instruction. I used evidence from the materials, such as lesson structure, instructional routines, and student practice opportunities, to determine overall alignment while also identifying minor gaps in consistency or depth when present. I was able to distinguish between fully aligned instruction and areas where alignment was present but not fully developed across all lesson contexts. When needed, I refined my understanding through training, calibration discussions, and collaboration with team members to ensure accurate and consistent evaluations. 3B:THroughout the IMRA review process, I consistently met required timelines while maintaining a strong focus on quality and accuracy in my evaluations. I used tools such as the QRC and workbook to systematically organize evidence and ensure alignment with rubric criteria during each review cycle. I was able to balance efficiency with careful attention to detail, ensuring that my ratings were fully supported and consistent with expectations. When clarification or feedback was provided, I was able to quickly incorporate it without impacting deadlines. Overall, I maintained high standards for quality and alignment while consistently completing reviews on time and contributing to the accuracy and reliability of the team’s work. I ensured that I always made designated time to appropriately focus and finish my work with fidelity. 3C:Throughout the IMRA review processed, I consistently applied unbiased, evidence-driven thinking in all evaluations and discussions by grounding my decisions in the materials and rubric criteria rather than personal opinion. I used tools such as the QRC, workbook, and rubric guidance to support objective analysis and ensure my ratings were based on clear evidence. In team discussions, I focused on what was explicitly present in the materials, helping to keep conversations aligned to observable evidence when differing interpretations arose. I remained consistent in my evaluations while staying open to adjusting my thinking when new evidence or clarified expectations were provided. Overall, my approach ensured fair, accurate, and evidence based reviews across all cycles. 3D:THRoughout the IMRA review process, I consistently championed high standards as a special education representative by keeping the focus on what best supports Texas educators and students. I advocated for instructional materials that were not only aligned to rubric criteria but also truly effective and accessible for diverse learners. In discussions, I used evidence from the materials and special education considerations to support my evaluations and to help the team think carefully about quality, rigor, and usability. I also contributed to consensus-building by clearly communicating concerns when alignment or support for students was limited and by encouraging decisions grounded in evidence rather than surface level impressions. Overall, I worked to ensure the materials reviewed reflected strong instructional quality and meaningful support for student success.

Personal goal

I have grown significantly in my ability to evaluate instructional materials with consistency, collaboration, and a strong focus on evidence. Through these experiences, I strengthened my understanding of rubric alignment, deepened my content knowledge in special education considerations, and became more confident using tools such as the QRC and workbook to support accurate and consistent reviews. I also developed stronger collaboration skills by engaging in team discussions, contributing to consensus building, and ensuring that my evaluations remained grounded in evidence rather than opinion. I have also made lifelong friends and connections that are incredibly valuable to me, Over time, I have become more intentional about applying training, reflecting on feedback, and adjusting my thinking to maintain alignment with expectations across cycles. Moving forward, my personal goal is to continue strengthening my efficiency and depth of analysis while maintaining high quality, evidence based evaluations. I want to further refine my ability to quickly identify both strong alignment and subtle gaps in instructional materials, especially as expectations evolve across review cycles. I also plan to continue building my leadership within team discussions by supporting others in tool use, promoting clarity in rubric interpretation, and helping ensure consistent, high quality outcomes across all reviewers.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A, 1B, 1C-Our Team has a group text chat which we use to build strong team rapport and support with encouragement. 1A, 1B, 1C-In our Sunday and Monday night meetings, we often have differing viewpoints. I always listen and value the different opinions and voices. 1A, 1B, 1C-I seek opportunities to improve my writing skills to integrate into the review process. 1A, 1B, 1C-I take my responsibility seriously and am thankful to meet new educators to share in this experience of review, collaboration, and learning.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A, 2B-I regularly use the project tools for effectively tracking and sharing with the Team. 2A, 2B I regularly use the project tools for effectively reviewing and sharing with the Team. 2A, 2B-I regularly use the project tools for effectively reporting and sharing with the Team. 2B-I collaborate in all settings demonstrating leadership and recognizing leadership in others. 2B-I adapt in all settings, online, in our Team Chat, through email. or in-person, and am able to adapt and be productive in any situation.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A, 3B, 3C, 3D-I strive for high standards for the reviews of instructional materials. 3A, 3B, 3C, 3D-I use evidence-driven thinking for accurate reviews. 3A, 3B, 3C, 3D-I have a deep understanding of the TEKS and apply that knowledge to create accurate high-quality reviews. 3B-I have adhered to all timelines and all deadlines. 3A, 3B, 3C, 3D-I have a deep understanding of the ELPS and instructional materials and apply that knowledge and understanding to champion high standards in the evaluations and reviews.

Personal goal

As we start other portions of the review process, I would like to keep up with our high positivity and support with Team members. I would like to consistently keep striving for high standards for our instructional materials for the future benefit and success of the music educators and music students.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A. Team Collaboration and Consensus Building Throughout this review cycle, I have contributed to building a collaborative team environment and to maintaining strong working relationships that support productive decision-making and consensus-building. During the face-to-face training, I intentionally got to know team members on both a personal and professional level, learning about their families, experiences, and backgrounds. As a new quality reviewer, I benefited from the knowledge of more experienced reviewers, who shared valuable context and insights that deepened my understanding of the review process. 1B. Professional Verbal and Written Communication Our team has consistently supported one another through challenges and changes. When technical issues resulted in the loss of information we had entered, we collaborated to recreate the work and ensure deadlines were met. We have maintained ongoing communication beyond the training through a group text thread where we ask questions, clarify expectations, share new information, and coordinate next steps. We also communicate regularly with our writer to ensure our evidence statements are complete, accurate, and aligned to the rubric. At one point, our coach asked us to pause evidence collection, which significantly compressed our timeline and left us with several weeks of evidence gathering to complete in just a few days. Rather than becoming discouraged, our team encouraged one another, set manageable goals, shared resources, and helped keep each other on track until the work was completed. This experience strengthened our collaboration and demonstrated our ability to remain flexible and solution-oriented when circumstances changed. When scoring differences arise, our team respectfully discusses the evidence, listens carefully to different perspectives, and works toward consensus. We remain open to changing our thinking when new information is presented and value each team member's expertise and reasoning. Through consistent communication, mutual support, and a shared commitment to producing high-quality work, I have helped foster a positive team culture focused on collaboration, problem-solving, and continuous improvement. 1C. Continuous Learning and Growth Throughout the review process, I have demonstrated a commitment to continuous learning by actively seeking out additional resources and professional learning opportunities that strengthen my understanding of the review process and evaluation criteria. When resources, guidance documents, videos, or tools are referenced during unpacking or consensus meetings, I note those unfamiliar to me and take time to review them independently. I regularly explore links, supporting documents, and training materials I have not previously accessed to deepen my understanding and improve the quality of my reviews. This ongoing learning has helped me build confidence in my role as a first-year reviewer and apply new knowledge directly to evidence collection, scoring, and consensus discussions.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A. Technical Proficiency and Use of Review Tools As a first-year reviewer, I have invested significant time in learning to use the review tools and resources available to support the quality review process effectively. I regularly reference evidence guides to better understand indicator expectations, identify appropriate evidence, and strengthen the precision of my written justifications. I also use evidence exemplars to guide the specificity, organization, and wording of evidence statements. Glossaries have been particularly helpful in ensuring a consistent understanding of key terms and expectations across indicators. To strengthen my understanding of the review process, I have utilized QRC supporting documents, training videos, navigation guides, and other available resources. I have spent considerable time exploring and familiarizing myself with the program under review, allowing me to efficiently navigate materials, locate evidence, and move between resources as needed. When additional supports or tools are recommended by experienced reviewers or our coach, I proactively review and incorporate those resources into my work. While I recognize there is still more to learn, I have demonstrated initiative and a commitment to continuous improvement in my use of review tools and resources. 2B. Engagement in Virtual and In-Person Environments I actively participate in both face-to-face and virtual review activities by contributing to discussions, sharing evidence, asking clarifying questions, and engaging in consensus conversations. During training sessions, weekly unpacking meetings, and consensus discussions, I consistently share my thinking, seek clarification when needed, and contribute to group problem-solving. I feel comfortable discussing evidence, explaining my rationale, and learning from the perspectives of other reviewers.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A. I have worked extensively with the TEKS and ELPS in curriculum development, instructional planning, professional learning, and evaluation of instructional materials. I have also worked with a variety of literacy programs and products, strengthening my understanding of standards alignment and my ability to identify strengths and areas for improvement in instructional materials. In addition to my professional experience, I actively engage in ongoing professional learning to stay current with research and evidence-based instructional practices. I have navigated multiple district curriculum adoptions and instructional shifts, including those driven by Science of Reading research. Most recently, I completed the two-year LETRS certification and attended professional learning focused on ELPS updates. I am also a member of The Reading League, regularly read The Reading League Journal, and participate in the Reading Science Academy’s monthly professional learning sessions. 3B. I consistently meet deadlines and maintain high expectations for the quality of my work. I proactively manage my time by reviewing timelines, mapping out deliverables, and creating personal completion schedules to meet expectations without sacrificing quality. Throughout this review cycle, I have remained flexible when timelines shifted. For example, when our coach directed the team to pause evidence collection, the review schedule became significantly compressed, requiring several weeks of evidence gathering to be completed in a much shorter timeframe. Although this change was outside of my control, I adjusted my schedule, reprioritized tasks, and completed the required evidence collection by the revised deadlines. Even when deadlines were moved up, I maintained the quality and thoroughness of my reviews rather than rushing to completion. I also checked in regularly with our writer to ensure my evidence statements included the detail and specificity needed for report writing. 3C. Throughout the review process, I based my decisions on rubric criteria and evidence found within the materials rather than personal preferences or prior experiences. Because of my extensive literacy background, there were times when programs used approaches or instructional practices that I did not find particularly strong or well developed. However, I evaluated materials based on whether they met indicator requirements rather than my own expectations for instructional quality. I regularly used the rubric, evidence guides, exemplars, and supporting resources to ensure my evaluations were grounded in the review process. During consensus discussions, I listened carefully to the reasoning and evidence presented by other reviewers and remained open to adjusting my thinking when additional evidence supported a different interpretation. I demonstrated unbiased decision-making by documenting both strengths and gaps within the materials. When evidence supported an indicator, I acknowledged and cited it, even if I believed the implementation could have been stronger. When evidence was missing or did not fully meet the indicator requirements, I noted those gaps rather than awarding credit based on assumptions or the program's reputation. This approach helped ensure my reviews were fair, accurate, and aligned with the review criteria. 3D. Even when timelines became compressed, I maintained high standards for evidence collection and scoring, regularly consulting the rubric, evidence guides, and supporting resources to ensure my reviews accurately reflected the quality of the materials. I also collaborated closely with team members and our writer to ensure evidence statements were clear, specific, and useful for decision-making, with the ultimate goal of helping educators identify instructional materials that best support student learning.

Personal goal

I will continue growing as a reviewer by learning from experienced team members, reviewing additional examples, and actively participating in consensus discussions. My goal is to become more confident in finding evidence, applying the rubric, and making scoring decisions efficiently and accurately.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A- I communicate with my team in an efficient and effective way. I am sure to complete my evidence collection before the weekend, so my team has time to review my evidence should they need assistance in evidence collection. 1B- I communicate professionally via text, email and in our consensus/unpacking meetings. I alert my team to any changes in my schedule that interfere with our meetings in an effort to provide respectful communication. I also strive to identify strong evidence collection from various team members in our consensus meeting in an effort to ensure all voices are heard. 1C- I consistently self-evaluate to determine if my writing is clear and my evidence is strong enough to be included in the report. I analyze my teammates' writings for strong examples of writing in order to strengthen my own.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A- I can easily and effectively navigate the workbook. I have been able to troubleshoot issues when my teams meeting has crashed as well as quickly communicated to my team that I was working through technical difficulties. I understand how to navigate our program quickly. Finally, I seamlessly toggle between various tables and resources throughout our meetings. 2B- As a reviewer who has participated in the review process before, I acted as a leader to our team during our in-person training, answering questions and clarifying the review process when needed. In our virtual meetings, I participate in accepting or rejecting QRCs before-hand and speaking up to explain my thinking. I also participate in our consensus meetings by acknowledging strong evidence.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A- I apply my knowledge of the TEKS to accurately review the materials. I analyze the language and decipher any nuances in what students are expected to do via the TEKS and whether the materials clearly align with that expectation or not. 3B- I set aside time during the week to complete the evidence collection with enough time to review before our consensus meetings. All pieces of evidence, scoring, and explanations are completed by the end of the week to give my coaches time to evaluate my evidence. All trainings and paperwork have also been completed on time. 3C- I use the rubric effectively when finding evidence for each indicator to ensure I am unbiased in my evaluation of the product. I also utilize the rubric to demonstrate evidence-driven thinking in our discussions, rather than personal opinions about the materials. 3D- I am passionate about Texas educators and students having access to high quality instruction, which is reflected in my evaluation of the materials provided to me. I adhere to the evidence guide consistently to determine if the materials meet the high standard I have for them. I utilize every part of the evidence guide to clarify any misconceptions and seek out truly high quality materials.

Personal goal

By the end of the IMRA Cycle 2026, I will develop my writing skills as well as stretch my participation in meetings to the benefit of my team as it allows for all voices to be heard.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A- As a writer I have done more leading and team collaboration than I expected. On a team with 20 people, it has been a hard start, but I have worked with my team manager, reporting manager, and SAFAL (a call with Amena) to help make our weekly meetings run smoother. I am also spending time building relationships with the other 4 people on my K-2 English team, we have texted and talked on the phone to help them understand the IMRA process. I also took a leadership role on my team of 5 in Dallas. We had a total of 8 breakouts (all 3 grades) to review. So we were ready to move into evidence collection by Saturday morning. I took my team out to a table and walked them through the process, answering questions and helping them to feel confident in collecting evidence so that they were not just sitting the next 3 days in Dallas, but felt productive. 1B- I have sent SAFAL an email when things were not going well during our weekly meetings. I joined the call with Amena to work through things. I have also joined a separate Zoom on my own time with our team manager, Kim, to help her develop ideas to help the consensus meetings not last 2.5 hours. 1C- I am responsive and willing to change my view when needed. During the unpacking I voice questions and I have already reached out to Kim after unpacking to help clarfiy things that do not sound quite right to me. I am doing my best to be open-minded and listen to others.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A: Since this is my second year, I was already familiar with the platforms. I will say, the team workbook has been harder to navigate this year and I do think there should have been training in Dallas on the QRC and what that would look like. I have gone above and beyond to meet with my teammates on my own time to explain the QRC, make sure our votes align and get the information Kim needs. 2B: Many of my earlier examples speak to this indicator. I have joined extra meetings to help things run smoothly on my team. As the writer, I am looking over my teammates evidence and also reminding them of deadlines. Prior to the consensus meeting I make sure I know where we are in agreeement or not to help the meeting be as concise as possible.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A: As a reading specialist and K-5 literacy coordinator, I have a deep understanding of the K-5 EKAR TEKS. I am able to explain things and help others on my team that do not have as much knowledge with multiple grade ranges. 3B: My earlier examples speak to this as well, I meet all the deadlines. I have all of my writing started early so Rosalina can give me feedback and I can adjust. I have done several extra phone calls to help my team be more effective. 3C: I have engaged with other reviewers and changed my view and opinions or they have, in a professional and respecful way. Currently I was confused about an indicator and sent Kim an email for clarification and provided evidence for why I think we should give points, etc. 3D: I think the extra work I have put into this, on top of having a full time job that is still very busy in May and June, speaks to this. I went above and beyond to help my team when we had completed standards alignment by Friday afternoon.

Personal goal

My personal goal is to continue to be open to listen to others and reflect before deciding if I am changing something.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A- I am an active participant in team consensus meetings and reference the materials, evidence guide, and unpacking presentations to help ensure our consensus is tightly aligned. 1A- Each week, I have compiled a list of the standards and marked where our team is not in alignment. I have reached out to the team to let them know in advance so they can look at their scoring prior to the consensus meeting. 1B-I listen openly to the ideas of my teammates and am open to them challenging my previous thinking. 1C- I go back and reference previous trainings to improve my evidence statements. 1C- I have asked if our team review and writing coach could share a link to the training they reference so I could better understand the process and improve my work.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A-I am able to navigate all resources, and when we were in-person at the kickoff, I helped new reviewers better understand the resources and the big picture of the review process. 2A- In our last meeting, the review coach felt we had reached alignment, but I was able to use the notes that I had taken prior to the meeting to identify an area where there wasn’t alignment and pinpoint the reviewer who differed and why they differed. This led to a change by all team members. 2B- A teammate sent the following message: “I appreciate you as a thought partner who gives constructive feedback. The process of evaluating our product comes with great responsibility for students across Texas. I am thankful for fellow educators who value aligning their work to doing what is best for students and teachers.” 2B- To strengthen collaboration and improve my work, a teammate and I drove to meet each other in person so we could dig into the product together and unpack the indicators more fully.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A- I have served on committees with TEA to write standards and guides 3A- I teach college-level courses centered around math TEKS and math instruction. 3B-I have met all deadlines for accepting/rejecting and for evidence writing. I have all of my evidence complete and entered into the workbook by Friday at the latest, so it can support others in their work. 3C- My evidence is tightly aligned to the rubric, and I reference the glossary for all available terms to ensure I am interpreting the rubric correctly. 3D-I care deeply about student learning and will always advocate for high-quality instruction. 3D- I received the following message from a teammate: “I appreciate you as a thought partner who gives constructive feedback. The process of evaluating our product comes with great responsibility for students across Texas. I am thankful for fellow educators who value aligning their work to doing what is best for students and teachers.”

Personal goal

My personal goal is to continue to hold tight to using the rubric to guide my evidence and to hold those around me to the same standards. I will continue to push for feedback from those in leadership roles to improve myself.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - I contribute meaningfully in consensus meetings in order to foster collaboration and reach consensus by both contributing my own ideas and investigating/considering the ideas of others. 1A - I have contributed to building team rapport by offering assistance to new members as well as to our coaches via email and text. I also communicate with other members to answer and ask questions outside of meeting times as we work through the review process. 1B - I regularly express my ideas professionally, both verbally and in writing working to be both precise and clear in my questions and ideas. It is challenging in a virtual environment to ensure all voices are heard because it is difficult to read nonverbal cues in that setting. This is something i will continue to work on. 1C - I have utilized the Resources tab of the workbook as well as outside resources to seek professional development and integrate that learning into the review process. For example, in evidence collection for indicator 3, I spent time educating myself on the requirements of the state-approved ESL programs to better evaluate the inclusion of those resources.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - I am able to quickly navigate between the different review platforms and rarely need assistance, which allows me to provide assistance to others. At the in person kick-off, one of our team members was struggling to locate important information for logging into the platforms, so I shared a document I had created that provided all of that information in one stop. 2A - In order to facilitate discussion about cross-alignment, I have utilized sharing my screen during our Consensus Meetings to help the other team see our resources and vice versa. 2A - I have provided technical support and direction to various team members both in person and virtually to assist in locating or adapting screens and views to help our work happen more smoothly. 2B - I have attended all meetings for our team with my video on so that I can be fully present in the conversation. I do my pre-work and come prepared with notes and questions so that I am ready to collaborate with my peers. 2B - When I noticed that my team was not providing their own disctinctive evidence making the report writing challenging, I worked with our coach to provide that redirection in a professional and compassionate way showing that leadership and adaptability within my team.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - I deeply understand the TEKS, ELPS, and instructional materials. As a teacher in the classroom for this content, I have spent considerable time and energy learning the TEKS and understanding the ELPS as a part of my job. Since working on this project, I have spent the same time and energy familiarizing myself with the materials beyond just the pages and areas that the Standards Alignment and QRC directed us to. I feel like I know the materials very well and can easily find examples and guidance based on that intimate exploration of the resources made available. 3B - I consistently meet my deadlines even when my team was missing a coach. As soon as those deadlines and information was provided, I spent a considerable amount of time to bring my team back to compliance. 3C - I apply evidence-based reasoning to my evaluation, but occasionally will allow my personal experience to impact that reasoning independently. I am not afraid to take a second and third look and recognize when that experience is coloring my evaluation. Sometimes, I reach out to a teammate for a check in to help me check my bias and adjust my thinking outside of our meetings. 3D - I push for my team to truly evaluate the materials in line with the rubic, including taking a second or third look to really question if the evidence in the QRC aligns with the specific wording of the standard. 3D - I am also not afraid to professionally and politely question the decisions of others. By engaging in those challenging conversations and not being afraid to be the "odd man out", I am championing those high standards to ensure that the best instructional materials are approved.

Personal goal

My personal goal is to find ways to encourage others to voice their thoughts and opinions. We have several members of our team who do not contribute unless they are specifically asked. I don't think that I am preventing their contributions, but I do think I can find more ways to encourage them.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A- Consistently build strong team rapport, foster open and effective collaboration and help reach consensus through actively communicating in our group chat, by collaborating with team members in finding evidence, questions or concerns to make sure we are on the same page, and reaching consensus by checking the evidence we gathered as a whole. 1B- Consistently provide professional and respectful communication throughout our team group chat, in our team meetings on Sundays and Mondays, through emails or text with our team coach and emails to Safal/IMRA to ensure that all voices and feedback are valued. 1C- Consistently and actively seek professional development and integrate learning into the review process by using the program workbook, workbook resources, Fine Arts K-12 rubric and manual, and IMRA trainings.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A- Engage in using project tools effectively for reviewing, tracking and reporting by implementing evidence in the program workbook related to the TEKS, reviewing instructional materials for information to find evidence, identifying details to help locate where pertinent evidence is found. 2B- Consistently engage and collaborate in all settings, demonstrating leadership and accountability throughout our team group chat, virtual team meetings on Sundays and Mondays, individual chats with team members and during the in-person IMRA trainings.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A- Provide pedagogical and content knowledge by identifying and understanding the TEKS for all K-3rd, identifying and understanding the ELPS for lower grades, using the instructional materials to find evidence, and provide relevant evidence that connects to the TEKS. 3B- Review process adherence and timelines by completing the required sections in the program workbook ahead of time, setting deadlines for when items need to be completed to stay on track, making sure my section in the workbook is completed in a timely fashion for meetings on Sunday and Mondays and providing reviews that aligned with the standards. 3C- I engage in evidence based reasoning, but may need guidance only in difficult areas, when certain parts of the TEKS does not meet the expectation for evidence, or when I happen to be bias in connecting with the evidence based on my personal opinion and hard to make reason with the evidence for the TEKS when part of it might be evident and the other half is not, developing a partial acceptance. 3D- Consistently champion high standards, ensuring that the best educational materials are received by finding relevant evidence that relates to the TEKS, making sure the evidence exhibits a connection in the teacher and student editions, providing detail information that connects to the evidence and the instructional materials provide support for the teachers.

Personal goal

Throughout the IMRA Cycle 2026, I plan to continue my part in collaborating with my team, learning and identifying the evidence that support the TEKS and keep an open mind by being unbiased.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A – I actively participate in all unpacking and consensus meetings and enjoy collaborating with my team throughout the review process. When questions come up or reviewers have different interpretations of the evidence, I help work through those discussions by sharing where I found supporting evidence and explaining my reasoning. I also share tips for navigating the Kiddom platform more efficiently, which helps team members locate evidence more quickly and confidently. During meetings, I regularly assist with technical issues by sharing my screen, walking others through processes, or directing them to the appropriate resources. I strive to be a supportive team member who helps foster productive discussions and contributes to reaching consensus. 1B – I consistently communicate clearly, professionally, and respectfully in both meetings and written feedback. During discussions, I share my thoughts in a way that supports collaboration and encourages open dialogue, while also being receptive to the perspectives of others. When feedback is provided on my evidence, I respond promptly and make revisions as needed to strengthen my work. Whether I am discussing evidence, asking questions, or providing support to teammates, I strive to communicate in a way that is constructive, helpful, and focused on moving the work forward. 1C – I regularly reflect on my work and use feedback to improve the quality of my reviews. When comments are provided on my evidence, I review them carefully, make adjustments as needed, and apply that learning to future reviews. I am comfortable asking questions when clarification is needed and take advantage of available resources to strengthen my understanding of the review criteria and process. This ongoing reflection and willingness to learn help me continue growing as a reviewer and contribute more effectively to the team.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A – I am confident in using the review platforms and tools required throughout the review process and regularly help others navigate them when questions arise. I have shared strategies for efficiently locating evidence within Kiddom and have guided team members through features and resources that support the review process. When technical challenges occur during meetings, I often assist by sharing my screen, troubleshooting issues, or providing step-by-step guidance to help resolve problems quickly. With this being my 3rd year as a reviewer and last year as the team lead, I am very familiar with the review tools which allows me to work efficiently while also serving as a resource for others on the team. 2B – I consistently engage and contribute in all virtual meetings by actively participating in unpacking sessions, consensus discussions, and team conversations. I come prepared, share my insights, ask questions when clarification is needed, and collaborate with others to support the review process. I make an effort to remain accessible and responsive outside of meetings as well, we have a team group chat where we help each other out answering questions, sharing resources, or work through challenges. My goal is to contribute positively to the team and help maintain a collaborative and productive environment throughout the project.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A – I consistently apply my knowledge of the TEKS, ELPS, and instructional best practices when evaluating materials. Throughout the review process, I carefully analyze lessons and supporting resources to determine whether they meet the criteria and provide meaningful support for students and teachers. During consensus discussions, I am able to explain my reasoning, point to specific evidence within the materials, and contribute to conversations about alignment and instructional quality. My teaching experience allows me to evaluate materials with a focus on both standards alignment and effective classroom implementation. 3B – I consistently follow the established review process and complete all assigned evidence within the required timelines. I'm organized, monitor deadlines, and ensure that my work is submitted on time while maintaining quality and attention to detail. When feedback is provided, I respond promptly and make revisions as needed so that evidence remains accurate and aligned to the review criteria. By staying engaged throughout the process and meeting all deadlines, I help support the efficiency and success of the review team. 3C – I regularly rely on evidence from the instructional materials to support my evaluations and recommendations. When determining ratings, I focus on the rubric criteria and the evidence available within the product rather than personal preferences or prior experiences. During discussions with colleagues, I remain open to different perspectives and consider additional evidence when presented. This approach helps me make fair, consistent decisions and contribute meaningfully to consensus conversations. 3D – I am committed to ensuring that Texas educators and students have access to high-quality instructional materials that are standards-aligned and support student success. Throughout the review process, I take the time to thoroughly examine materials, verify evidence, and provide detailed justifications that accurately reflect the strengths and areas for improvement within a product. I approach each review with the understanding that these evaluations have a direct impact on classroom instruction, and I strive to uphold high standards in all of my work.

Personal goal

My experience during this cycle has been both rewarding and professionally enriching. Participating in the review process strengthens my understanding of the review criteria, enhances my ability to analyze instructional materials, and provides me with valuable opportunities to collaborate with other educators across the state, different grade levels, and content areas. Through consensus discussions and feedback cycles, I have continued to refine my ability to identify evidence, support my decisions, and contribute meaningfully to team conversations. One of the biggest changes this cycle has been the merging of review teams for meetings. While I understand the importance of cross-alignment and appreciate the opportunity to hear perspectives from other grade-level teams, it has also been an adjustment. The broader discussions do provide insight into how other teams approach the review process; however, the meetings are often longer, and some conversations are not always directly applicable to every team. In my experience, separate team meetings allowed for more focused discussions and greater efficiency while still supporting alignment within each review group. My goal for the remainder of this cycle is to continue strengthening my expertise in standards alignment and evidence collection while continuing to collaborate with my team. I want to further develop my ability to contribute to productive consensus discussions and serve as a resource for my team when questions arise. By continuing to learn from feedback and collaboration opportunities, I hope to further enhance the quality and consistency of my reviews.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A – Actively participated in reviewer calibration and consensus conversations, using evidence from materials and rubric language to support ratings while remaining open to alternative perspectives and interpretations. 1A – Helped maintain productive collaboration by focusing conversations on rubric expectations and student outcomes, ensuring decisions reflected the collective analysis of the review team rather than individual preferences. 1B – Participated in professional discussions with reviewers by respectfully articulating my reasoning, asking clarifying questions, and engaging in productive dialogue that strengthened the quality of review outcomes.1B – Maintained a professional and respectful tone throughout all review activities, ensuring feedback remained focused on instructional materials and rubric criteria rather than personal preference. 1B – Authored detailed written rationales that clearly connected publisher evidence to indicator requirements, ensuring review decisions were transparent, defensible, and aligned to IMRA expectations. 1C – Applied lessons learned from each stage of the review process to improve subsequent reviews, resulting in increasingly precise evidence statements, stronger rationales, and greater consistency in scoring decisions. 1C – Demonstrated reflective practice by revisiting previously reviewed indicators, evaluating the strength of evidence, and making adjustments when deeper analysis revealed opportunities for improved alignment.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A – Demonstrated proficiency in organizing and tracking large volumes of evidence across multiple indicators, ensuring accurate alignment between reviewed materials, evidence statements, and assigned ratings. 2A – Efficiently navigated reviewer guidance documents, rubrics, and digital review tools to support comprehensive analysis of instructional materials and informed decision-making throughout the review process. 2B – Actively participated in virtual calibration sessions, reviewer meetings, and collaborative discussions, contributing thoughtful analysis and maintaining consistent engagement throughout the review cycle. 2B – Adapted effectively between independent review work and collaborative team discussions, ensuring both individual contributions and team decisions remained aligned to IMRA expectations. 2B – Maintained consistent participation across all phases of the review process, including training, evidence analysis, calibration activities, and resolution discussions, contributing to the successful completion of team responsibilities. 2B – Served as an active contributor during collaborative review sessions by asking clarifying questions, sharing evidence-based insights, and helping sustain productive professional dialogue.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A – Analyzed instructional materials through the lens of effective teaching and learning, considering factors such as student engagement, scaffolding, academic language development, and opportunities for conceptual understanding. 3A – Drew upon experience as a classroom teacher and instructional coach to identify strengths and potential gaps within materials, ensuring recommendations reflected both standards alignment and practical classroom implementation. 3A – Evaluated the quality and coherence of instructional sequences by examining how lessons, assessments, and learning experiences supported long-term student success and mastery of standards. 3B – Completed assigned reviews, evidence collection, and rating submissions within established project deadlines while maintaining thorough and accurate documentation. 3B – Demonstrated strong organizational skills by managing multiple indicators, resources, and review requirements simultaneously while maintaining attention to detail. 3B – Contributed reliably throughout all phases of the review cycle, supporting the team's ability to meet project milestones and complete reviews according to established timelines. 3C – Evaluated materials using objective evidence and established rubric criteria, ensuring ratings reflected documented findings rather than personal instructional preferences. 3C – Revisited materials and reconsidered conclusions when additional evidence emerged, demonstrating a commitment to accuracy and impartiality throughout the review process. 3C – Maintained an unbiased approach to evaluation by focusing on whether materials met the requirements of the indicator rather than whether they aligned with personal beliefs about instruction. 3D – Demonstrated a strong commitment to high-quality instructional materials by conducting thorough evaluations focused on both standards alignment and instructional effectiveness. 3D – Approached each review with the understanding that evaluation outcomes could impact instructional experiences for educators and students across Texas, reinforcing the importance of accuracy and integrity. 3D – Advocated for high standards throughout the review process by carefully examining evidence, questioning assumptions, and ensuring recommendations reflected the intent of the IMRA framework.

Personal goal

Participating in IMRA Cycle 2026 was one of the most professionally rewarding experiences of my career. The review process challenged me to deepen my understanding of high-quality instructional materials, strengthen my ability to evaluate curriculum through an objective lens, and apply my knowledge of the TEKS, ELPS, and effective instructional practices in a new way. As an instructional coach and former classroom teacher, I found value in examining materials not only for standards alignment but also for their potential impact on student learning and teacher implementation. Throughout the review cycle, I consistently relied on evidence-based analysis when making recommendations and engaged in collaborative discussions that strengthened the quality and accuracy of our team's work. The process reinforced the importance of separating personal instructional preferences from rubric expectations and helped me become more precise in identifying and documenting evidence. I also gained a greater appreciation for the complexity involved in evaluating instructional materials at the state level and the responsibility reviewers have in ensuring Texas educators and students have access to high-quality resources. One area of growth identified through this experience is continuing to refine my ability to evaluate complex indicators consistently and efficiently. While I developed confidence in interpreting rubric language and supporting ratings with evidence, I recognize there are opportunities to further strengthen my expertise in curriculum evaluation and instructional material analysis. Personal Goal: For future review cycles, I will deepen my expertise in instructional materials evaluation by studying emerging curriculum design practices, participating in additional calibration opportunities, and intentionally analyzing how high-quality materials support diverse learners. I will focus on strengthening my ability to identify nuanced evidence, articulate clear and concise rationales, and contribute to consensus-building discussions that promote consistent and rigorous review outcomes. By doing so, I will continue growing as a reviewer and contribute to ensuring Texas educators and students have access to the highest-quality instructional materials available.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - Throughout the review process, I actively participated in discussions and worked collaboratively with team members to reach consensus. I made an effort to listen to differing perspectives, contribute thoughtfully to conversations, and help the group arrive at decisions that was derived from the evidence. 1B - I communicated respectfully and professionally in both written feedback and group discussions. When sharing my reasoning, I focused on being clear and specific while remaining open to questions. I tried to ensure that everyone felt like that had a voice on my team. 1A/1B - I regularly shared my content knowledge and review experience to support productive discussions. When disagreements occurred, I helped refocus conversations on the rubric criteria and evidence, which contributed to efficient and constructive consensus building. 1C - I reflected on feedback provided throughout the review process and used it to strengthen the quality and consistency of my reviews. My team leader provided good feedback and I was able to use this to grow and reflect during the process.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - As my familiarity with the review tools and workbook increased, I was able to navigate the platform more efficiently, troubleshoot minor issues independently, and assist in keeping discussions focused on the evidence and review criteria. 2A - I maintained organized records of review notes, evidence, and rubric reference within the workbook, which helped ensure consistency across reviews and allowed me to efficiently revisit materials during consensus discussions. 2B - I actively participated in virtual meetings, calibration sessions, and consensus discussions. I came prepared to contribute, asked clarifying questions when needed, and remained engaged throughout the process to support the team's work. 2B - I effectively adapted to both independent review work and collaborative team settings, transitioning between individual report writing and evidence collection and group discussions while maintaining productivity and professionalism.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - I applied my knowledge of the TEKS, instructional best practices, and grade-level expectations to evaluate materials for alignment, rigor, and student accessibility. This allowed me to provide feedback that was rooted in both content knowledge and instructional experience. 3B - I consistently completed assigned reviews within established timelines and followed the review protocols throughout the process. I ensured that required evidence and documentation were submitted accurately and on schedule. The only time my team was unable to meet a deadline was when the Dashboard was having technical difficulties. 3C - I based my evaluations on the rubric criteria and evidence found within the materials rather than personal preferences or instructional philosophies. During discussions, I referenced specific evidence to support my reasoning and remain objective. 3D - Throughout the review process, I remained focused on identifying materials that would best support Texas educators and students. My recommendations reflected a commitment to rigorous, standards-aligned instructional resources that promote student learning and success.

Personal goal

IMRA 2026 has been a great experience overall, but with a few challenges along the way. There is always room for improvement and I hope to continue to see these changes in future review cycles. Each year that I participate, I continue to learn and develop my knowledge and expertise both in content knowledge and the IMRA review process. A personal goal in future cycles is to feel more confident in grade level work that isn't what I'm accustomed to teaching, thus providing even more applicable and knowledgeable feedback to publishers.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - I regularly communicate with teammates throughout the week as well as during the consensus meetings. I also communicate with team coaches to keep my team aligned with the entire group. 1B - I show up on time or early to every meeting. I am prepared and share with my team in a respectful and professional manner. I also encourage my teammates throughout the week and provide constructive feedback when needed. 1C - I regularly modify and improve my work as I receive feedback. I apply my experience to further evidence collection and ask questions to clarify understanding.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - I am often the person that my teammates seek out when a question arises about the review tools. I understand and utilize review tools appropriately and effectively. I regularly offer advice in troubleshooting and when teammates need help accessing the review tools. 2B - I remain approachable and consistently collaborate with teammates in-person and virtually. I respond to emails, text messages, and in meetings with consistency. I demonstrate leadership during meetings and throughout the review process by asking questions when necessary and providing accurate information to teammates.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - I apply 20 years of teaching early elementary grades to the review process. I use my knowledge of TEKS and ELPS to accurately review products and give fair and accurate reviews. I apply my extensive knowledge of the content to all materials and seek out high quality materials for Texas educators and students. 3B - I meet every deadline and answer questions my teammates have about dates and deadlines approaching. I understand the review process and the timeline and give my best effort at ensuring high-quality reviews. 3C - I consistently use my extensive knowledge of the related content to evaluate the products. I lead by example when teammates share their opinions about the product and remind them to use fact-based evidence when reviewing the product. I ensure my review is unbiased by seeking out an expertise in the breadth of the product. 3D - I give my best effort at the entire review process. I understand how the review process helps Texas educators and students have access to high quality instructional materials. I seek out the best examples for showcasing what the product offers and keep my team aligned with the goals of the review process throughout the review.

Personal goal

My personal goal is to be an example of an excellent team member during all aspects of the review process so that next review cycle I may apply to be a review coach. I will specifically work toward improving my team collaboration and consensus building as well as seeking out professional development for continuous learning and growth.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - Our team has a GroupME set up, and I constantly update my team with important information, ask for input from everyone, help distribute "to-dos" when needed, and am available to my team members when they ask for help! 1B - Using our GroupMe again as this is our main source for communications, I am always positive in my messages with the team and when asking for assistance myself, ask the team what they would be willing to do or provide assistance to team members when they need something done. 1B - Another example of professional and respectful communication is with my writing coach. We often need to meet outside of regularly scheduled meetings to pick each others brains and for me to gain a deeper understanding of how I can improve my writing/how to be better at writing in active voice rather than passive voice (lol) and we always have a great time in our conversations, getting a ton accomplished while also listening to each other and understanding each others points-of-view. 1C - Since we are a little less than halfway through the writing process, I am taking feedback from my writing coach and her higher-up and applying the requested fixes while asking for specific patterns my coach sees to ensure I do my best to incorporate those fixes into any following writing.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - Since this is my second year participating in the IMRA review process, I am more familiar with how the review tools work even though they are different than last year. I am very comfortable guiding my team to the appropriate locations of content such as the QRCs, the workbook, and the resource tab in our workbook. 2A - During the standards alignment weekend, my team and I ran into voting issues and since I was familiar with the dashboard, I was able to assist my team in troubleshooting why votes were not counting. I also contacted our row helper on multiple occasions asking for her to check on why our dashboard wasn't matching what we were seeing and helping to troubleshoot why. 2A - Although we have not met yet (will be meeting tomorrow), I have noticed that our team has started using the QRC examples in the extra evidence they are providing during evidence collection which is making it more difficult for me when writing as I have to now go through the materials to find different pieces of evidence. I spoke with my writing coach and we will be bringing this up at our meeting and reminding the team that when looking for additional pieces of evidence, that we need to be comparing what was approved/partially approved in the QRC to the new evidence being found. 2B - I am, at this time, the only team member who has participated in every meeting we have had so far, which is totally fine. This leads to constant collaboration and professionalism while also showing adaptability to small vs. large group setting. 2B - Whenever my team members reach out for help, I will meet with them one on one or in a small group setting. I have done this a few times over TEAMS but did the same at the standards alignment kick off when we had two new members.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - Although I understand mathematics TEKS, I am not a middle school teacher and so I am not as familiar with middle school TEKS as I am with high school level TEKS. However, I do feel confident that I am able to view the content and ensure alignment. 3B - Each report is ready to be submitted by my writing coach on Sundays. I work very hard to ensure that what I write in the report is concise, coherent, and that I provide quality examples. 3C - I am still honing my writing skills and occasionally need help from my writing coach on how to word reasoning within my reports. 3D - There have been a few times this year, though not as many as last, where I do not follow the direction of my group members in terms of quality evidence. I have and have always had high standards especially with the IMRA rubric and when my team believes a piece of evidence qualifies full points from the rubic that I do not agree with, I will speak up about it, reminding the team how important the wording of the rubric is, to look back at the exemplars and the non-examples to ensure that what is provided really doesn't match what we would want our HQIM to have.

Personal goal

This is my second year participating in the IMRA process and the second time I have done written support. This year is leaps and bounds better in my opinion. My team is solid, we help each other when someone needs a little extra help, my writing coach is amazing and supportive, and I feel like my writing is already better than my best writing last year! The pacing feels more appropropriate, as a writer I do not feel as pressed for time as I did last year, and feel more in-the-loop with my team in terms of viewing and finding evidence for our content. My goal this year is to continue sharpening my writing skills to ensure we have quality reports for our HQIM!

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1a- During consensus meetings, I actively contribute to collaborative scoring discussions by bringing in additional evidence when initial consensus is not immediately reached. I help guide the team back to rubric language to ensure decisions remain objective and evidence-based. 1a- When discrepancies arise in scoring or interpretation, I help re-center discussions around the evidence rubric criteria, supporting the team in reaching fair and consistent consensus outcomes. I actively listen to peer input and adjust my own scoring and interpretations when warranted, demonstrating flexibility and commitment to team-aligned decisions. 1b- I communicate scoring rationales and evidence interpretations in a way that is grounded in rubric language, which supports clarity and shared understanding among colleagues. 1b- I maintain respectful and solution-focused communication even during differing opinions, helping to preserve a collaborative and productive team environment. 1c- I actively participated in the IMRA cycle to deepen my understanding of HQIM (High-Quality Instructional Materials) and the processes used to evaluate instructional resources. I have engaged in National Board Certification work, which has strengthened my reflective practice and instructional expertise through rigorous standards-based analysis. I am currently pursuing a Master’s degree in Educational Leadership, demonstrating ongoing commitment to professional growth and expanded leadership capacity. 1c- I consistently design and facilitate professional development at both campus and district levels, applying current research and best practices in instruction and leadership. I regularly participate in optional professional development opportunities and independently engage with current research related to instructional materials and mathematics instructional strategies to continuously refine my practice.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2a- I regularly use review platforms and project tools to complete scoring, document evidence, and track progress during the IMRA review process with consistency and accuracy. As this is my first IMRA cycle, I am continuously learning the platforms and maintaining flexibility as procedures and expectations evolve. I lean on guidance from experienced team members and review coaches to strengthen my understanding of platform navigation and evidence collection. I then apply this feedback independently in my own work. 2b- I demonstrate leadership in both virtual and in-person IMRA review environments by actively guiding consensus discussions and contributing evidence-based reasoning tied directly to rubric language. In collaborative scoring sessions, I help facilitate shared understanding by clarifying expectations, prompting reference back to rubric criteria, and supporting team alignment during calibration conversations. 2b- I demonstrate adaptability across virtual and in-person settings by adjusting my communication and collaboration strategies based on the format of the session. In virtual meetings, I engage through video discussion and written contributions in shared documents, while in in-person settings I shift to more immediate verbal collaboration and real-time scoring discussions while maintaining consistent alignment to review expectations. 2b- I regularly update my review spreadsheets before due dates and use structured written collaboration tools to prepare for consensus meetings. This includes documenting scoring rationales, identifying discrepancies between materials and rubric criteria, and integrating peer feedback, which supports focused and efficient consensus discussions.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3a- I evaluate the accuracy and appropriateness of instructional content by independently identifying gaps in alignment, rigor, or developmental appropriateness and grounding those determinations in standards-based reasoning for our Grades 2-3 Supplemental Math Programs. 3a- I consistently apply deep knowledge of TEKS and ELPS to evaluate instructional materials, independently analyzing the depth of key concepts and determining whether content reflects grade-level expectations with appropriate rigor. I evaluate the coherence of key concepts across instructional materials by examining how learning progresses within and across lessons, supporting alignment to TEKS and the logical development of student understanding. I analyze the depth of key concepts in instructional tasks by determining whether materials extend beyond procedural understanding and promote conceptual mastery aligned to TEKS and ELPS expectations. 3b- I complete all scoring and documentation ahead of established deadlines, allowing time for reflection, peer calibration, and revision before consensus meetings. I actively contribute to the efficiency of the review cycle by arriving to consensus discussions fully prepared, with completed scoring, organized evidence notes, and clear justifications ready for discussion. 3b- I maintain high-quality submissions by systematically cross-referencing instructional materials with rubric expectations prior to finalizing scores, which supports accuracy and consistency across reviews. 3c- During consensus discussions, I support unbiased decision-making by presenting evidence from the materials and guiding conversations back to rubric language when interpretations begin to diverge. I actively refine scoring accuracy by evaluating peer perspectives through an evidence-based lens, adjusting my own decisions when instructional evidence supports alternative interpretations. 3c- I independently distinguish between subjective preference and standards-based quality by explicitly aligning all evaluations to TEKS expectations and rubric descriptors and anchoring all scoring decisions in observable evidence from instructional materials and rubric criteria, maintaining objectivity even when materials are personally familiar or stylistically preferred. 3d- Because this is my first IMRA cycle, I consistently ground all evaluation work in the evidence descriptors and rubric criteria when reviewing instructional materials. I focus on applying expectations with fidelity to support accurate scoring and alignment to TEKS. Throughout the process, I continue building my understanding of high-quality instructional materials and look forward to incorporating deeper analysis and stronger advocacy for instructional quality as I gain additional experience in the cycle.

Personal goal

My personal goal is to increase fluency and confidence in using rubric language during consensus discussions so I can more effectively articulate evidence-based reasoning and support shared understanding among reviewers as well as develop a high level of proficiency with all IMRA platforms so I can navigate tools efficiently and, over time, provide guidance and support to other reviewers.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1.A - Participate as a supportive team member in navigating and troubleshooting IMRA processes and tools. 1.A - Locate, create, and vote on new citations during the standard alignment review 1.B - Ensure clarity of the evidence guidance when discussing indicators with the team. 1.B - Seek feedback from team members 1.C - Refer back to presentation slides of asynchronous training sessions.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2.A - Use project tools effectively for reviewing and reporting. 2.A - Communicate with the Review Coach on behalf of the group to request assistance with the evidence collection tool (workbook) issues. 2.B - Consistently participate in virtual meetings 2.B - Provide feedback when needed

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3.B - Consistently meet deadlines to complete assigned evidence collection on or before the Friday following the unpacking meeting. 3.B - Review indicators in advance of unpacking meetings. 3.C - Edit submissions (evidence collection, score alignment to rubric) to comply with the consensus decisions.

Personal goal

Elevate my leadership in the instructional materials review process by consistently leveraging my core content expertise to independently resolve highly complex or ambiguous alignment challenges.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A- I work well with my team, foster open communication, work collaboratively, and come to a consensus professionally. I communicate weekly via text message and through our Google meets meetings. 1B- I am a great listener, take into consideration everyone’s feelings and opinions. I’m respectful and I make sure all voices are heard and valued. 1C- I am regularly assessing myself and looking for better ways to improve my evidence collection feedback.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A- I constantly demonstrate expertise in the review tools. I have yet to find any issues to troubleshoot however, when another team member is struggling, I offer my assistance. 2B- I fully collaborate and participate in all Google meets meetings and adapt anytime it is needed.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - As an educator for 15 years, I deeply understand the TEKS and the ELPS. anytime I question myself I look it up to verify my understanding. 3B - I consistently meet deadlines and make sure my work is done days before any consensus meetings. 3C- I consistently used unbiased, evidence driven thinking in all evaluations and discussions with my peers. 3D - As an educator myself I consistently campaign high standards, ensuring Texas educators and students receive the best instructional materials.

Personal goal

My personal goal is to increase the consistency and accuracy of my reviews by ensuring that all evaluation findings are supported by clear, specific evidence from the instructional materials and aligned to the IMRA criteria.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - I regularly engage in the group text messages in a respectful, professional manner. I have created and shared documents to help in the review process when we could not access our team workbook. This allowed us to collect evidence while we waited on a technical issue to be resolved. Later, we were able to transfer the evidence successfully. I have also shared with new to IMRA team members how I stay organized and to meet deadlines and find needed IMRA resources quickly. As a content expert in phonics and spelling, I am able to effectively answer questions related to concepts and terminology. I have changed my scores, after actively listening to teammates evidence, to align with the evidence and help the team reach consensus. 1B - During team meetings I come prepared with documents preprinted and annotated, so I can ask meaningful questions. I keep my camera on at all times and come off mute when needed to engage in meaningful conversations. I respond to the chat during meetings as needed. I have also stayed behind on the team meeting to ask questions, so I can be respectful of everyone's time. 1C - As part of my TTES evaluation, I engage in self-assessment and feedback. I have enrolled in four different professional development opportunities this summer in order to meet that goal. I check my workbook regularly to implement any feedback or writing tips we get during the weekly consensus meetings. I regularly engage in several professional reading teacher websites to stay current in the latest research. I integrate this knowledge into the review process and to help my teammates who teach other subjects.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - As an experienced reviewer, I am able to direct team members to needed resources when questions arise. I have an organized bookmarks menu to easily access review tools, which I shared with team members at our in-person event. I reach out to team members or share when I figure out a work around for technical issues within the product. When we were locked out of our workbook, I created a temporary workbook that I shared with my team so we could transfer the data later. I showed several new team members how to create a citation and give feedback through the IMRA Dashboard. I also showed our new to IMRA team members where and how to create a suitability flag, since I have previous experience writing them for my last team. 2B - I consistently demonstrate leadership capabilities, not only in my work with IMRA, but also in my other jobs. I am a member of my campus leadership team. I am the 3rd grade team leader. When IMRA timelines are update, I adapt and implement the new deadlines, adjusting my schedule accordingly. At my dance studio, I am the Director of Ballet Instruction. I have collaborated with my team to change my scores on two indicators after our group discussion. I have rewritten my descriptive evidence to align with the evidence.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - I am on the Curriculum Review team because of my extensive knowledge of the TEKS and vertical alignment. Since I have written my own spelling curriculum, I am very aware of the depth and rigor of the TEKS in 3rd grade and in relation to other grades. I am able to spot weaknesses in our current curriculum and have given them feedback on mistakes within in the content and assessments. I write all of the ELAR assessments for my grade level. Due to my experience on numerous STAAR Review committees, I am able to effectively see the relationship between the TEKS and curriculum and assessment design. As a certified ESL teacher, I am constantly assessing our EB's ability to use language and assess them throughout the year on various rubrics. I have been apart of numerous TELPAS writing ratings before the new online assessment platform. Due to this knowledge, a curiosity to learn new things, and through collaboration with other teachers throughout the state, I am able to ensure rigorous and accurate reviews. 3B - I have met all deadlines consistently. If I am not able to attend a meeting due to a prior commitment, I submit all of my work early and check in the next day to see what changes need to be made. I respond to feedback and questions in a timely manner. I keep an organized planner to ensure all deadlines are given the appropriate amount of preparation, writing, and revision time. I also utilize reminders on my phone to stay on track, so everything is finished in a timely manner. 3C - I consistently use the rubrics and IMRA glossary to ensure evidence based thinking that is aligned to the rubric. For a difficult indicator, I contact teammates and our coach as necessary to make sure my interpretation is consistent with my team. I annotate the Look-Fors and Examples in the rubrics with my thinking and check the QRCs prior to our Sunday meetings to ensure accurate evidence collection. 3D - Last summer, I was able to help my district implement new RLA materials due to my experience with IMRA. I knew how our new products aligned with the IMRA rubric and directed district leaders to the IMRA reports to see what the product included. I was able to share how our process worked and affirm that the rubrics helped ensure a consistent evaluation. I have also been able to share with non educators in our community about the process and assure them the IMRA process helps students and teachers get the best materials possible. I also attend STAAR Review meetings at TEA to ensure that our students receive the highest possible quality testing materials that are free from errors and biases.

Personal goal

I want to become more comfortable sharing my screen and using the tools in the Teams program.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - I always work collaboratively and contribute to team discussions. I attend all meetings except for one unpacking meeting that was during a wedding I attended. I love working with my team and offer assistance whenever I can. We have not really had any issues coming to consensus except for one issue which had to be resolved by Safal. During this I was able to explain how we cannot look for all types of assessment in one piece of evidence based on the TEA definition of the assessment types. One assessment cannot be all types. However, the materials do have all types of assessment as we later showed as evidence. I have also worked with team members to help them understand our role, in evidence collection. 1B - I work hard to consistently model professionalism with my team. I remember that not every team member has as much educational experience or knowledge of the TEKS and review process. I listen and choose to let others share before I share. I don't want to be seen as taking the lead too much. 1C - I always look for feedback and use it to improve my writing. I challenge myself to do things correctly the first time, but acknowledge that there can always be improvements.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - I consistently use all of the required tools as a Quality Reviewer. I have three screens open at all times because it is necessary to be able to write in a form, verify sources, look at materials, and to use rubrics simultaneously. There has not been an opportunity at this point to help others with troubleshooting issues or to assist others in any way. 2B - I fully collaborate in all settings. We instantly formed an in-person team in Dallas and worked well together, utilizing each others strengths and knowledge. Having been an IMRA reviewer previously I was able to share so much with new team members. We have continued to collaborate virtually in all of our meetings. We are comfortable with each other and trust each others' knowledge. I am able to share my understandings of the TEKS and the review process as I assist others. I have been very adaptable when it comes to the three meeting a week cadence. This is a lot for full time school district employees, but I am making it work with grace and professionalism.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - I deeply understand the TEKS, ELPS, and the IMRA reviewer role. This is where I excel. I have been a literacy leader for 20 years, training others on the TEKS, RBIS, the Science of Reading etc. I have taken this knowledge and applied it to my role as a quality reviewer. 3B - I consistently meet every deadline. I do quality work in unpacking, collecting evidence and writing the evidence. I am also a writer for my team. My writing reflects all of the evidence collected and I consistently apply the TEA writing style and guidelines, making the best report I can. 3C - I am always unbiassed when reviewing materials. I know and always show what the materials have based on the rubric. I do not add opinions or what I would like to see. I am able to share this with team members when we are meeting for consensus. Sometimes team members want to say an indicator is not met when they are looking for more than what is asked for. I am able to guide them in focusing solely on the evidence that is present, and how well it meets the standards and all components of the indicator are met. 3D - I have always been a champion for high quality instructional materials even before they were called that. I have been a part of the adoption process for various instructional materials in my district since 2013. I have always used rubrics for evaluation of the materials with teams of district stakeholders. I have trained instructional coaches, principals, assistant principals, teachers, and community members on the TEKS and the RBIS alongside the Science of Reading. I know that not all districts have the resources that I have, and take the role of reviewer seriously. I respect that all students everywhere should have high quality materials to learn from.

Personal goal

My goal is to continue with self-assessment. I do it, but I know I could do more. I am planning to take a few minutes each week after my meetings to reflect on my role as a leader.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A, 1B- I worked side by side with the writer in our group to make sure we were all on track as a team by having several phone calls with him to go over communication from the top down. Together we set up additional zooms for our team to meet before consensus meetings to streamline the process and leave no team members in the dark. When we were given incorrect info- that we were required to produce additional evidence for each breakout, I went back over my work to ensure he had well written, viable 3rd examples to include in his writing. I kept continuous communication with our team coach to ensure we were completing work correctly and fulfilling all requirements.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A, you will find consistent work done efficiently in my workbook. 2B, I attended every zoom meeting and participated in each by having the correct documents open and ready for quick review and correction when needed.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

This section has more to do with who I am as an instructor, so I will provide an overview in lieu of exact examples for each section. I have a master’s degree in Studio Art, was a lead secondary teacher at my previous school district and completely designed all professional development for a dozen teachers. As the sole art teacher in my new district, I have brought West to District of Distinction for the first and second time in its history. I just received exemplary TIA status, but am in line to receive masters from last year. Art education is extremely important to me, and the core of that is TEKS, ELPS, instructional materials, high standards, and rigor. As an individual, I test as a scientist on personality tests, not a creative. This has aided me greatly to challenge the stereotypes given to Type B artists by not only meeting deadlines but exceeding them and applying scientific method to evidence instead of personal bias. I hope the record will show that this team, despite reports otherwise, had all work completed in a timely manner and of the highest quality.

Personal goal

My goal is to provide the same quality of work for the final sections of 4, 5, and 6 that we produced for 1, 2, and 3.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - I have texted in a group me text to our team to clarify why it would score certain points and came to consensus after several texts. 1A - Asked clarifying questions during consensus meeting and shared why our team decided as such. 1B - I ask questions respectfully to my group and the team as we discuss consensus. 1B - I am always listening to my group and team and express ideas with the group. 1C - I make sure I ask any clarifying questions to the coach when something doesn't make sense. 1C - I am always referring back to the rubric to make sure I understand and learn the correct measures. 1C - I am constantly referring back to the RBIS to learn and understand each of the RBIS. 1C - I refer back to the notes taken in the in-person training to apply them in my review

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - When I noticed that sometimes I had to un-vote and vote back to make the system work, I shared them with my team to ensure it was done for everyone. 2A - I refer back to the notes taken during the in-person training for tools to vote on the dashboard. 2A - I am consistently working in the workbook and make sure it is done in correct format. 2A - I consistently help team members when I noticed that someone had not voted on an error by viewing the team votes on the dashboard. 2B - I fully and consistently collaborated with the team when we worked together in-person. 2B - I stayed late the first day and share my knowledge of teks based on my experience of teaching Algebra 1. 2B - I engage regularly to support team when a team is unsure of the standards. 2B - My team understands that I am always there to support when anyone is stuck.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - I deeply understand all 8th, Algebra 1, and Algebra 1 TEKs. 3A - I deeply understand the instructional materials as I have reviewed them with my district of the HQIM 3A - I deeply understand the ELPs as we practiced them together with my team by referencing them during the in-person training. 3A - I ensure accurate review by double checking when I am unsure. 3B - I consistently meet deadlines. 3B - I have not been late of any deadlines for consensus. 3B - I have always arrived on time to thee virtual meetings. 3B - I have been present the whole time during the in-person meetings. 3C - I make sure I am looking for evidence in the materials and not think emotionally 3C - I consistently make unbiased evidence driving thinking when we are discussing in the meeting. 3D - I am invested in ensuring our Texas educators receive the best of the best curriculum for our students. 3D - I review with high expectations 3D - When evidence is not there, I want to ensure that publishers re-look at the comments in order to create the best instructional materials. 3D - I apply evaluation criteria strictly and review examples and non-example to score accurately. 3D - I consider past IMRA approved materials to understand a model of HQIM.

Personal goal

My personal goal is to continue reviewing with high expectations and collaborate with the team to ensure that we are providing the best instructional materials to teachers and students of Texas.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - Evidence Statement 1: I actively contributed to this project, where our team successfully reached a consensus. 1A - Evidence Statement 2: I utilized collaborative tools, such as shared documents and regular check-ins, to keep all team members engaged and informed. 1B - Evidence Statement 3: I communicated my ideas professionally and respectfully during our meetings, and my written communication always follows the established guidelines for our project. 1B - Evidence Statement 4: I adapted to our communication tools to ensure a continuous flow of information, aligning with the expected timeline for the project. 1C - Evidence Statement 5: I have incorporated all relevant training content into the review process to ensure a thorough evaluation of the supplemental materials, adhering to the guidelines established by IMRA and aligning with the project's objectives

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - Evidence Statement 1:I have effectively utilized all the tools available in the workbook, as well as the instructional materials provided by Handwriting Without Tears and the digital versions, to review and document my evidence. Additionally, I participated in our meetings to present this evidence, clarify any doubts, and work toward reaching a consensus. 2B - Evidence Statement 2: I have consistently engaged in our training sessions, participated in virtual meetings, contributed to group chats, and maintained communication via email with both my group and the entire team.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - Evidence Statement 1: With over 20 years of experience as a veteran teacher in various roles and grade levels, I possess extensive knowledge of the TEKS and ELPS. I can clearly identify and apply these standards in instructional materials, ensuring a thorough and rigorous review process. 3B - Evidence Statement 2: I consistently meet deadlines and ensure that my reviews are accurate and comply with the established guidelines. 3C - Evidence Statement 3: My expertise allows me to consistently apply unbiased, evidence-based reasoning in all my evaluations and discussions. 3D - Evidence Statement 4: I am dedicated to guaranteeing that students and educators consistently uphold high standards, ensuring that Texas educators and students have access to exceptional instructional materials.

Personal goal

Looking back on my time with the IMRA Cycle 2026, I feel really positive about the experience. The chance to connect with other educators from across the region has been fantastic. I've learned a lot from our discussions, and it’s clear how important it is to work together and share ideas in education. As I think about what’s next, I realize that focusing on curriculum evaluation is a big part of making education better for our students. I want to ensure that the programs and materials we use really serve kids well and meet their needs. My conversations with other educators have inspired me to think about how we can assess and improve our curricula more effectively. So, I’ve set a personal goal: I want to pursue an advanced degree in curriculum and instruction, specifically zeroing in on curriculum evaluation. My hope is to learn more about how to assess teaching materials and practices so that we can create better learning experiences for students. To reach this goal, I plan to take courses and attend workshops that focus on curriculum evaluation. I want to learn about different strategies for assessing what works and what doesn’t in our teaching practices. I also hope to collaborate with other educators, learn from their experiences, and maybe even engage in some hands-on research projects to see how theory applies to real classrooms. Overall, I’m excited about this goal. I believe that by improving our curriculum evaluation processes, I can contribute to the Texas education system and help ensure that our students have the best opportunities for success.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - 1. I contributed in person, working collaboratively during the kickoff meeting. 2. I consistently foster open and effective collaboration to help reach consensus during virtual meetings. 3. I reach out to the team via text to seek opinions and thoughts about particular indicators and evidence. 4. I come prepared to meetings to share and collaborate with all team members. 1B - 1. I express all my feelings and opinions professionally and respectfully. 2. I allow others to share their thoughts and opinions before coming to an end decision. 1C - 1. I always seek feedback (surveys) to find ways to support others and learn more. 2. I'm in a Science Leadership Cohort for Region 4 that meets monthly to interact with other teachers to seek new learning opportunities. 3. I enjoy writing curriculum to apply new strategies and ways to improve instruction of things I have learned in PDs. 4. I seek new learning opportunities consistently to grow, this summer I'm participating in IMRA and a Master STEM Program.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - 1. I consistently utilize the Evidence Guide to assist with properly scoring the evidence for consensus meetings. 2. I consistently utilize the Workbook to collect my data for consensus. 3. I consistently reference the Resources tab in the workbook to review or troubleshoot any problems. 4. I typically reference the Workbook resources tab to assist others when they have questions regarding where to find things. 2B - 1. I have fully participated in the in-person kickoff meeting. 2. I have participated in all unpacking and consensus meetings. 3. I come prepared to all meetings, ready to share my findings and collaborate with others on their findings. 4. My team collaborated, taking on pieces of leadership to assist while replacing our Review Coach.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - 1. As a previous 1st grade teacher, I deeply understand the TEKS. 2. As an ESL teacher, supporting our dual language and bilingual students, I deeply understand the ELPS. 3. I have spent a lot of time reviewing the instructional materials, alignment, and implementation quality. 4. I have completed the Read Academy program and understand the state's expectations of phonics curriculum and instruction. 3B - 1. I meet deadlines for all requirements with some support from my team members. 2. I come prepared and ready to share in all meetings. 3C - 1. I reach out to my team for support on some difficult decisions based on the evidence I collected. 2. I generally collect my own evidence for my own decisions. 3D - 1. I review each indicator carefully to ensure the materials meet implementation requirements. 2. I reviewed the materials to ensure that they can meet ALL students. 3. I have reviewed the materials to ensure they can provide support for teachers to easily execute the instruction. 4. I have reviewed the materials to ensure it has ways to progress monitor the students to provide all supports to reduce the learning gaps.

Personal goal

This opportunity has been great. I have enjoyed meeting my team members from across Texas and getting to know them. I look forward to our weekly meetings and collaborating with them. A personal goal of mine is to be more proactive in managing my workload and to share my expertise and experiences with more educators.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A- Speak with my team via text more than four times per week. Separate team sheet has been created so that we can discuss, review, and reach team consensus prior to our unpacking and consensus meetings weekly. 1B- I regularly share ideas among the team as well as during consensus meetings to ensure clarity. I actively listen and take notes during meetings. 1C- Consistently take active notes during the TEAMS MEETINGS and reference ideas from others as well as set aside time to research and explore new facets of the program that team members share during the meetings.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A- I am able to support other team members with finding evidence within the program. I have been able to successfully access all online trainings, sheets, and learning modules without issue. My team has a separate document where we discuss evidence, troubleshoot, and share ideas. Throughout the program, I have met all deadlines and online work. 2B- I speak to my team multiple times per week. I regularly engage in team meetings. I consistently reply back to my team when there are questions about evidence or upcoming deadlines. I have stayed on all meetings despite going over time as there is great discussion and important information being shared.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3D- I champion high standards so much and believe in it that I wanted to be part of this process to learn more. I am a fully certified Texas administrator who believes in research based curriculum for students. I advocate for teachers and students to receive the best instructional materials. I am committed to the process at hand to ensure Texas students and educators have access to HQIM every year. 3c-I regularly apply evidence based thinking based on my evidence collection. I reference the rubric only for questions on assigning points. I reference and use all of the resource materials provided to include the glossary. 3B- I have attended all meetings. I have submitted all online trainings on time. I completed all training modules before the deadline. I have submitted all assignments, forms, and QRC/Review materials on time. 3A- Texas certified administrator still working in schools. 19 years experience with TEKS and ELPS. Deep understanding of the rubric- Year 2 in IMRA. Deep understanding of the process and why it is done.

Personal goal

So far, it has been somewhat difficult adapting to the new meeting setup and practices. I feel like I am a year one person during this process. My goal. is to contine to adapt, be a good teammate, and support our Team Leads as best as I can.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - I consistently involve others in our online Team meetings on Sunday night and ask for others' opinions after I share my opinions. 1A - I consistently help to reach consensus by summarizing what I hear others on my team say during our online meetings, even if we do not all agree at first. 1B - I model professional communication with my team in our GroupMe app messages each week. 1C - I consistently have read the feedback from our writing coach, Yen (sent by email), and have made improvements to both the quality and specificity of my evidence collection in both Google Sheet Workbooks each week.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - I consistently demonstrate expertise in the mechanics and mechanisms of the IMRA Dashboard tool where we vote on our instructional programs' alignments to the breakout for each Student Expectation by sharing ideas to resolve any issues with our team in our GroupMe app messages. 2A - I help others with how to address issues like Accept or Reject or removing votes to be in alignment based on our team discussions and agreement (both online on our weekly Team Consensus meetings and in our GroupMe app). 2B - I have attended and engaged in all virtual and in-person environments and have not missed any required meetings. 2B - I have collaborated in each in-person meeting and virtual meeting (and have attended two additional meetings that our team agreed would be helpful to us) and have allowed and encouraged others to voice their opinions.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - I deeply understand the TEKS and ELPS, which helps me to accurately review when I vote on alignment in the Dashboard and when I determine whether the support resources for the TEKS and ELPS for the 2 CTE courses are aligned to our 3 instructional programs. 3B - I usually adhere to the deadlines but have fallen behind by 24-48 hours on two occasions in the past week; I got caught up prior to each Sunday & Monday evening meeting as needed. 3C - I use objective, standards-based, unbiased thinking when examining evidence and conducting my evaluations. 3D - I apply evaluation criteria from the rubrics consistently and effectively.

Personal goal

I have enjoyed my collaborative work with my team Q003 since our in-person meetings. Our virtual meetings are equally productive, although we have gotten behind on two occasions. We are now caught up with everything and have missed any deadlines. My personal goal is to complete all of my descriptive evidence summaries in both workbooks by the Friday evening deadlines: On two occasions, I needed 24-48 hours more but completed them prior to our unpacking and consensus meetings; I don't want my delay to potentially impact our writer's work moving forward.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - I work collaboratively with my team weekly in discussions outside of unpacking and consensus meeting. 1A - I collaborate with other review teams during unpacking and consensus meetings. 1B - I listen during meetings and speak up when my input is valuable. I listen when others speak and take their thoughts and findings into consideration. 1C - I constantly review my work and take the feedback from the review and report coaches to improve my reviews.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - I am comfortable navigating both the review dashboard and the workbook in Google Drive to find materials necessary to the review process. 2B - I work with my team virtually on the meetings and through group communication and developed respectful relationships with them during in-person training.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - I use my knowledge from my extensive study during my Masters Degree work to create rigorous and accurate reviews. 3B - My reviews are turned in on time each week and my work is always ready for the unpacking and consensus meetings. 3C - I make sure to go into my quality review each week with an open mind and allow the rubrics and curriculum to guide my thinking. 3D - I hold the curriculum to high standards, understanding that this curriculum has the ability to affect generations of students.

Personal goal

I have enjoyed the collaboration of the IMRA 2026 Cycle. Moving forward, I would like to dedicate even more time each week to digging into the material to ensure it is of the highest quality for the students and teachers in Texas.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A: I work well with my team by listening to everyone’s ideas, sharing my own thoughts, and helping the group come to an agreement. 1A: I help keep conversations respectful and productive, especially when there are different opinions or when the group needs to make a decision. 1B: I communicate my ideas clearly in both writing and discussions, while keeping my tone professional and respectful. 1C: I use feedback from others to improve my work and stay open to learning throughout the process.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A: I use the review platform to keep track of assigned tasks, check the status of my work, and make sure I submit updates accurately. 2A: When reviewing work, I use the project tools to document progress, organize notes, and follow up on items that still need attention. 2B: I stay engaged during virtual meetings by listening, responding when needed, and keeping up with tasks even when the work is online. 2B: In person, I participate by communicating with the team, staying focused on the activity, and helping make sure the work gets completed.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A: I use my understanding of the TEKS, ELPS, and instructional materials to make sure my reviews are accurate and focused on what students are expected to learn. 3B: I stay on track with review deadlines by completing my assigned work on time and making sure my feedback follows the review process and criteria. 3C: I base my evaluations on evidence from the materials instead of personal preference, and I point back to specific examples when explaining my decisions. 3D: I focus on whether the instructional materials are clear, aligned, and useful for teachers and students, so the final review supports high-quality instruction.

Personal goal

My personal goal is to improve my technical skills by becoming more confident with the review tools and using them more efficiently. I also want to engage at a deeper level with my team by participating more, supporting others when I can, and helping the group stay focused on quality work.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - I have supported my team through in person and text collaboration to troubleshoot struggles, offer life support via teleconferencing, and maintain a structured schedule for standards alignment completion, and communication. 1B - I consistently engage in professional communication through text, email, and in person interactions. I employ supportive and strength based communication to troubleshoot, potential problems or misconceptions. I have worked collaboratively with my coaches to ensure clarity and understanding in Group specific or program communication. 1C - I employ reflective practice when receiving feedback, make adjustments, updates, or revisions based on feedback, and self reflect on my own performance to make improvements.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - I have supported my team in troubleshooting minor technical issues. When a team member struggled to identify components of the program, I provided support and guidance through direct links, verbal support, and modeling. I maintain organization in my use of the review tools through a guidance document I created to house all links and training notes. 2B - I consistently demonstrate collaboration and contribution during virtual and in person work. While in person, I led our team to divide the work in a cyclical pattern of standards, alignment review, collaboration, and consensus. In the virtual setting, I regularly lead the team in contributing specific evidence, asking questions on behalf of the group, and clarifying potential misconceptions.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3 - Through my professional expertise and experience, as well as advanced education and certifications, I demonstrate a deep understanding and commitment to the TEKS and ELPS. I use descriptive evidence and rubric language to clearly align IMRA expectations to the program and product specifications. 3B - I demonstrate a deep commitment to timelines and effective quality review by establishing personal due dates in advance of the team due date, reviewing and conducting my own program, consensus before the meeting to ensure alignment between my evidence and my team's evidence, and communicate effectively in advance of upcoming meetings. 3C - I effectively ground my work in rubric language through the use of the rubric and a heavy reliance on the evidence guides. In particular situations where evidence may not be as clear or explicit, I revisit and reflect deeply on the examples and non-examples as well as conduct a deep analysis of the vocabulary in the rubric. I apply the clarity and understanding derived from the unpacking meetings to guide my application of the rubric. 3D - I have established a deep commitment to the purpose admission of this process through the application of the rubric, the integration of key learning components provided in trainings, and the collaboration within my team and across cross alignment teams

Personal goal

As I continue to develop reflective and collaborative practices, I plan to encourage and support my teammates in providing input and sharing their experiences.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A-I collaborate with my team on a regular basis. We communicate in a group chat to help each other throughout the week before we meet on our teams call. I help my teammates by answering questions throughout the week. 1B- I communicate professionally with the coaches when emailing or texting them. I communicate professionally with my teammates. During our Teams calls, I allow for all voices to be heard and do not take over the conversation. I participate in the conversation, but do not take over the conversation. 1C- I listen and learn from each of our meetings how to make my evidence stronger. As I look for evidence, I reflect on our Teams calls to make sure my evidence is accurate. I listen to the feedback given from the coaches and apply it to my evidence.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A-I understand and use the tools to help me collect evidence. I use the tools to thoroughly understand what the indicators are looking for in order to write evidence with specific examples. 2B- I listen and participate in Team discussions. I listen to the feedback given and apply it to my evidence. I am flexible when changes need to be made for the good of the group. I am respectful of my teammates and coaches when they share their ideas.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A- I deeply understand the TEKS, as I taught K-2 for 12 years with a focus on phonics instruction. 3B- I consistently meet deadlines and make sure my evidence has been submitted before the deadline.3C- I make sure that all of my evidence is specific to the indicator with no biases. I quote specific words from the curriculum to create my evidence and make sure it fits with the indicator. 3D- I take this job seriously and the privilege to do this work.

Personal goal

My goal is to use the feedback given by the coaches to make my evidence stronger each week.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A-I consistently leverage my positive and approachable demeanor to build strong, trusted rapport across the team, creating an inclusive environment where colleagues feel comfortable sharing ideas. I maintain a highly adaptable and fluid approach to teamwork, adjusting to team dynamics and welcoming diverse collaborative styles. By centering my focus on the collective goals of the team rather than individual agendas, I contribute to constructive discussion that successfully works toward a unified consensus. 1B-I always aim to bring a high level of professionalism to our weekly meetings, mostly by making sure I'm actively listening and showing genuine respect to whoever has the floor. For me, these meetings are a great opportunity to learn from my teammates and look for natural ways we can collaborate on decisions as a group, whether that's through clear verbal updates or follow-up written communication. 1C-I am consistently engaging in self-assessment to drive my professional growth, especially when it comes to sharpening my evidence-collecting skills. I make it a priority to take the weekly feedback I receive from my leader and writers and directly apply it to my work, focusing on making my evidence much more specific and clear.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A-I consistently utilize our provided review tools to effectively collect evidence, drawing on my previous technology experience to troubleshoot any technical issues as they arise. This proficiency has also allowed me to support the wider team by sharing helpful links and resources I’ve discovered, making the overall review process smoother for others as well. 2B-I feel incredibly fortunate to work with such a great team that collaborates seamlessly and effectively, whether we are working in person or online. Right now, we are all doing a fantastic job of supporting one another through the evidence collection process, with everyone consistently demonstrating high proficiency and professionalism. We’ve also navigated plenty of moments where we’ve had to adapt on the fly, working together flexibly to overcome challenges and reach a solid consensus.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A-My deep understanding of the TEKS and ELPS has been incredibly helpful as I navigate the IMRA process this year. It allows me to hold exceptionally high standards for our reviews, ensuring everything we do is rigorous, accurate, and aligned as we collect evidence and work toward a team consensus. 3B and 3C-I am still working on adjusting to the new review processes and deadlines laid out this year, especially balancing the twice-weekly meetings, but I am fully committed to prioritizing these blocks of time and scheduling personal events around them. I am also focusing on applying evidence-based reasoning to my decision-making, and while I still need occasional clarification and guidance on certain indicators, the support from my leaders has been tremendously helpful in allowing me to make informed decisions. 3D-I am deeply committed to holding the highest standards while reviewing our currently assigned materials, always keeping the bigger picture in mind. Every week, I remind myself that this rigorous process is ultimately about ensuring educators and students have daily access to high-quality instructional materials that drive real academic growth.

Personal goal

My experience with the 2026 IMRA cycle has been incredibly positive so far. The leadership teams have been extremely helpful with their clear communication and smooth rollout of information, and the constant encouragement, guidance, and explanations from my teammates have truly set us up for success. Looking ahead, I am setting a personal goal to sharpen my evidence collection so I can better support my writer, ensuring she has exactly what she needs to do her job efficiently and effectively. Ultimately, I want to keep balancing my own workload while remaining a reliable source of support for the entire team.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A: During our consensus meetings, I have collaborated with our team on quality indicators which we did not agree on, and worked together to come to a consensus by carefully analyzing the IQ document and looking back at the materials. 1B: During our standards alignment work, I submitted feedback for the publisher for pedagogical inaccuracies and errors with the program materials. 1C: I continuously look to the more experienced members of our team for guidance on consensus, and writing exemplars.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A: I took the time to familiarize myself with the IMRA materials in Goggle Drive and the IMRA website. I have submitted help desk tickets, found necessary proof in the answer key documents provided by the publisher, and found program materials that were mislabelled, which allowed us to accurately score the program. 2B: During the kick-off event, I asked as many questions as I could to our more experienced members, as well as a coach who was helping our team. I am an active participant in our consensus meetings by using the IMRA materials to help guide our conversation on linking Evidence Guide 'look-fors' with our program materials.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A: I have used my understanding of TEKS and ELPS to have valuable conversations during the standards review process about activities that did not meet the rigor that Texas expects of students. Additionally, in our quality review for ELPS instructional guidance, I led a discussion that ensured we were applying credit for only explicitly stated instructional recommendations that meet the needs of EB students. 3B: I have met all deadlines for the process so far. 3C: I use the Evidence Guide to drive my decision-making process for the review of our program.

Personal goal

Moving forward, I will spend more time on the drafting of my responses and start earlier in the week so I am not in a time crunch to submit.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A I collaborate with and share thoughts with my team throughout the week as we work evident collection. I share evidence during meetings. I listen to other group members during meetings and consider their ideas as we work to reach consensus. I make revisions to scores and evidence if needed based on new information learned from peers. 1B I listen to peers as they share in meetings. I ask my team clarifying questions. I check for understanding and share relevant ideas and evidence. I share my appreciation for other points of view when working towards consensus.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A I use the different platforms with skill to complete the review process. I use scoring guides to inform the scoring process. I refer to the workbook resources often. 2B I collaborate and work both virtually and in person with teammates. I have missed 2 meetings due to a planned vacation, but I completed all of my assigned work, notified my team lead, and submitted the correct forms.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A I use resources provided by the IMRA review process to support my work. I study the TEKS and use specificity documents to inform ratings and evidence. I study the ELPS to ensure ratings are accurate. I look in all aspects of the program to look for evidence as that could meet standards. 3B I meet all deadlines for training. I meet all deadlines for evidence collection. I look through each component of the program when looking for evidence for indicators. I review my scores and evidence to make revisions before consensus meetings. 3C I study the evidence guides before looking at the program. I look closely at each component to search for evidence that could support an indicator. I look for each indicator individually and do not let one influence another. I set aside any preconceived notions of the program to look at it objectively as I work to find evidence and score. 3D I collaborate with my team and discuss evidence to ensure it is of high quality. I encourage my team to look closely at the program and indicators. I make sure my evidence is aligned and thorough. I share counter opinions in meetings to share a different point of view when needed.

Personal goal

I would like to work on demonstrating leadership in the IMRA process.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A-Team Collaboration and Team Building I consistently build strong rapport within the team and foster open, effective collaboration by actively participating in all meetings and maintaining an approachable presence. I listen carefully to each team member’s perspective and work collaboratively to reach outcomes that best support the team’s goals. Beyond scheduled meetings, I proactively connect with team members to offer support, clarify questions, and ensure alignment. This ongoing communication strengthens collaboration and helps address uncertainties in a timely manner. In my role as the team’s writer, maintaining consistent communication is essential to producing clear, accurate, and aligned deliverables. By staying closely connected with team members, I ensure that my work reflects shared understanding and effectively represents the team’s collective input. 1B-Professional, Verbal, and Written Communication As an IMRA team member, I consistently demonstrate professional, verbal, and written communication by clearly expressing my ideas, actively listening to others, and contributing thoughtfully to discussions. In verbal communication, I engage respectfully in team meetings, ask clarifying questions, and ensure alignment through collaborative dialogue. In written communication, I produce clear, concise, and well-organized deliverables that accurately reflect team input and align to IMRA expectations and criteria. I maintain a high level of professionalism by being responsive, solution-oriented, and respectful in all interactions, ensuring effective communication that supports team rationale and high-quality outcomes. 1C-Continuous Learning and Growth I also prioritize continuous learning and professional growth by actively seeking feedback, reflecting on my work, and refining my understanding of IMRA criteria, indicators, and expectations. I use each opportunity to strengthen my practice, deepen my content knowledge, and improve the quality and precision of my contributions to the team.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A-Technical Proficiency and Use of Review Tools As both a reviewer and a writer, I consistently demonstrate technical proficiency and effective use of review tools to support accurate, efficient, and high-quality work. I utilize the workbook and digital platforms, shared documents, and review tools to analyze materials, track team evidence, and align findings to IMRA indicators. I am intentional in organizing evidence and ensuring that feedback and revisions are clearly documented and accessible to the team in a timely manner. In my role as a reviewer, I use these tools to systematically evaluate materials, annotate evidence, and ensure alignment to rubric criteria. As a writer, I leverage technical tools to synthesize team input, refine language for clarity and precision, and produce well-structured deliverables that meet IMRA expectations. 2B-Engagement in Virtual and In-Person Environments I consistently attend all scheduled weekly meetings and engage fully by actively listening, contributing to discussions, and taking detailed notes to ensure alignment and follow-through. My note-taking supports both my own ideas and evidence and team consensus by capturing key decisions, clarifications, and final decisions. I remain focused and present during meetings, ensuring that all team members’ perspectives are captured and considered. Additionally, during the in-person IMRA conference, I demonstrated strong engagement and collaboration by remaining attentive throughout sessions and working effectively with my team. I actively participated in discussions, contributed to group tasks, and supported team problem-solving efforts. My ability to collaborate in both virtual and in-person settings reflects my commitment to teamwork, professionalism, and high-quality outcomes.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A-As a veteran educator, I bring deep pedagogical and content knowledge to my role, which strengthens my ability to analyze instructional materials with accuracy and intentional insight. I have a strong understanding of the TEKS and use this knowledge to ensure that all evaluations and written justifications are tightly aligned to indicator expectations. My experience allows me to recognize how skills should be sequenced, scaffolded, and delivered to support student learning effectively. I apply this understanding when reviewing materials and finding evidence to determine whether instruction is developmentally appropriate, aligned to standards, and supportive of student mastery. Additionally, I use my knowledge of best instructional practices to complete my consensus and writing submissions. This combination of pedagogical expertise and TEKS alignment ensures that my contributions are grounded in both instructional effectiveness and standards-based expectations, supporting high-quality, accurate IMRA feedback, suggestions, and evidence. 3B-I consistently demonstrate adherence and timeliness by meeting all deadlines related to weekly meetings, evidence collection, and written submissions. I come prepared to meetings and complete assigned tasks on time, including identifying and organizing evidence for indicators. I manage my time effectively to ensure that all writing deliverables are completed accurately and submitted within established timelines, contributing to the overall efficiency and progress of the team. 3C-I consistently apply evidence-based thinking and unbiased decision-making when analyzing materials and justifying my evidence. I ground all claims in specific, verifiable evidence from the curriculum and align my analysis directly to IMRA indicators and TEKS expectations. I remain objective by focusing on what is explicitly present in the materials rather than assumptions, ensuring that my conclusions are fair, accurate, and consistent. When providing feedback or suggestions for improvement, I base my recommendations on identified gaps in evidence and alignment, rather than personal preference. I often asked for assistance of higher expertise when guidance is needed or I am struggling to come to a solid score or final consensus. 3D-As an IMRA reviewer and writer, I demonstrate a strong commitment to high-quality instructional materials by ensuring that all evaluations and written justifications are grounded in rigor, alignment, and instructional effectiveness. My work is driven by the belief that Texas students deserve access to curriculum materials that are standards-aligned, cognitively demanding, and supportive of meaningful learning outcomes. I intentionally analyze materials through the lens of rigor and quality, ensuring alignment to the TEKS and IMRA criteria while considering how well the materials support student mastery and teacher implementation. As a writer, I clearly articulate strengths and gaps to support accurate evaluations and actionable feedback. As a reviewer, I remain focused on identifying whether materials truly meet the expectations required to promote high levels of student achievement. Ultimately, my goal is to contribute to the selection and improvement of instructional materials that provide all Texas students with equitable access to a rigorous, high-quality education.

Personal goal

My personal goal is to continuously enhance my knowledge, professionalism and to strengthen my ability to analyze curriculum with precision. I aim to deepen my understanding of IMRA indicators and improve how I articulate alignment, rigor, and instructional effectiveness to support student success.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A--Distinguished--In team collaboration and consensus-building efforts, I consistently communicated ideas professionally, prioritizing clarity and inclusivity to support productive dialogue. I maintained a collaborative and respectful tone throughout all discussions, contributing to a positive team dynamic. I actively participated in resolving differences related to scoring or interpretation of evidence, working with colleagues to reach thoughtful, consensus-driven decisions. 1B--Distinguished--Throughout the curriculum review process, I consistently modeled professional and respectful communication, ensuring that all voices were acknowledged and valued. I communicated clearly and appropriately across all formats, including verbal discussions and written reports. I adhered to best practices for report writing and contributed to team understanding by asking thoughtful questions to clarify reviewer input. Additionally, I helped resolve confusion by providing clear, concise writing and messaging that supported accurate interpretation and collaboration. 1C--Accomplished--In support of continuous learning and growth, I regularly engaged in self-assessment and actively applied feedback to improve the quality of my contributions. I demonstrated adaptability by adjusting language to align with updated rubric criteria and formatting guidance. When uncertainties arose regarding rubric interpretation, I proactively sought clarification to ensure accuracy and consistency in my work, reflecting a commitment to ongoing development and high standards.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A--Distinguished--I consistently demonstrated technical proficiency by effectively using project tools for reviewing and collecting evidence throughout the curriculum review process. I independently navigated supplemental math materials, TEA documents, Google Docs, and evidence guides to support accurate and thorough evaluations. I ensured comments and scores were entered in the appropriate locations, maintaining accuracy and alignment with the review expectations. 2B--Distinguished--I consistently demonstrated strong engagement in both virtual and in-person environments by collaborating fully and adapting to various settings. I met all deadlines, responded promptly to communication, and actively contributed to both meetings and asynchronous collaboration. I maintained regular communication with team leads and fellow reviewers when questions arose, ensuring alignment and clarity. Throughout the process, I remained available and supportive, fostering a collaborative and responsive team environment.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A--Distinguished--I demonstrated strong pedagogical and content knowledge by applying a deep understanding of the TEKS, ELPS, and instructional materials to ensure rigorous and accurate reviews. I effectively identified strengths and gaps in TEKS alignment within the assigned supplemental math materials and used my knowledge of grade-level expectations to evaluate the rigor and progression of skills. I clearly named and described instructional models, strategies, and representations, while thoughtfully considering how each lesson component supports the development of student understanding and teacher internalization. 3B--Distinguished--I consistently met deadlines and maintained high-quality standards alignment reviews by taking a proactive approach to the review process. Before beginning each review, I thoroughly examined the materials and set personal goals to complete at least one to two indicators each day after unpacking the content. I adhered to review process expectations, followed indicator structures and rubric scoring procedures with fidelity, and ensured evaluations were clear, accurate, and standards-aligned. When needed, I revisited the product's implementation resources to verify evidence and strengthen the accuracy of my ratings, demonstrating a commitment to consistency, attention to detail, and continuous quality improvement throughout the review process. 3C--Accomplished--I regularly applied evidence-based reasoning throughout the review process, relying on criteria and focusing on the content present in the materials. I anchored my rationale in the language of the indicators and used the rubric expectations to guide my evaluations. While I was confident in making objective, unbiased decisions, I sought guidance when faced with particularly complex cases to ensure accuracy and alignment. This approach supported fair, consistent, and well-justified evaluations. 3D--Accomplished--I regularly demonstrated a strong commitment to high-quality instructional materials by thoughtfully applying evaluation criteria to ensure accurate and meaningful reviews. I dedicated time and attention to locating evidence that reflected both rigor and clarity, aiming to uphold high standards throughout the process. My focus remained on supporting educators and students by helping to identify and elevate materials that promote effective teaching and meaningful learning experiences.

Personal goal

For my second year participating in the IMRA curriculum review process, I felt well prepared and confident in my understanding of the review expectations and procedures. Working alongside experienced reviewers provided valuable opportunities for collaboration, discussion, and reflection, allowing us to learn from one another and refine our approach based on lessons learned from previous review cycles. Overall, the IMRA 2026 math curriculum review experience was positive and productive, offering meaningful opportunities to evaluate instructional materials, deepen my understanding of high-quality mathematics instruction, and contribute to a rigorous review process. As I reflect on this experience, I recognize growth in my ability to analyze evidence, apply rubric criteria consistently, and support team discussions. I also appreciated the structured process, which fostered thoughtful collaboration and strengthened the quality of our evaluations. Moving forward, my personal goal is to continue developing my leadership and facilitation skills so that I can serve as a Review Coach in a future IMRA cycle. To achieve this goal, I plan to build on my review experience, seek opportunities to mentor others, and deepen my understanding of the review process to support future teams effectively.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

IA--I helped my team reach consensus by going back to the rubric and pointing out that the piece of evidence some team members were considering was from an outdated version of the program. IB--I reached out to our review coach about concerns with combining meetings and the length of consensus with a professionally worded email. IC--I self-evaluate my adherence to the rubric and the quality of my evidence collection, making revisions as necessary based on feedback from our review coach and writing coach. IA--I participate actively in meetings, solicit input from other team members, and justify my reasoning with evidence and understanding of the rubric.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A--I am able to access program provided resources and use them regularly to complete my reviews. 2B--I am on time for meetings, my camera is on, and I verbally participate with my thoughts while seeking to build consensus. 2A--I can navigate the reviewer dashboard and add evidence effectively. 2A--When I have questions, I can find support in the dashboard resources tab to answer my question, such as sentence stems, evidence guides, glossaries, and rubrics.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A--I was able to apply my knowledge of TEKS and ELPLs to our last set of indicators and use this knowledge to determine that the program did not meet criteria for 3.3a because it does not differentiate for different levels of language proficiency. 3B--I have met all deadlines and have submitted well-written evidence collection and commentary following provided guidelines and coach feedback. 3C--I base my thinking in the meaning of the rubric and evidence found in the program, not making inferences based on my teaching experience or personal opinion. 3D--I encourage my teammates to use the rubric to evaluate whether or not the program truly meets each indicator, helping ensure our students wlll have access to high-quality instructional materials.

Personal goal

My personal goal is to get better at troubleshooting issues and assisting others when they have questions.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A – Collaborated with educators from across the state during the IMRA review process, sharing insights and engaging in discussions that helped inform review decisions. 1A – Took part in calibration sessions and team meetings where I considered multiple perspectives, supported my thinking with evidence, and worked with others to reach consensus. 1A – Built positive working relationships with fellow reviewers through open communication, active participation, and a shared commitment to high-quality instructional materials. 1A – Shared classroom experiences and instructional knowledge during discussions to help inform decisions and support meaningful conversations about student learning. 1A – Respected differing viewpoints and contributed to a collaborative review environment focused on thoughtful dialogue and continuous improvement.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A – Used review criteria and scoring tools to consistently evaluate instructional materials and provide feedback that was grounded in evidence from the materials being reviewed. 2A – Maintained detailed notes and organized evidence throughout the review process to support scoring decisions and ensure all assigned reviews were completed accurately and on time.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A – Used my experience as an elementary classroom teacher to evaluate instructional materials, identify strengths and gaps, and provide feedback supported by evidence gathered throughout the review process. 3A – Reviewed materials with a focus on student engagement, rigor, accessibility, and opportunities for differentiation to determine how well they supported TEKS-based instruction and the needs of all learners.

Personal goal

Participating in the IMRA 2026 review cycle was a valuable professional learning experience. Reviewing instructional materials alongside educators from across Texas gave me a greater appreciation for the work that goes into ensuring resources are aligned to the TEKS and meet the needs of students and teachers. Throughout the process, I strengthened my ability to analyze materials, support my ratings with evidence, and engage in meaningful discussions with fellow reviewers. One of the most rewarding aspects of the review process was collaborating with other educators and learning from their perspectives and experiences. These conversations challenged my thinking and helped me become a more thoughtful reviewer. As I reflect on this experience, my goal is to continue building my knowledge of curriculum evaluation and standards alignment so that I can contribute even more effectively in future review cycles. I also hope to apply what I have learned to support instructional decisions on my campus and help ensure students have access to high-quality instructional materials.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1a- created the text message group for the team to ensure communication, created an unpacking document to know who would be reading out and in charge of which indicators, send team reminders about meeting times and agenda to foster communication, answer text messages and phone calls from team members about any questions or concerns 1b- I regularly communicate with clarity and professionalism in meetings, I regularly communicate via text messages with clarity and professionalism, and I regularly communicate providing feedback to the team on evidence collection 1c- I regularly apply feedback and reflect based on the verbal communication in meetings, based on the video trainings and coursework, and on the written feedback provided by the coaches

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2a- I consistently demonstrate expertise in tools such as how to work in the workbook, in the dashboard for alignment, and assist others by providing tips, or answering questions about process 2b- I fully and consistently demonstrate leadership and flexibility by leading meetings, creating documents to support, providing tips to improve our work quality, and stepping in since we are in transition between lead coaches

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3a- I regularly apply content expertise to evaluate content materials by referring to the IMRA manual, evidence guides, and consulting with others about grade-level content specific to phonics. 3b- I consistently meet deadlines and endure high quality by having a calendar, consulting with others about action items, being organized, and enduring in use rubric and evidence guides for every step of the process. 3c- inconsistently used unbiased evidence-driven in all discussions and evaluations by guiding my decisions based on evidence guides, rubric, time to reflect, and consulting with my team if there are questions 3d- I consistently champion high standards for Texas educators and students by ensuring alignment, staying true to the rubric, being organized, and having a critical eye to ensure high quality.

Personal goal

This has been an impacting process about how materials and implementation delivery are so key in ensuring student success.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A – Team Collaboration and Consensus Building: I consistently attend scheduled team meetings on time and come prepared to participate. During meetings, I actively listen to team members, contribute to discussions, and help move the group toward shared decisions when reviewing materials. 1A - Collaboration and Timeliness I complete assigned review tasks by the required deadlines, which supports the team’s workflow and allows time for collaboration, discussion, and consensus-building before final decisions are submitted. 1B – Professional Verbal and Written Communication: I communicate professionally in both written feedback and team discussions by using clear, respectful, and objective language. I make sure my comments are grounded in the rubric language and evidence rather than personal opinion. 1C – Continuous Learning and Growth: I actively reflect on my review process and make adjustments as I learn more about the expectations of the project. For example, I apply team feedback, calibration guidance, and consensus discussions to improve how I evaluate evidence and write review comments.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A – Technical Proficiency and Use of Review Tools: I regularly use the project review tools to access materials, document evidence, track progress, and submit review work accurately and on time. 2A / 2B – Review Tools and Engagement: I use virtual collaboration tools effectively during team meetings by accessing shared documents, following along with evidence discussions, and contributing to the team’s review process in real time. 2A / 2B – Technical Proficiency and Engagement: When issues arise with review documents, platforms, or evidence tracking, I communicate promptly and work through the issue so that my review tasks and team collaboration remain on schedule. 2B – Engagement in Virtual and In-Person Environments: I adapt to the needs of the review setting by collaborating professionally in meetings, asking questions when clarification is needed, and staying focused on team goals and deadlines.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A – Pedagogical and Content Knowledge: I regularly apply my understanding of mathematics content, TEKS, ELPS, and instructional design to evaluate whether materials meet the intent of each rubric indicator. 3B – Review Process Adherence and Timeliness: I consistently complete assigned reviews by the required deadlines and follow the established review process for documenting evidence, scoring indicators, and participating in consensus discussions. 3B / 3C – Review Process and Evidence-Based Decision-Making: During consensus discussions, I come prepared with evidence, page references, and rationale so the team can make accurate, standards-aligned decisions. 3C – Evidence-Based Thinking and Unbiased Decision-Making: I base review decisions on the evidence found in the materials rather than assumptions or personal preference. When evidence is unclear, I apply a strict interpretation of the rubric and seek clarification through team discussion. 3D – Commitment to High-Quality Instructional Materials: I demonstrate commitment to high-quality instructional materials by holding evidence to the stated criteria and considering whether the materials provide meaningful support for educators and students.

Personal goal

Reflecting on IMRA Cycle 2026, I contributed through consistent attendance, active participation, timely completion of work, professional communication, and evidence-based decision-making. I worked to apply the rubric carefully, support consensus discussions, and keep the focus on high-quality instructional materials for Texas educators and students. My personal goal is to continue improving the precision and consistency of my reviews by preparing clear evidence, using rubric language closely, asking clarifying questions when needed, and applying feedback from the team to strengthen my future work.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A- 1. I consistently build strong team rapport by fostering open and effective collaboration withing my team. This is shown through open communication and seeking to reach consensus. 2. I listen with an open mind, and opportunities to learn when working with my team. 3. I am flexible and use factual evidence to support my reasoning, however, when a teammate provides additional evidence, I accept with humility and understanding. 4. I do not hesitate to speak on behalf of my team in a collaborative way to reach consensus. 1B- 1. I share the online space and do not overtake conversation time. 2. I encourage all of my teammates to share their learning and findings. 3. I respond to all emails and other forms of communication in a timely manner. 4. I am always respectful in tone and word choice during communication with my team. 1C- 1. When asked or given the opportunity, I engage in self-assessment. 2. I routinely apply feedback to improve as a professional.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A- 1. I serve with others on my team as a go to troubleshooting expert when teammates run into technical challenges. 2. I effectively complete my workbook assignments with little to no challenges with technical issues. 3. I can successfully navigate and use review tools to complete all work. 4. I assist others in a timely manner when troubleshooting the use of review tools or other online technical issues. 2B- 1. I attend and engage during all environments. 2. I collaborate across all grade level and product teams in a positive manner. 3. I ensure that my camera is turned on so that effective communication can occur. 4. I fully and consistently respond and collaborate with others demonstrating leadership and the ability to adapt when necessary.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A- 1.During the review of the curriculum, I identified multiple instances where the content only addressed low-level recall, successfully rejecting due to misalignment with the specificity of the TEKS. 2. I frequently assist teammates to unpack the TEKS to help build understanding for all. 3B- 1. Even during the midst of personal health issues I did not miss a deadline. 2. I have never missed a deadline of any assignment. 3. I respond to all communication in a timely manner. 4. My work is completed on time and to the best of my ability. 3C- 1. I regularly apply evidence based reasoning to my work, however, there have been moments that I have needed to reach out to my coach or teammates in difficult cases for guidance. 2. This is my first IMRA review, I reach out if I need guidance on specificity of the rubric to ensure scoring aligns and reaches consensus. 3D- 1. I consistently champion high standards by refusing to compromise on material quality. 2. By providing high quality evidence statements, I am assisting my team in ensuring that a high quality review is taking place for our product. 3. I complete my own work and adhere to the specifications of the rubric to ensure a high quality review is taking place. 4. I work each week to make sure my review is consistent with all review tools and rubrics provided to assist me in my scoring.

Personal goal

I will improve my confidence and independence when applying evidence-based reasoning to edge cases by actively participating in team calibration discussions. I will continue to grow in my expertise of the rubric specifications and better myself in the writing of my evidence.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - During in person training, as an experienced reviewer, I helped those who were new to understand the structure of the process. 1A - I encouraged participation from everyone during in person ice breakers and activities. 1A - I help the team reach agreement when discussing consensus by reviewing vocabulary, unpacking notes and rubric language. 1A - We always ask each other for feedback or encourage questions. 1B - I maintain consistent communication through email and GroupMe with my reviewer coach and reporting coach. 1B - I follow our team norms in order to stay focused and collaborative. 1B - I positively provide feedback to teammates. 1B - I maintain consistent communication through GroupMe and texting with my team. 1C - I participated in a virtual office hour with my reporting coach at the beginning of the process to develop my knowledge and skills as a writer. 1C - I applied learning from in person training and async training to evidence collection in the following weeks for 1.1 and 1.2.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - I have been in communication with my reviewer coach and reporting coach in suggesting adjustments for our workbook organization and identifying issues within the tool. 2A - I have a good understanding of the tabs and resources found within the workbook and I'm able to help my teammates. 2A - I've shared best practices and provided guidance to my team to improve consistency. 2A - I've maintained proficiency in the Drive/workbook and the dashboard and adapt quickly to any changes. 2B - I participated in the in person training with Safal staff and my teammates. 2B - I took initiative to help facilitate discussions in person and now during our virtual meetings. 2B - I adapt to changing priorities and updates while staying productive. 2B - I collaborate effectively with my own team and our aligned secondary team so that we reach our goals during unpacking and concensus.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - I apply my knowledge of K-5 TEKS and ELPs to my work with IMRA. 3A - I consistently reference our Supp Math Evidence Guide to ensure accurate reviews. 3B - I meet my deadlines for reviewing before consensus meetings each week. 3B - I meet my deadlines for writing submissions in alignment with our drafting meetings each week. 3B - I collaborate, ask questions and request feedback so that sessions are productive and my work is of high quality. 3B - I utilize resources like the High Quality Descriptive Evidence Summary Exemplars to ensure that my reviews are of high quality and utilize the correct rubric language. 3C - I base all scores on the rubric, evidence guide, and what is present in the instructional materials. 3C - I engage in professional discussions focused on evidence and the rubric when perspectives are different among the team. 3D - I maintain the high expectations that are clear in the rubric and evidence guide so that the focus is always that teachers and students have access high quality instructional materials. 3D - My team and I have review discussions that emphasize quality instruction. 3D - I base all scores on the rubric, evidence guide, and what is present in the instructional materials. 3D - I advocate for high quality materials that support students success and teacher implementation.

Personal goal

IMRA 2026 is my second year as a reviewer and my first experience as a writer for the team. I continue to enjoy the experience of advocating for both teachers and students and helping find instructional materials that meet the standards. My competency area strengths are professionalism and technical skills. Being a person who is always learning, my areas of growth right now are "Pedagogical & Content Knowledge" and "Evidence-Based Thinking & Unbiased Decision-Making". I'm still growing in my knowledge of 5th grade standards and seek feedback due to minor gaps. For evidence based thinking, as a writer this year, my goal is to be clearer and more precise about my evidence thinking and how to accurately state DES for the more difficult cases.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A- I actively participate in team discussions by listening to my peers’ perspectives, sharing evidence-based reasoning, and contributing to consensus decisions. I help maintain productive team dialogue by asking clarifying questions, encouraging others to share their thinking, and keeping the conversation focused on the review criteria. I support consensus building by respectfully explaining my rationale and adjusting my thinking when stronger evidence or clearer rubric alignment is presented. I also contribute to a positive team culture by coming prepared for meetings, engaging professionally, and helping the team reach a shared understanding around scoring decisions. 1B- I communicate regularly and professionally with my team through text, phone calls, virtual conversations, and in-person discussions during our time in Dallas, and I continue to stay connected from home. I make an effort to be clear, supportive, and respectful when discussing review expectations, evidence, scoring questions, and project guidance with my teammates, especially those who are new to the process. I use texting and phone calls to help keep the team connected, ask clarifying questions, and support others when they need help thinking through a review decision. During phone and in-person conversations, I try to make sure everyone feels comfortable sharing their thinking and asking questions. I work to communicate in a way that is both professional and relational because I believe strong communication builds trust and improves the quality of the work. 1C- I use conversations with my team as opportunities to reflect on my own understanding of the rubric, review expectations, and evidence requirements. When I have questions or need clarification, I reach out to teammates, listen to their perspectives, and use that feedback to strengthen my review work. I learn from the discussions we have through text, phone calls, and in-person collaboration, especially when team members interpret evidence or scoring slightly differently. I remain open to feedback and adjust my thinking when another reviewer or team member helps me see a stronger alignment to the rubric. I continue to grow throughout the process by reflecting on what I am learning from the team and applying that learning to my evidence summaries and scoring decisions.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A- I use the review tools and platforms to complete my assigned reviews, track my progress, and document evidence to support my scoring decisions. When I have questions about the platform or review process, I reach out to teammates and coaches through text or phone conversations to problem-solve and stay on track. I continue to become more confident using the review tools by relying on available resources, team support, and project guidance to complete my work accurately. I also share reminders, clarifying information, and questions that come up during the process, especially in the beginning when we are all trying to make sure we understand what to do and where to find things. 2B- I stay engaged with my team in multiple settings, including virtual meetings, text communication, phone conversations, and in-person collaboration in Dallas. I make an effort to be present and connected whether we are working online, talking by phone, or meeting face-to-face. During our time in Dallas, I take advantage of the opportunity to build stronger connections with team members and strengthen our collaborative working relationship. I participate in team conversations by asking questions, sharing my thinking, and listening to the perspectives of others. I also continue to respond to questions my team has so I can support them as much as possible throughout the process.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A- I use my background in curriculum and instruction to evaluate materials through the lens of TEKS alignment, teacher usability, and student learning. Because this is the work I do every day, I look closely at whether the materials actually support teachers in planning and delivering strong instruction. I also bring my experience with instructional materials into team conversations while making sure I stay grounded in the rubric, the evidence requirements, and the guidance we are given. My goal is to make sure my scoring decisions are accurate, evidence-based, and reflective of both the rubric and the real instructional impact the materials can have in classrooms. 3B- I work to complete my assigned reviews on time while following the required process for scoring, evidence collection, and documentation. I try to stay ahead of deadlines because I do not like feeling rushed, and I want to make sure I have time to review the materials carefully. I use team communication to clarify questions, check my understanding, and avoid misunderstandings so that my work stays consistent with the process. I also prepare for team discussions by reviewing the materials, gathering evidence, and being ready to explain my thinking. I take the review process seriously and ask for feedback when I need it so my final work reflects the expectations of the project, the rubric, and the consensus conversations. 3C- I work to keep my scoring decisions grounded in the evidence found in the materials rather than relying only on my own opinion or preference. Since I have strong beliefs about instruction, I am intentional about going back to the rubric and asking, “What does the evidence actually show?” During team conversations, I listen to other reviewers’ perspectives and use the rubric to help determine whether the evidence supports the score, even when I do not always agree at first. I appreciate being able to text or call teammates when I need to talk through a difficult indicator or clarify whether the evidence truly meets the criteria. I remain open to changing my thinking when a teammate presents stronger evidence or a more accurate interpretation of the rubric. 3D- I approach the review process with a strong commitment to making sure Texas teachers and students have access to high-quality instructional materials. This work matters to me because it connects directly to the curriculum decisions I help make in my own district. I take the responsibility seriously because I understand how much instructional materials impact teacher planning, classroom instruction, and student learning. In my real-life role, I see how important it is for teachers to have materials that are clear, aligned, rigorous, and usable. I care about the quality of the final review and want my evidence and scoring to reflect both the expectations of the rubric and the needs of educators.

Personal goal

Since this is my third time participating in the review process but my first time serving as a writer, my goal is to continue growing in how I communicate evidence clearly, accurately, and in alignment with the rubric. I want to use my experience as a reviewer to strengthen my writing, but also remain open to feedback as I learn the expectations of this new role. My focus is to write evidence that is objective, specific, and helpful to the review process while continuing to build my confidence as a writer.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - Throughout the week, I communicate with my team members regarding evidence collection, issues with navigating curriculum or IMRA platforms, meeting topics, and writing improvements. 1B - I consistently contribute to both unpacking and consensus meetings each week, expressing my thoughts on evidence collection, overall curriculum strengths/ weaknesses, and contributing ideas that helped me to discover evidence that best represents the criteria being assessed. 1C - I have continued to improve my writing to make the job of our writing team member more efficient. I have increased the amount of detail I'm using in evidence collection and incorporated the format requested including grammar, syntax, voice, and overall writing strategies.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - I continually make sure my evidence collection is formatted properly and is uploaded in a timely manner. 2A - I created a separate Google sheet which allows me to work on evidence collection during the week and make sure it is formatted correctly before I transfer it to my individual workbook page. 2B - I have been recognized by my team members and our coach as contributing high quality evidence in our workbook. My evidence has been used in multiple examples in the written reports. 2B - I frequently ask questions for understanding and clarification in team meetings. I contribute to discussions and attend all meetings with a professional demeanor and collaborative attitude.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - Since I have been teaching for 22 years, my knowledge of TEKS, ELPS, and overall content is vast. I am able to critically evaluate materials and decipher whether materials not only address the TEKS and ELPS, but the level of rigor and consistency across grade levels and units. 3B - My evidence collection is always submitted well before the deadline. I make sure my evidence is detailed, consistent, written in the proper format, and accessible and understandable not only to experts in the field, but also to people who may not have a working knowledge of music terminology. 3C - I make sure my evidence collection is based only on what I am able to locate in the materials and not my own opinions of the product. I use my knowledge of varying music methodologies to make sure materials coincide with proven music methodologies used throughout the state of Texas, the United States, and the world. 3D - I make sure that my evidence collection and contributions to the reports which will be presented to SBOE are the best representation of the materials provided. If I can't find evidence supporting one of the standards, I say so and notate in my findings. Texas students deserve the best materials available and I make sure to do my part in ensuring that happens.

Personal goal

The IMRA Cycle 2026 has helped me to grow not only as a reviewer, but as an educator. As I critically evaluate materials at a rigorous level, I continually reflect on my own teaching practices and design ways to refine my own teaching to better serve my students. It has been an honor to be part of this process and to learn how important this process is to making sure students in Texas get the best materials available. The resources, processes, and timelines have been well-designed and make the job of the reviewer easier by allowing us to focus on content and not logistics. I very much appreciate the work that went into designing and planning for this process. My personal goal is to continue refining my writing to facilitate our writer in his responsibilities.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - I engage fully in our team meetings, often times being the first to speak when others are hesitant. 1A - I communicate regularly in our group text chat with workload updates and action items to keep us productive. 1B - I make an effort to ensure all voices are heard and to give space for them to speak in meetings. I will wait for others to speak and at times ask teammates their thoughts by name if it seems their voice is being heard less. 1C - I regularly reference the resources tab of our workbook sheet and do my best to follow all guidance.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - I have helped teammates with technical issues and navigating our materials. 2A - I have assisted our team lead with how to submit a help desk ticket in the correct location. 2B - I attend all meetings with my camera open and remain engaged. 2B - I have communicated through in-person, text, phone call, FaceTime, and video conferencing for various interactions with teammates.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - While I do have a strong math background, I have not taught the courses that I am reviewing, therefore I am learning the standards during the process. 3B - I have met the deadlines that have been given to me and assisted team members to help them meet their deadlines, also. 3C - I look for evidence to support any score that I give and am open to hearing others evidence. 3D - I believe in this process and want the best materials to be found n front of our students.

Personal goal

I would like to improve my evidence writing to best capture the specific evidence to support the score.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - My review coach, Lydia Fields, as well as my teammates, can attest to the fact that I am a strong collaborator and work effectively with the team to reach consensus. 1B - My review coach, Lydia Fields, as well as my teammates, can attest to the fact that I consistently communicate effectively, efficiently, and respectfully, whether in person or during virtual meetings. 1B - As evidenced in my Descriptive Evidence Summaries, I work hard to ensure that my written communication is professional and respectful. 1C - I am definitely an example of a person who strives to continually learn and grow. In fact, I just accepted a job within the district that I work in as a K-2 RLA curriculum coordinator. Part of the reason I'm choosing to leave the classroom to take on this new role is due to the learning opportunities that it provides.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - I have been successful with using the tools I have been given, such as the Workbook and the QRC, to effectively review, track, and report. 2B - Aside from our very initial virtual meeting, where I had some technical difficulties, I have been able to be fully present, engaged, and highly participatory in all virtual and in-person work settings.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - DES example: As evidenced on page 5 of the Level 3 Scope and Sequence Assessments-Teacher page 5, assessment items increase somewhat in complexity, including reading sound/spelling patterns in isolation, decoding the pattern in real words, and encoding the pattern by spelling the word; However, instructional assessments do not include having the child decode connected text. 3B - Aside from the week I was on vacation without my laptop and was informed that I needed to re-finalize votes, I have consistently been fully prepared and on-time or early to all meetings. 3C - While I come to meetings fully prepared and have grounded my evidence in the rubric, I do occasionally adjust my thinking after hearing my team's viewpoints on a particular matter. 3D - DES example: Pages 2-3 of the Level 3 Assessments and Instructions booklet does provide teacher guidance on when to administer the assessment, what materials are required, and how to administer the assessment; However, the instructions are lacking in clarity in order to ensure consistent and accurate administration of the assessment. For example, when assessing the words per minute rate (Step 9: Fluency in Paragraphs), the instructions say, "If a student gets stuck on a word, you can provide it for the student but count it as a mistake." Different teachers will wait different amounts of time before providing a correct word for the students, leading to inconsistent administration of the assessment. Similarly, when administering other parts of the assessment, guidance on how long the teacher should wait on a response before prompting the child to move on to the next item should be made explicit. In addition, instructions should clarify how the teacher should respond to incorrect responses (i.e., should the teacher correct the child or not?). Finally, guidance should be provided that take into account the potential frustration level of students. For example, perhaps after a child gets 2 items wrong within one section, assessment of that particular section should end and the child should be prompted to move on to the next section.

Personal goal

I have enjoyed my experience working on the IMRA Cycle 2026. It is my first year in the process, and I am grateful for the knowledge I have gained, as well as for the opportunity to help ensure that Texas teachers are receiving access to truly high-quality materials. One goal I have is to increase my knowledge of and proficiency with the review tools so that I can troubleshoot independently, as well as assist others with any technical difficulties that they may be experiencing.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A. I consistently collaborate with team members to reach shared goals. I actively participate in discussions, contribute ideas and solutions, and work to foster alignment when differing perspectives arise. My focus is on maintaining productive working relationships and supporting the team's success through open communication and cooperation. I regularly contribute to a collaborative team environment. During the review period, I worked effectively across teams, shared knowledge, supported colleagues when needed, and helped steer discussions toward consensus and practical outcomes. My contributions have helped the team achieve results while maintaining strong collaborative relationships. I consistently demonstrate teamwork and collaboration in my daily responsibilities. I participate constructively in team discussions, listen to and incorporate others' views, and contribute to decision-making processes that support our goals. I have been a reliable team member who helps foster alignment and positive working relationships. 1B.I regularly share ideas clearly and professionally, whether speaking or writing, making sure important information is understood and that conversations stay useful and open. My way of communicating helps teams work together smoothly, stay on the same page, and make good decisions. I often show strong skills in both speaking and writing in my daily work. I give clear updates, record information properly, and talk respectfully with coworkers. I try to make sure everyone feels heard and well-informed, helping create a positive and collaborative work environment. I communicate professionally and effectively with team members. During the review period, I shared information in a clear, organized, and inclusive way, helping to prevent misunderstandings and keep everyone aligned on priorities and goals. 1C.I consistently look for chances to learn and get better at my skills. I often reflect on how I’m doing, welcome feedback from coworkers and managers, and use that feedback to improve my performance and contributions. During this review period, I’ve shown a strong dedication to ongoing growth and professional development. I actively assess myself and take responsibility for my own growth. I ask for feedback to find areas where I can improve and use what I learn to strengthen my skills, expand my knowledge, and do higher quality work. This attitude has helped me adapt to new challenges and contribute more effectively to my team’s goals. I regularly seek out learning opportunities and apply what I’ve learned to my daily tasks. I’m open to constructive feedback, constantly evaluate how I’m doing, and make changes when necessary to improve results. My focus on continuous development has helped me grow personally and also supports my ability to help the team succeed.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A.I regularly troubleshoot issues with review tools and assist colleagues when they encounter technical challenges, ensuring minimal disruption to workflows. I use the online platform to input rubric scores, comments, and supporting evidence with accuracy and efficiency, helping maintain high-quality records. I ensure that all entries are complete, clearly documented, and submitted within deadlines, contributing to a smooth and organized review process. I share best practices and tips with team members to improve overall efficiency and consistency in the use of review tools. I leverage my knowledge of the tools to streamline processes, reduce errors, and support accurate, timely decision-making within the team. 2B. I actively contribute to team discussions during virtual meetings, ensuring my input is clear, concise, and relevant, while also encouraging participation from others. In in-person settings, I collaborate seamlessly with colleagues, engaging in productive conversations, sharing insights, and helping the team reach consensus on key decisions. I adapt my communication style and approach to suit the environment, whether virtual or in-person, ensuring that interactions remain professional, inclusive, and efficient.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A. I carefully evaluate instructional materials to ensure alignment with TEKS requirements and grade-level expectations, identifying strengths and potential gaps when necessary. I apply my understanding of ELPS when reviewing materials to ensure they appropriately support English learners and promote language development alongside content learning. I use my knowledge of curriculum standards and instructional practices to assess whether materials provide rigorous and meaningful learning opportunities for students. I consistently reference relevant standards and review criteria when providing feedback, ensuring that recommendations are evidence-based and aligned with established requirements. I contribute to review discussions by sharing content knowledge and clarifying standards related questions, helping promote consistency and accuracy across the review process. 3B. I consistently complete assigned reviews within established deadlines, managing my time effectively to ensure timely submission of all required work. I carefully follow the review guidelines and procedures to ensure that all evaluations are accurate, consistent, and aligned with established standards. I maintain attention to detail throughout the review process, ensuring that feedback and ratings are well-supported and meet quality expectations. I prioritize my workload to balance multiple assignments effectively, allowing me to deliver thorough and timely reviews without compromising quality. I proactively monitor my progress to ensure that all tasks are completed on schedule and contribute to the overall efficiency of the review cycle. 3C.I carefully analyze instructional materials and supporting evidence before forming judgments, ensuring that my evaluations are grounded in facts rather than personal opinion. I follow established rubrics and criteria consistently, applying the same standards to all materials to maintain fairness and reduce bias in decision-making. I provide clear, evidence-supported feedback in both written comments and discussions, explaining the rationale behind my evaluations to support transparency and understanding. I actively listen to colleagues’ perspectives during review discussions, considering all relevant evidence before contributing to consensus decisions. I regularly reflect on my own judgments and seek feedback to identify and correct any unconscious biases, ensuring that my evaluations remain objective and equitable. 3D. I carefully review materials to ensure they align with TEKS, ELPS, and grade-level expectations, identifying gaps or areas for improvement when necessary. I provide detailed, constructive feedback that helps authors and teams enhance the quality, clarity, and effectiveness of instructional content. I prioritize accuracy, rigor, and inclusivity in every review, making sure materials support all learners and provide equitable opportunities for success. I collaborate with colleagues to discuss complex content issues, share best practices, and maintain consistency in the evaluation of instructional resources. I continuously monitor updates to standards and instructional best practices to ensure that the materials I review reflect current educational expectations and research-based strategies.

Personal goal

Reflecting on my experience as an IMRA reviewer during the 2026 cycle, I feel proud of the steady, professional, and high-quality work I contributed at every stage. I recognize that I consistently worked well with others, used my technical skills effectively, and made careful, evidence-based evaluations. Whether working virtually or in person, I was able to participate actively in team discussions, provide accurate and thorough reviews, and support the development of instruction materials that meet standards. I also learned more about the TEKS, especially how they relate to teaching language arts to elementary students, and I played an active role in reviewing both Supplemental and Tier 1 resources. By working closely with teammates, communicating promptly, and staying objective, I made sure that each scoring decision was clear, supported by evidence, and aligned with TEA guidelines. I consistently used fair, evidence-based thinking and communicated clearly and professionally throughout the process. Going forward, I want to find a good balance between being thorough and being efficient, so my work continues to support fair, standards-based resources for all students while also helping me grow personally and professionally. I also want to improve my understanding of culturally responsive practices, especially in bilingual instructional materials. My ultimate goal is to keep learning and improving so I can become an even more helpful, thoughtful, and fair reviewer in future IMRA projects.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - Collaborated with review team members during IMRA cycle discussions to ensure consistent interpretation of rubric criteria and aligned scoring decisions through shared evidence analysis and clarification of expectations. 1B - Maintained clear and timely written communication through email and platform updates, ensuring accurate documentation of evidence collection and adherence to IMRA training requirements and deadlines. 1C - Actively engaged in IMRA 205 training materials and self-reflection processes to improve understanding of performance management expectations and strengthen evidence-based evaluation practices.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - Demonstrated effective use of IMRA tools, training modules, and submission platforms to complete required tasks, access rubric materials, and submit evidence within established deadlines. 2B - Actively participated in virtual training sessions and optional office hours to clarify expectations, ask questions, and deepen understanding of evidence collection and scoring processes.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - Applied understanding of instructional quality frameworks to interpret rubric descriptors and align evidence selection with expectations for instructional effectiveness and student learning outcomes. 3B - Followed all IMRA cycle timelines and submission requirements, ensuring timely completion of training, exit ticket, and self-evaluation components. 3C - Used objective, rubric-aligned evidence rather than subjective judgment when determining performance levels, ensuring consistency and fairness in evaluation decisions. 3D - Engaged with IMRA resources and rubric guidance to support accurate evaluation of instructional quality and ensure alignment with high standards for learning materials.

Personal goal

My goal for the IMRA 2026 cycle is to strengthen my ability to consistently apply rubric language when evaluating evidence and to improve precision in distinguishing between implementation quality and learning quality evidence. I also aim to enhance the clarity and specificity of my evidence summaries by incorporating more direct references to student learning outcomes and data patterns.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

I am consistently involved and participate in collaboration discussions. I ask clarifying question during consensus and maintain respectful professional rapport

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

I passed all my tracings with high scores participated in the in-person training. I use tools with ease and help others.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

I meet all deadlines and I understand TEKS to ensure accurate reviews. I champion high standards and want students and educators to receive best materials possible

Personal goal

I will meet all deadlines while creating detailed reviews.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A- I regularly collaborate with colleagues by sharing my understanding about the indicators during our consensus meetings such as asking clarifying questions and contributing my thoughts that move our work forward. I listen actively during our unpacking meetings and build on others’ thinking during the consensus meetings, helping the group reach clear decisions based on rubric language. 1B- I rated myself distinguished because I do my best to have professional and respectful communication when in discussion with my team. When communicating in writing, I make sure I am clear and open for collaboration with my peers. I listen and take suggestions from everyone, which allows me to be open to all perspectives. I take all pieces of our communication and apply it directly to my evidence collection work. If unable to attend any meetings, I communicate in writing in advance so my teammates, review coach, and IMRA personnel can stay informed. 1C-I regularly engage in self-assessment by taking time to reflect on what's working for me, and what isn't. I apply feedback that I am given to refine my work and strengthen my contributions while collecting evidence. By doing this, I ensure that I stay aligned with high-quality, collaborative work.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A- I consistently demonstrate expertise in review tools by navigating each needed resource with accuracy, efficiency, and a clear understanding of how the components work together to write high-quality evidence summaries. When issues arise, I troubleshoot systematically. I identify what the cause may be, test solutions, and take note of the steps I took to prevent future problems. I am also open to supporting my teammates by sharing tips and walking them through processes when they need guidance. 2B- I regularly engage effectively in both virtual and in person work by adjusting my communication and pacing to match the setting. In virtual spaces, I stay organized, engaged, and responsive during meetings. I try to be intentional about clarity, so discussions stay productive. In person, I support smooth teamwork through staying active and engaged in the work.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A- With 15 years of being in education and my second year as a quality reviewer, I have built a deep understanding of the TEKS and ELPS, and how that understanding works to produce high quality instructional materials. This allows me to review content with detail and confidence. I analyze materials for alignment, rigor, and developmental appropriateness, ensuring they meet state expectations. My familiarity with the verbiage of the standards helps me identify strengths, gaps, and opportunities while evaluating materials. This ensures that every review I complete is accurate, thorough, and grounded in strong instructional knowledge. 3B- I consistently meet deadlines by organizing my to-dos, pacing tasks accordingly, and prioritizing what is most important at the start of each week. I am intentional with managing my time. I break complex tasks into clear steps and attend to the necessary resources, so nothing is rushed or overlooked. I am very flexible when timelines change or new guidance is released. I adapt quickly while still maintaining accuracy with what I produce. I ensure my work is both timely and consistently aligned to TEKS, ELPS, and quality expectations. 3C- I consistently use unbiased, evidence driven thinking by grounding every evidence summary in the rubric language. I reference the TEKS and ELPS readily, and use concrete evidence found in the materials. I put aside any personal preference or assumptions. In discussions, I reference specific examples, clarify any misconceptions, and help my team return to what the evidence shows rather than what anyone thinks it “should” be. I also check my own writing for bias to ensure that I am fair, consistent, and aligned to the review framework. 3D- I regularly demonstrate a strong commitment to quality materials by applying evaluation criteria with a clear understanding of what high quality instruction requires. I carefully analyze each indicator against the rubric, ensuring that what I collect reflects the evidence that is there, rather than my own thoughts or opinions. I look for alignment, rigor, accessibility, and teacher support, making sure to watch for flags or errors.

Personal goal

I will continue strengthening my reviewer practice by regularly comparing my evidence and rationale against IMRA standards to ensure even greater consistency, accuracy, and alignment across the IMRA review cycle.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A- 1. I consistently maintain open and ongoing communication with the IMRA review team 81. Following our in-person kickoff meeting, I regularly communicate with team members through weekly text messages, conversations, and informal check-ins to discuss questions, clarify expectations, and engage in professional "sparring" around evidence and ratings. 2. I actively contribute to collaborative discussions designed to calibrate our thinking and ensure consistency in the review process. Prior to formal virtual meetings, I engage in conversations with team members to compare interpretations of criteria, discuss potential discrepancies, and work toward a shared understanding of indicators and evidence. 3. I foster positive working relationships by creating an environment where team members feel comfortable sharing differing perspectives. Through respectful dialogue and active listening, I help facilitate productive conversations that lead to stronger analyses and more accurate ratings. 4. I support consensus-building by helping the team identify common themes, reconcile differing viewpoints, and align decisions with the IMRA rubric and evidence. My contributions help ensure that our final determinations reflect collective agreement and a consistent application of review expectations. 1B- 1. Throughout the IMRA review process, I consistently communicate with team members in a professional, respectful, and solutions-oriented manner, both during formal meetings and through ongoing text and phone conversations. I strive to ensure that discussions remain focused on evidence and student outcomes rather than personal opinions. 2. During calibration and consensus-building discussions, I actively listen to differing viewpoints and ask clarifying questions to better understand team members' perspectives. This approach helps create an environment where all reviewers feel comfortable contributing their thinking. 3. I intentionally encourage participation from all team members by acknowledging their expertise and inviting additional perspectives when reviewing evidence. This helps ensure that multiple viewpoints are considered before reaching final decisions. 4. When disagreements arise regarding ratings or interpretations of criteria, I maintain a collaborative and respectful approach by referring back to rubric language, evidence, and review guidance. This supports productive dialogue and helps the team arrive at consensus while valuing each member's contributions. 1C- 1. I actively incorporate feedback from my coach, Chinwe Onwujuba, to strengthen the quality and accuracy of my reviews. For example, after receiving feedback that my evidence description clearly identified what the materials included but did not fully address what was missing, I revised my analysis to include both strengths and gaps in the materials. This adjustment ensured stronger alignment between my evidence, score summary, and final rating. 2. I engage in ongoing self-reflection by reviewing patterns in the feedback I receive and applying those lessons across future reviews. Following guidance from my coach to ensure that evidence descriptions consistently supported score summaries, I revisited additional evidence statements and made similar revisions to improve clarity, alignment, and consistency throughout my evaluations.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A- 1. I consistently utilize project management and review tools to document evidence, track progress, and monitor completion of assigned indicators throughout the IMRA review process. I maintain organized records of ratings, evidence statements, and reviewer notes to ensure accuracy and timely completion of deliverables. 2. I effectively use shared project resources, including review platforms, collaborative documents, and communication tools, to support ongoing calibration and reporting. These tools allow me to efficiently access guidance, monitor updates, collaborate with team members, and ensure my work remains aligned with project expectations and timelines. 2B- 1. I actively participated in the in-person project kickoff, collaborating with team members to establish working relationships, review expectations, and begin calibration discussions. I leveraged these interactions to build rapport and create a foundation for effective collaboration throughout the review process. 2. Following the kickoff meeting, I successfully transitioned to a virtual work environment by maintaining regular communication through meetings, text messages, collaborative documents, and project platforms. I adapted my communication and collaboration methods as needed to ensure continued engagement, timely completion of tasks, and ongoing alignment with team goals despite working remotely.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A- 1. I leverage more than 16 years of experience as an educator and instructional coach to analyze instructional materials through the lens of Texas standards. My background in curriculum implementation, lesson design, data analysis, and teacher coaching allows me to evaluate materials with a deep understanding of how standards are taught and assessed in classrooms. 2. Through my experience supporting teachers across content areas, I have developed extensive knowledge of TEKS alignment, rigor, scaffolding, and instructional best practices. This expertise enables me to accurately determine whether materials fully address the intent and complexity of the standards. 3. As a former classroom teacher and instructional coach, I understand the practical realities of implementation and can identify whether materials provide the guidance, supports, and instructional components necessary for successful classroom use while maintaining fidelity to the standards. 4. I apply my knowledge of TEKS, ELPS, assessment expectations, and instructional design to conduct thorough reviews that consider alignment, rigor, accessibility, and usability, ensuring that evaluations reflect both standards requirements and classroom application. 3B- 1. I consistently meet established review timelines and follow project processes to ensure high-quality and timely completion of assigned work. I maintain a structured workflow that allows me to effectively manage evidence collection, ratings, and score summaries while meeting project expectations. 2. When project timelines shifted during the review cycle, including a midweek adjustment to submission deadlines, I proactively communicated with project leadership regarding the impact on my established workflow and review cadence. I collaborated with the team to identify appropriate adjustments while maintaining the quality and integrity of my reviews and ensuring expectations remained clear. 3C- 1. I consistently anchor ratings and recommendations in the evidence presented within the instructional materials rather than personal preferences or prior experiences with programs. This ensures that all evaluations remain objective, fair, and aligned to IMRA criteria. 2. During calibration and team discussions, I reference specific evidence and rubric language to support my conclusions, helping maintain consistency and transparency throughout the review process. 3. When reviewing materials, I intentionally evaluate both strengths and gaps, ensuring that positive features do not overshadow missing components and that areas of concern are supported by documented evidence. This balanced approach strengthens the validity of my reviews. 4. I remain open to alternative interpretations and engage in professional dialogue with team members to examine evidence from multiple perspectives. By focusing on the evidence rather than individual opinions, I help promote accurate and equitable review outcomes. 3D- 1. I approach each review with the understanding that the final determinations will directly impact educators and students across Texas. This responsibility motivates me to conduct thorough, rigorous evaluations that prioritize instructional quality and student success. 2. I consistently advocate for materials that fully address the intent, rigor, and expectations of the TEKS, ensuring that Texas teachers have access to resources that support strong instruction and student achievement. 3. Drawing upon my experience as a classroom teacher and instructional coach, I evaluate materials through the lens of both educator usability and student outcomes, recognizing that high-quality instructional materials should support effective teaching while promoting meaningful learning experiences. 4. I carefully identify strengths, gaps, and implementation considerations within instructional materials to help ensure that Texas districts receive accurate

Personal goal

In 2026, I will continue to strengthen my impact as an IMRA reviewer by refining the quality and consistency of my evidence-based evaluations, particularly ensuring strong alignment between evidence descriptions and score summaries. I will actively contribute to calibration and consensus-building efforts, leverage my instructional expertise to support rigorous reviews, and maintain a commitment to high-quality instructional materials for Texas educators and students.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - I attend all three meetings each week and contribute to discussions. 1B - I not only give feedback to the reviewers regarding their evidence submissions, but I also seek clarification by asking questions and engage our team in discussions when the consensus is divided. Multiple voices are represented in my writing; I use a variety of evidence from all reviewers to ensure they are all an integral part of the report. 1C - I reach out to my coach for advice when reflecting on my writing. When writing I try to review other writing to make sure our evidence is aligned. Through this work I have reported discrepancies to the coach and asked for constructive feedback to ensure alignment in future work.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - I am very familiar with all the tools to use for reviewing, tracking, and reporting. I became familiar with our digital product during our in-person weekend, I engage weekly with the QRC and other documents created by our review coach, and I utilize the resources and other tabs in the workbook a few times each week to complete the writing. 2B - I attend all in-person and virtual meetings, and I contribute to discussions, even when the meetings are held at inconvenient times. Since some of the team isn't always able to make meetings at the time that was designated by our writing coach, I reach out to the other writers as needed through text and comments in the workbook.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - I am adept in understanding the TEKS. I regularly use this knowledge to analyze the product and it's lessons before consensus. I then use this knowledge again when deciding on which evidence is most deeply aligned with the TEKS and ELPS. 3B - I try each week to finish QRC voting and evidence writing before the deadlines set by our team. I needed extra time for the writing deadline once, but I have met my deadline every other week. I also am able to catch misalignment in our product's writing when I can spend more time with it. 3C - We meet with our team and another team, who is reviewing the same product for grades 3-5. Even though our individual teams may agree on things, I have noticed that both teams do not always agree. I have led discussions during these time, asking questions for clarification, reviewing glossary terms and the rubrics for grounding, and ensuring that all voices are heard and understood. 3D - When searching for evidence it is easy to form opinions on how the curriculum can be improved. However, we stay grounded in the rubric and submit suggestions to the publisher through the feedback options.

Personal goal

I have noticed that this year is more difficult for me to find time to get the work done. I appreciate the timeliness in which we started, but this is my busiest time of year at my first job. So my goal for the next few weeks is to stay focused, meet deadlines, and continue to be a valued member of the team.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A- Collaborated with team members to clarify rubric interpretations and promote consistency in scoring decisions. 1A- Maintained a positive and professional attitude during discussions, fostering a collaborative review environment. 1B-Communicated professionally and respectfully during virtual meetings, calibration sessions, and team discussions. 1B- Responded promptly to team communications and requests for clarification throughout the review process. 1C- Applied feedback received from facilitators and team members to improve review accuracy and consistency. 1C- Asked for clarification when needed and used learning opportunities to deepen knowledge of high-quality instructional materials.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A- Navigated instructional materials, digital resources, and review systems efficiently and accurately. 2A -Demonstrated the ability to troubleshoot minor technical issues independently to remain productive during the review cycle. 2B- Actively participated in virtual meetings, training sessions, and collaborative review discussions. 2B- Came prepared to meetings with completed reviews, notes, and evidence to support productive conversations. 2B- Contributed thoughtfully during calibration activities and consensus-building discussions.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A- Applied content expertise and instructional knowledge to evaluate materials for standards alignment and instructional effectiveness. 3B- Completed assigned reviews and submitted required documentation by established deadlines. 3C- Supported conclusions with documented examples from the materials under review. 3C- Applied rubric criteria consistently across all reviewed materials. 3D- Demonstrated a commitment to identifying instructional materials that support rigorous and equitable learning opportunities. 3D- Carefully reviewed resources to ensure alignment with quality standards and student needs.

Personal goal

As a first-year Quality Reviewer, my goal is to achieve a Distinguished rating by the end of July. I am committed to continuing to strengthen my review skills, deepen my understanding of the IMRA process, and consistently provide high-quality, evidence-based feedback. I also aim to continue supporting my team by sharing best practices, contributing positively to collaborative discussions, and helping maintain the high standards of excellence that promote the selection of outstanding instructional materials for our schools across Texas.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

I consistently build strong team rapport by fostering a collaborative and supportive environment where all voices are valued. Through open communication, active listening, and a willingness to work toward shared goals, I help the team reach consensus and maintain positive working relationships. I have not missed a meeting and am always present. When our coaches ask questions and/or clarification, I respond. I am committed to continuous learning and professional growth. I routinely engage in self-reflection, seek and apply feedback, and use opportunities for professional development to enhance my effectiveness. By embracing a growth mindset, I continuously refine my skills and contribute more meaningfully to my team and organization. When I have questions or thoughts about the work I am doing, I reach out to my team via text messages. Also, I listen to what each team member is saying before responding. Seek first before responding. I submit my part of the work on time.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

I leverage technology to enhance efficiency, maintain organization, and support informed decision-making, ensuring projects stay on track and stakeholders are well-informed. I am very capable of using all the tools that were given to us. I always review the publisher's suggested evidence, as well as the other tools provided, when making my decisions. When we worked in person, our team collaborated effectively and completed the work on time. I was introduced to the tools on Day One, I have consistently used them to help me write the responses that are needed weekly.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

I demonstrate deep pedagogical and content knowledge by maintaining a thorough understanding of the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS), English Language Proficiency Standards (ELPS), and instructional materials. I apply this expertise to conduct rigorous, accurate, and standards-aligned reviews for the Instructional Materials Review and Approval (IMRA) process. Through careful analysis, I ensure that instructional resources meet high-quality expectations, support student learning, and align with state requirements. My knowledge of curriculum, instruction, and assessment enables me to provide meaningful feedback and contribute to selecting effective instructional materials for diverse learners.

Personal goal

My personal goal would be to write more specific evidence weekly. I need to work on indicating where the evidence is to support my responses.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A: I consistently build strong team rapport, foster open collaboration, and help the team reach consensus by: 1. Attending all team collaboration and consensus meetings and actively participating by asking prepared and follow-up questions to support decision making. 2. Completing 100% of assigned tasks and being prepared to discuss details. 3. Initiating and configuring a shared team text site during Dallas training to enable ongoing communication until the coach establishes new protocols. 4. Taking detailed notes during unpacking and consensus meetings and posting them in the meeting agenda; notes include team updates, agreements, and next steps. 5. Proposing practical strategies for completing standards alignments during face-to-face training when computer issues occurred; these suggestions were recognized for excellence and adopted by the team. 1B: I regularly express ideas professionally, ensuring clarity and inclusivity in discussions by: 1. Including every team member’s response in reporting drafts. 2. Using a collaborative tone in both verbal and written communication. 3. Acknowledging when others’ ideas reshape my findings and adjusting accordingly. 4. Promptly communicating my mistakes or oversights to the team and following up with corrected information. For example: I informed the new reviewers that the quality review will begin after the standard alignment is completed. I gave the correct information as soon as I noticed my oversight. 1C: I consistently actively seek professional development and integrate learning into the review process by: 1. Completing 100% of required professional development trainings to ensure a practical understanding of each topic and resource. 2. Regularly requesting feedback from my coach and maintaining a feedback log to incorporate suggestions into my work. Example: “Do not include page numbers in evidence collection.” 3. Recording and using feedback from other leaders, for example by writing the complete name of the program manual as requested. 4. Reflecting consistently on my work and adjusting my habits and processes to support improvements. Example: I added an inquiry log to my Quality Review documents to capture questions and concerns before meetings. 5. Requesting additional training materials when needed, for example asking for access to Squawk and revised lesson-support videos after they were referenced in training.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A I regularly use project tools effectively for reviewing, tracking, and reporting by: 1. Taking notes in the workbook agenda during unpacking and consensus meetings. 2. Completing my first writing draft using the workbook correctly and without errors. 3. Sharing a personally created app with my quality review and writing teams to provide navigation tools and add a few customized features that structure our work. 2B. I fully and consistently collaborate in all settings, demonstrating leadership and adaptability by: 1. Proposing solutions for completing standards alignments when computer issues arise during face-to-face training and outlining how the team can work together to meet our goals; my recommendations were recognized for excellence and adopted by the team. 2. Establishing a shared team texting site during the Dallas training to facilitate ongoing correspondence through the face-to-face training and initial implementation until the coach introduces new protocols. 3. Taking detailed notes during the unpacking and consensus meeting and posting them in the meeting agenda. 4. Maintaining regular contact with team members via text after face-to-face training, both individually and as a group, to address work-related concerns. 5. Responding promptly and consistently to team suggestions, questions, and concerns before and during meetings.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A. I regularly apply content expertise to evaluate materials effectively, with minor gaps in alignment by. 1. Incorporating positive feedback from my team’s coach and administrative reviewers; one administrator wrote, “But, overall these reports were great! Evidence was aligned and organized. Thank you for your hard work!” 2. Justifying whether evidence supports each indicator to build consensus when scorers disagree. 3B: I consistently meet deadlines and ensure high-quality, standards-aligned reviews by: 1. Submitting required work within the allotted timeframe 100% of the time. 2. Following a structured schedule that reserves focused time for quality review (Monday–Wednesday), with built-in contingency days to complete tasks early when needed. 3. Staying closely connected to each assignment, using data and team resources efficiently to produce honest, thorough reviews. 4. Preparing and maintaining a draft for each review to enable streamlined editing before final submission, including checks for active voice, grammar, punctuation, and alignment with the original requirements. 3C. I regularly apply evidence-based reasoning but may need guidance only in difficult cases by: 1. Consulting team members during challenging cases. For example, when my standard-alignment votes differed from others, I explained my rationale and asked colleagues to clarify their positions. 2. Collecting and documenting location-based evidence and justifying findings both orally and in writing. 3. Developing and maintaining a structured evidence-collection system. For example, I created a document to record findings, drafted indicators to improve connections, and used a variety of resources—especially the evidence guide—to support well-founded decisions. 3D. I consistently champion high standards, ensuring Texas educators and students receive the best instructional materials by. 1. Despite the challenges of the work, I consistently process it independently and honestly making sure that I understand what I am required to do and do it with excellence. 2. Currently serving as a RLA Quality Reviewer but I also serve in other areas such as Science and Math. 3. Applying my experience as a quality reviewer in the class, noticing where my materials fall short of the high quality expected by the state and developing new resources to help close the gap for me and students on my campus. Example: I create support for BL students with class notes and activities. 4. Serving on my district’s Middle School Social Studies Team Lead Cohort to support curriculum and PLC process another way that I use my quality reviewer experience to support educators and teachers with access to highly quality materials.

Personal goal

My goals is to have a successful Quality Review year by doing the following: 1. Submitting work on time. 2. Improving the quality of my submissions by applying feedback and information from trainings. 3. Building team positivity by proactively reaching out to support colleagues individually and collectively. 4. Finishing the review period strongly.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - I initiated a spreadsheet during standards alignment with my team so that we had a system to communicate our findings once we left the training. We also used the spreadsheet during the training so we could all learn how we would work together once we left. Another team (3-5 Spanish team for the same product) saw the efficiency of our system and asked about it. We shared it from our sandbox. Additionally, I initiated a text group thread so that we could ask on the spot questions during our quality review. I respond professionally sharing my findings and also ask questions that I may have about the materials. In the text thread, I am also quick to share encouragement and appreciation for my team members. During consensus meetings, I actively participate by sharing why I scored it the way I did and use the rubric examples and non-examples to support my scoring. I also actively remind myself to wait to share to give others an opportunity to share first. When I can see another perspective, I am open in saying that I don't mind changing my answer/evidence since I can see what my teammates are saying. During our first drafting meeting, I had several clarifying questions about the QRC. Once clarified, I drafted an email to send to my team (on the spot) and shared it with the other writers so they could also send to their team. 1B - Much of my evidence is similar to 1A. I am sure to speak respectfully even when I disagree. I state my reasons always grounded in the rubric or the examples/non-examples of the evidence guide. For example, in one of the consensus meetings, many team members were not sure about whether the materials provided explicit instruction for enrichment. There were some misunderstandings so I spoke up bringing it back to the examples and non-examples and pointed out the non-examples had generic guidance. Though we were still split, the conversation remained professional and grounded in the rubric and materials. Additionally, when I saw how something could be seen with a different perspective from another team member, I was quick to share that I'm not married to my evidence and that I can change my response. This shows value of other voices from other teams. When I need clarity, I ask questions to the coaches and team members and restate my understanding to ensure that I understood. I, however understand that many times professionalism and respectful communication depends on the perception of the other members. If others feel that I have not been respectful, I would love the feedback :). 1C - I continuously look at the high-quality descriptive evidence and the writing from previous reports to ground my work. I also ask for feedback, particularly during the drafting meetings from my coaches. When the drafting coach provided feedback, I was quick to implement or go back and make any corrections.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - I use the resources page, the evidence guides, the materials, and the workbook with fidelity to complete the work. During the drafting meeting, I showed our drafting coach how to use the three lined tab in the workbook to quickly switch tabs and also showed the team how to use the "+" sign on the side of the QRC to expand and diminish the rows for the indicators we were using at the time. I have also shown my team (Team 024) many of these same tools and Shannon and I have been the point person to answer questions for our teammates because we have been a part of the review process before. When sharing, I am quick to say this was my experience two years ago but things have changed so it might look different. 2B - I have my camera on for all virtual meetings and take turns sharing about my evidence grounded in the rubric/evidence guides. My team members and I also collaborate consistently while reviewing via text thread. Often times we help each other see the evidence, but at times we may say, let's share during consensus or unpacking so that we can see the thoughts of the entire team (we are a K-8 supplemental math team). During in person trainings, I initiated a group text and a group spreadsheet for us to log our feedback, suitability flags, and new citations.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - During standards alignment my teammates and I had great discussion about the student expectations showing our deep understanding of the TEKS. We also productively discussed if an area model always needed to be length x width or if a circle could should area and be an area model for fractions. This type of discussion shows our deep understanding of the TEKS and are careful attention to alignment and review process. Our team also had a great discussion on whether our materials should get the full points since the proficiency levels are not aligned to the new ELPS rather had the old levels. Again, this discussion and careful review shows our deep attention to ensuring high quality and accuracy in alignment to TEKS and ELPS. At our school, I facilitate weekly data meetings aligned to the TEKS and consistently break down TEKS in internalization meetings as well. 3B - I have only missed 1 deadline in drafting due to a misunderstanding in needing both evidence boxes and traveling. Once I received the feedback, I had it correct within a few hours of receiving it. When traveling, I consistently communicated with the drafting coaches and my teammates and still met most deadlines. 3C - I am a strong believer in HQIM. I have worked in Title 1 schools (95% or higher) for 18 years and have seen the difference HQIM makes. When our school was considering adopting Eureka (now Bluebonnet) and Amplify Reading (now Bluebonnet), I was one of the first to push for it. I believe this process ensures that all students receive high quality materials and tier 1 instruction and closes the academic gap. I have also trained for HQIM products like Eureka in the past showing my commitment and belief and effectiveness of these materials.

Personal goal

Improve the accuracy/quality of my written evidence and pay careful attention to details while writing high quality evidence. Actively ask for feedback about my drafts so that I can be proactive about fixing any errors I may be making.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - I work collaboratively by providing my evidence in a timely manner, so that I can actively participate in team meetings with descriptive evidence to support my findings. I contribute to unpacking by analyzing the indicators. I do not feel distinguished in this category, due to the large group of reviewers and may not always be quick enough to speak before someone else does. 1B - I consistently model professional by valuing everyone's evidence findings and either adjusting my evidence to align or respectfully sharing my evidence of the indicator. I ensure that all voices are heard by listening to each person to understand their process, not just to respond with my own statement. I show respect to all members of the team by knowing their background experience of the reviewing process. I also show professionalism by giving grace to all roles, knowing that we are all continuing to learn and grow the IMRA process. 1C - I consistently seek feedback on my written work to see how to write better descriptive evidence. I actively seek out professional development by viewing the Squawk and Revise videos. I integrate learning by viewing the high quality examples for best practices to better my writing styles. I consistently use the resources provided to ensure equity with scoring the indicators, such as glossaries and protocols.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - I use and seek out the tools provided in the workbooks and reviewer folders, such as the glossaries and reviewer schedule. I still need assistance with troubleshooting the platform just due to the updates from last year. I regularly check for any incorrect tools, so that I can notify SAFAL to fix at the earliest availability. 2B - I regularly engage in virtual meetings, by understanding the settings, for example I keep my camera on during the meetings and mute when I am not speaking. Due to the large number of members in the virtual meetings, I do not display any leadership skills, but I do adapting by speaking at the appropriate time.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - Through my professional work and secondary education, I deeply understand the TEKS, ELPS, and instructional materials. I have to have a deep understanding to help train teachers in my district. The review process supports the deeper understanding by breaking down the TEKS and ELPs and showing alignment with the RBIS. I am able to take this deep knowledge and apply to understanding the indicators and analyzing the curriculum to ensure they match the level and rigor of the standard as well as grade appropriate language. 3B - I consistently meet deadlines by providing my descriptive evidence in timely manner to receive feedback that allows to update the evidence before the due dates. I ensure high-quality review by analyzing examples of high-quality descriptive evidence and apply the new learning to my writing style. I work on the descriptive evidence early to allow time for questions that I may need answer for with a appropriate wait time. 3C - I use evidence based reasoning in my evidence collection. I try to remain unbiased when collecting evidence, but sometimes that is a struggle when working in the classroom with students and I see something that may be too high level thinking for that grade level, but it is not a factual or suitability flag, just my opinion. I am able to reflect on that thinking and only apply evidence aligned statements. 3D - I consistently champion for high standards by ensuring that the work I am reviewing meets the language of the indicator and is grounded in the rubric. Students in Texas are in need of ensuring that no matter the school or teacher, they have access to high quality materials. I ensure that my evidence collection represents my factually findings and aligns to the indicators and rubric scoring. I know that educators and school districts rely on the review process to ensure integrity with all approved materials.

Personal goal

My personal goal is to better my writing style that is descriptive and written using the correct mechanics.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1. At each consensus meeting I lead discussion on the quality of the evidence. 2. I have tied the glossary discussion to help all participants have a common understanding of what the SBOE is asking on the rubric. 3. I ask clarifying questions in the consensus meeting. 4. I ask our Reviewer 5/writer id my evidence is clear or if she has any feedback to make her job easier.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

1. I have given feedback on the new workbook. 2. I have made a separate spreadsheet when we have had issues with my page on the document until it was fixed. I did not allow the technical issue effect my work. 3. I take notes during all trainings and offer them to colleagues if they are needing them. I have notes for in-person and virtual trainings.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

1. I bring up the glossary definitions in our consensus meetings to ensure we are aligned in our understanding of the rubrics. 2. I have my evidence completed with time for others to review before our meeting. 3. I review peers evidence before our meeting in order to share what I believe is quality evidence for writers. 4. I have multiple times reminded colleagues that we are using just the rubric to give feedback, not personal opinions.

Personal goal

My goal is to give high quality evidence that is aligned to the rubric, easily combined for the writer in the report, and aligned with the evidence my team provides.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

I email my team throughout the week to get their clarifications before I choose the evidence and where I am finding it. While doing so, I ask the others specific questions about the evidence and how they are applying the rubric. This allows for communication before consensus so that more evidence can be brought to the table. I also keep in communication with our writer throughout the week to ensure that my writing is where it should be in order for her to write a report. I ask if she needs specific information, if the writing style is appropriate, and if she needs more examples. This allows for less time to go back and redo reports on her part.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

I use the project tools consistently throughout the reviewing process. I use the examples and non-examples to justify my voting. I use the exemplar to adjust my writing when it is vague. The vocabulary glossary is printed, and I double-check my understanding of key words in the indicators so that I do not misinterpret any words that I may not use daily. I always read my evidence at consensus meetings so that I can justify my thinking and show that I hear others' thinking and validate it as well. In doing this, I have acknowledged that others' views, supported by evidence, outweigh my original thinking.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

I use the TEKS as my guidance in evaluating materials, and I have to go back and check grade-level alignment in areas I do not use as much daily to ensure I am applying the correct sequence for grade levels. I use my tools and evidence to apply my scoring to indicators. When it is a difficult indicator that could go several ways, I communicate with my team to see the different points of view and their evidence so that I can make a more informed decision. I always have room to grow and do not know all the answers, so asking and using others' knowledge of my weak points helps me grow as an educator who can be shared.

Personal goal

My personal goal is to take what I am using to evaluate instructional materials back to the classroom, campus, and district to educate others on how to ensure high-quality instruction is being used consistently in our district. My understanding of the materials has helped shape how I deliver materials in my lessons through a different lens.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

• During consensus meeting I can be heard asking others to share if/where they found evidence of something or providing information about what informed my vote by citing the source material location for evidence. • In looking at my written evidence I am consistently mirroring the rubric language, providing specific locations for Examples or Non-Examples. • In communicating both in writing and verbally with team members I seek to ensure clarity, often attempting to step up and provide information when our coach is inquiring while also stepping back at times to ask for thoughts from team members we have not heard from or whose written evidence includes information that I feel would benefit our conversation. • Within our team chat I have asked questions for clarification on tasks when I am unclear while also providing guidance for other team members when they seek clarity on something. • I attended a last minute team meeting with our SAFAL contact on Thursday June 4 and posed several questions that I had as well as requesting clarification in writing on some questions that team mates unable to attend had also named in an effort to help us move forward as a team.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

• Through email and text message I have been a resource for team members on several occasions about how to locate resources and properly engage with the review tools. • I feel confident in use of the rubrics and processes, noticing I have become a resource for my colleagues. Most recently one example would be consulting with a teammate about how to raise a suitability flag. • During trainings I seek to understand, taking notes and asking clarifying questions to presenters, staff or team mates as needed. • In team meetings and during in person training I have been actively engaged throughout sessions and have been consistently on time and in attendance.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

• During our June 8 consensus meeting I was able to name the specific TEKS that matched an IQ example to Technical Theatre I. This is one example of where my deep understanding of the TEKS has helped ensure a rigorous and accurate review. • Another example of where my deep understanding of the TEKS has helped ensure a rigorous and accurate review comes from pointing out the differences between world drama and world theatre, as well as ensuring we are fully engaging with and ensuring our material fully covers the specific differences between a breakout that calls for students to analyze versus evaluate. • My knowledge of the ELPS and Emerging Bilingual students has been beneficial as we engaged with implementation quality in being able to explain some of the nuances. • As someone who works in a number of different classrooms and districts within Texas I have found that my ability to ask team mates if they have considered what implementation or materials would look like in a variety of setting, with various resources or when encountering community standards that may differ from their current district provides a framing that ensures we are working to ensure we are championing the diverse needs throughout Texas.

Personal goal

To this point I have been providing clear evidence summaries and successfully providing evidence-based ratings. That said in moving forward into Learning Quality one goal I have is to seek more diverse sources of evidence to cite in an effort to help ensure our team writer has ample material to pull from for their work. In doing so I hope to continue to clarify my writing, ensure specificity in location descriptions, provide a variety of examples or non-examples within my evidence summaries and mirror the rubric language.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A – I worked to build consensus by comparing my findings with the team’s observations and adjusting when stronger evidence or rubric interpretation supported a different rating. I remained open to feedback while also advocating for ratings that were clearly supported by the materials. 1B – I communicated professionally with other reviewers throughout the IMRA process by clearly explaining my rationale, referencing specific evidence, and asking clarifying questions when needed. My verbal communication focused on supporting accurate and fair reviews of the instructional materials. 1C – I used feedback from calibration, team discussion, and rubric guidance to improve the quality of my reviews. As I moved through the process, I became more consistent in identifying strong evidence, recognizing gaps, and writing evidence statements that clearly supported the rating.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A – I used the IMRA review platform and required tools to complete assigned reviews, enter ratings, document evidence, and submit responses within the expected timelines. 2B – I participated professionally in collaborative review settings by staying focused on the task, respecting the perspectives of other reviewers, and grounding my contributions in the rubric and instructional materials.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A – I applied my instructional knowledge during the IMRA review process by evaluating whether the materials supported grade-level standards, student engagement, teacher usability, and meaningful learning opportunities.I used my understanding of curriculum, instruction, and student needs to analyze whether the materials provided appropriate supports, scaffolds, and opportunities for students to practice and demonstrate learning. 3B – I followed the IMRA review process by completing assigned reviews, using the rubric criteria, documenting evidence, and submitting ratings within the required timeline. I adhered to the expectations of the review process by participating in calibration, applying feedback, and making sure my final ratings were based on the established criteria rather than personal preference. 3C – I based my ratings on specific evidence found in the instructional materials and aligned each decision to the language of the rubric. I focused on fairness and consistency across indicators by applying the same level of scrutiny to each section of the review and avoiding assumptions about the quality of the materials without documented evidence. 3D – I looked closely at whether the materials provided meaningful instructional support, clear guidance for teachers, and appropriate learning opportunities for students, including diverse learners. Through the IMRA process, I strengthened my understanding of what high-quality instructional materials should include and how strong materials can support consistent, rigorous instruction across classrooms.

Personal goal

At this point in IMRA Cycle 2026, I feel like I am continuing to grow in my ability to review materials objectively and support my ratings with clear, rubric-aligned evidence. The process has helped me slow down, look closely at what the materials actually demonstrate, and separate personal preference from evidence-based decision-making. I have also learned from calibration and team discussions, especially when comparing evidence and working toward consensus.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A Encourage all team members throughout the IMRA process. 1A Regularly chat with my team through text messages and meetings. 1A Communicate with my coach through email and text. 1A Communicate with my writing coach through email and text. 1B I actively participate in all meetings. 1B I am open to others point of views. 1B I listen to all team members and make decisions after hearing all points of view. 1B I advicate for teachers and student needs in the IMRA process in a professioal manner. 1C I attend all required IMRA trainings. 1C I attended a reading training PD. 1C I attended a math training PD. 1C I attended a GT training PD.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A- I use all resources to collect evidence. 2A- I trouble shoot technology with my team so we can all be effective. 2B- I work well with my group in person. 2B- I work well with my group in virtual team meetings or through messaging.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A- I understand TEKS and verical alignment with the TEKS. 3A- I understand ELPS and second language acquisition. 3B- I strive to pace myself and meet all deadlines. 3B- I communicate with my coaches if I require extra time and let them know ahead of time when I will have completed my assignments. 3C- I follow Evidence Guides to guide my decisions. 3C- I seek clarification at the meetings with my team and coaches if I feel I may not have scored accurately and need more guidance. 3D- This is year 3 I am committed to IMRA process. 3D- I maintain high standards for for educators and students with the materials I review.

Personal goal

I am learning the behind the scenes process of being an IMRA writer which is helping me learn more about evidence collection.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - I actively participated in discussions for consensus by keeping our message channel open through the evidence collecting window. I collaborated with my team of reviewers to look at strength of evidence via communication channels like email and text. I shared evidence from materials to contribute to productive team discussions. 1B - I actively listened to differing perspectives during consensus discussions and responded respectively to agree or ask questions. I considered multiple viewpoints from team mates before deciding on a consensus rating. I maintained professional communication by asking clarifying questions and engaging in evidence-based discussions. I demonstrated an open mind when listening to alternative interpretations of the materials and adjusting recommendations based on those strongly supported interpretations. I contributed to a collaborative environment by building on my teams ideas and supporting consensus decisions aligned to the rubrics given. 1C - During consensus meetings I have adjusted my scoring criteria after listening to quality feedback from the team. I regularly reflect on my rating during the review process by visiting with other team members and asking clarifying questions. I incorporate feedback from consensus discussions into future reviews so that I can strengthen my justifications and refine my evidence.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - I assisted reviewers with navigating the review platform and locating relevant resources. I helped troubleshoot technical issued to ensure the review process remained productive. I shared strategies and examples for writing evidence to rubric criteria. 2B - I participated in both virtual and in-person review sessions, remaining engaged and contributing to discussions regardless of the meeting format. I adjusted to changed in schedules, meeting structures by having available technology to complete tasks effectively. I have communicated and collaborated with team members to make sure my tasks and responsibilities were completed and deadlines met.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - While reviewing instructional materials I compared lessons and assessments to the TEKS and identified areas where student tasks did not fully reflect the rigor of the standard. I documented these findings and discussed revisions with my team. 3B - I have consistently completed assigned work by established deadlines allowing time for team discussions and final consensus. I carefully verify rating with my team, look through evidence statements before submissions. I ensure that all review materials meet high quality standards and remained on schedule. 3C - I consistently reference specific evidence from the instructional materials and provide examples from the materials. When differing opinions arise, I use evidence based examples to support my published evidence in order to reach a rubric based decision. 3D - I consistently identified areas where instructional materials could better support student learning, including gaps in TEKS alignment, rigor and teacher guidance. I have documented detailed evidence and recommendations to ensure only high quality materials advanced through the review process.

Personal goal

While I consistently complete my review responsibilities and contribute through written feedback, I recognize that I do not always share my thinking during team discussions. There have been times when I had valuable observations or evidence that could have strengthened the conversation but chose to listen rather than speak. Moving forward, I want to be more intentional about contributing my expertise, asking clarifying questions, and sharing evidence from my reviews. By participating more actively I can support team calibration, promote deeper discussion, and help ensure high quality review outcomes for Texas educators and students.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

• 1A- Cross-Grade Consensus Calibration: During a cross-team consensus discussion regarding a program claim, I maintained a criteria-based analysis of visible text evidence and participated in an extended calibration discussion across grade bands. While the K–2 panel maintained its rating, my evidence-based rationale contributed to grades 3–8 reaching unanimous agreement to assign a score of 0, preventing an unsupported instructional claim from being validated. • 1A - Real-Time Group Calibration Threads: Outside of formal review sessions, I actively participate in team communication channels to discuss complex indicators, clarify rubric interpretations, and support calibration efforts. These discussions help establish common understandings prior to consensus meetings and strengthen consistency in scoring decisions. • 1A -Peer Review Alignment Network: I collaborate with members of my grade-band team to review descriptive feedback prior to final submission. This process helps ensure reporting remains rigorous, aligned to rubric expectations, and consistent across reviewers. • 1A- Objective Consensus Support: During discussions where interpretations differ, I consistently redirect conversations toward observable evidence and rubric language. By encouraging reviewers to focus on documented evidence rather than assumptions, I help facilitate respectful dialogue and accurate consensus decisions. • 1B - QRC Report Documentation: When my independent review leads me to revise an initial rating, I document the evidence and rationale behind the change directly within the QRC report. This transparency allows team members to understand the progression of my analysis and supports more efficient consensus discussions. • 1B - Real-Time Collaborative Communication: I actively participate in team communication channels to discuss complex indicators, seek clarification, and exchange evidence-based feedback. These conversations help maintain calibration and support a shared understanding of rubric expectations. • 1B - Publisher Citation Development: When identifying instructional gaps or inconsistencies, I provide detailed, professional, and evidence-based citations that clearly explain concerns and support publishers in understanding the basis for evaluation decisions. • 1C - Asynchronous Training Verification: I regularly revisit training modules, recorded sessions, and state-provided guidance materials to verify interpretations and strengthen scoring accuracy. • 1C - Historical Report Analysis: I review completed reports from previous state review cycles to deepen my understanding of rubric application and state expectations. • 1C- IMRA Glossary Utilization: I routinely consult official IMRA glossaries and resource documents to ensure consistent interpretation of instructional terminology and minimize subjective judgment.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

• 2A - Platform Resource Utilization: I regularly use IMRA glossaries, guidance documents, and platform resources to support accurate scoring and maintain consistency in evaluations. • 2A - Advanced Dashboard Documentation: I utilize dashboard documentation features and specialized input fields to record detailed evidence and publisher citations accurately. • 2A - Digital Resource Verification: I navigate multiple publisher platforms to review digital instructional materials, verify functionality, and evaluate student-facing resources. •2B - Multi-Platform Troubleshooting: When technical issues arise, I proactively communicate with support channels and coordinate issue resolution to minimize workflow disruptions. • 2B - Student-Profile Auditing: I access student-facing learning environments to review materials from a learner perspective and gather additional evidence for evaluation decisions. • 2B - Asynchronous Workflow Documentation: I utilize shared comments and documentation systems to communicate evidence, rationale, and rating changes prior to consensus discussions.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

• 3A - Exemplar Benchmarking: I analyzed approved IMRA reports, including Stemscopes Math Pulse and DreamBox Math for Texas, to refine my understanding of high-quality evidence documentation and strengthen alignment with state expectations. • 3A - Structured Evidence Analysis: Prior to reviews, I deconstruct rubric indicators into examples, non-examples, and common misconceptions to support consistent and accurate evaluation practices. •3A - Comprehensive Digital Asset Verification: I systematically review teacher-facing materials, lesson blueprints, supplemental resources, and digital assets to ensure scoring decisions are based on a complete analysis of available evidence. •3A- Cross-Platform Evidence Validation: I routinely verify instructional claims across multiple digital environments and resource locations to ensure ratings accurately reflect the full instructional experience. • 3B - Independent Review Completion: I consistently complete assigned reviews and evidence documentation within established timelines. • 3B- Consensus Meeting Preparation: I attend required meetings fully prepared with supporting evidence and completed ratings. • 3B - Workflow Management: I utilize structured organizational systems to manage large volumes of instructional materials and maintain review quality across multiple assignments. • 3C - 3-3-3 Evidence Filtering Framework: Prior to reviewing materials, I identify examples of compliant evidence, non-compliant evidence, and common false positives to strengthen objectivity and maintain consistency. • 3C -Glossary-Based Calibration: I utilize official IMRA terminology and definitions to reduce subjective interpretation and ensure accurate application of rubric criteria. • 3C -Cross-Grade Evidence Verification: During consensus discussions, I consistently redirect conversations toward observable evidence and documented instructional content when differing interpretations emerge. • 3C -Training-Based Validation: I regularly reference state guidance and training resources when evaluating complex indicators to ensure decisions remain aligned to official expectations. • 3D - During a cross-grade consensus discussion, I identified that the instructional materials did not provide sufficient evidence to support a publisher’s claim. My analysis helped reviewers across grades 3–8 reach agreement while upholding the rigor and integrity of the evaluation process. • 3D -Detailed Publisher Feedback: I provide clear, evidence-based citations that accurately document instructional strengths and areas for improvement, supporting transparency and continuous improvement. • 3D -Student Experience Verification: I review student-facing resources and instructional pathways to ensure evaluation decisions reflect the actual learner experience. • 3D -Independent Evidence Confirmation: I verify publisher claims through direct review of instructional materials rather than relying solely on summaries or stated intentions, ensuring ratings are supported by documented evidence.

Personal goal

Through my work as a reviewer, I have strengthened my ability to develop detailed evidence summaries and construct precise citations that clearly connect findings to rubric criteria. This experience has reinforced the importance of evidentiary rigor and increased my interest in understanding the compliance requirements and procedural frameworks associated with publisher appeals. In the absence of formal guidance on the appeals phase, I have focused on ensuring that my evaluations are thoroughly documented, objective, and supported by clear evidence. These efforts have enhanced the defensibility of my review decisions and provided a strong foundation for future opportunities to participate in appeals-response work and gain a deeper understanding of the rebuttal process.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A & 1B - I frequently provide input during group meetings to contribute to the team discussions. 1A & 1B - I am intentional in my wording to clarify my thought processes while welcoming alternative points of view. 1C - I integrate feedback into my process as we receive it. For example, when our reporting coach gave us guidance on using active vs. passive voice, being grade level specific, and utilizing the math reports from the previous year, I immediately began applying this to my work.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A & 2B - I am adept at using technology and provide support to my team members when they need help navigating tools or locating resources. 2B - I frequently provide input during group meetings to contribute to the team discussions.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3B - I consistently meet all deadlines. 3C & 3D - When I have trouble finding sufficient evidence for a particular indicator, I visit the tabs of team members to seek other examples to ensure that I have thoroughly reviewed any available opportunities to give credit to the publisher. 3A, 3C, & 3D - I have a comprehensive understanding of TEKS & ELPs. Additionally, I use the TEKS guide to ensure that materials are aligned to the state’s guidance on state standards (not just my interpretation).

Personal goal

I will continue to utilize feedback from both review & reporting coaches, as well as teammates, to reflect and improve. This will result in a high-quality review and yield the best results for Texas students and teachers.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A- Our core team has an open line of communication where we consistently ask for clarification and provide feedback to each other to ensure that we are all on the same page. 1A & 1B- I am one of only a handful of members on the larger team who actively participates in the consensus meetings by providing reasoning for the scores I gave when consensus is not met. 1B- When communicating during consensus meetings, I consistently use language from the rubric to ensure clarity and professionalism during decision making. 1B- I listen to all evidence during consensus meetings and have changed my vote when others have made clear and compelling arguments. 1C- I have read all comments in the workbook, made corrections, and learned from the feedback to ensure that it was done correctly the next time.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A- I regularly use tools, like the rubric and the glossary, to collect appropriate evidence. 2B- During the in-person training, our team worked together effectively to troubleshoot through internet issues and still managed to nearly complete 2 out of 3 grade levels citation voting. 2B- I have attended all virtual meetings and actively engaged in all of them.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A- I have participated in the RBIS training 3 times for my full-time job as a coach and have a clear understanding of what components are needed to make effective and rigorous materials. 3A- My full-time job as a math coach requires that I have a understanding of the TEKS for all of my assigned grade levels at a level that is deeper than that of a classroom teacher. 3B- I have adhered to the review deadlines and have only required minor adjustments after deadlines. 3C & 3D- I have consistently referred back to rubric language and glossary definitions to ensure that my evidence and decisions are unbiased and evidence-driven.

Personal goal

There has been a strong learning curve during the beginning of the IMRA Cycle 2026 as the process has changed so even those with prior experience are unsure of procedures for this year. Through this we have worked as a team and made timely corrections as we receive direction. As I move forward with the review cycle I would like to work on my writing skills and ensuring that my evidence is written in a clear and organized manner.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - I participate in all unpacking and consensus meetings, actively engaging (listening and/or speaking) in discussions to resolve differing viewpoints and align rubric scores with the panel. I contribute to a balanced team environment by listening objectively to differing perspectives and helping synthesize viewpoints so our group can reach a timely consensus. I collaborate across review teams to share insights and ensure standardized, consistent evaluation practices. Before each session, I prepare by completing all individual material reviews ahead of schedule, ensuring highly productive, timely consensus meetings. 1B- I maintain professional, respectful, and efficient communication across various project channels, including email, virtual meetings, texts, Google forms, and IMRA platform feedback. By providing clear, objective, and evidence-based comments within the review platform (Workbook), my written feedback aligns with rubric expectations and TEKS, supporting clarity and consistency in the review process. As a team, we all contribute to discussions and ensure all viewpoints are valued. When scores differ, we have a process where team members take turns presenting evidence to reach a collaborative consensus. We have constructive feedback practices that focus on and anchor each evaluation on material performance against the criteria rather than on subjective preferences. 1C - I attend all mandatory face-to-face training sessions, webinars, and calibration exercises to stay fully aligned with IMRA evaluation standards. I apply feedback from the team coach to ongoing material reviews, thereby improving evaluation precision. I consistently review updated guidance documents and rubrics independently to maintain an accurate, up-to-date understanding of the review criteria. Seeking timely clarification on rubric indicators, I am ensuring accuracy and consistency across assigned evaluations. Throughout the IMRA cycle, I engage in professional learning opportunities and apply my new understandings to strengthen the quality and consistency of my reviews.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A- I regularly utilize the designated review platforms and digital tools effectively to ensure a smooth, organized evaluation workflow. By maintaining accurate documentation throughout the cycle, I ensure that all data entry and final submission processes adhere to IMRA timelines. Also, I can navigate digital evidence collection systems effectively to log, track, and retrieve required instructional materials and data. 2B- I participate in all virtual meetings, using video, chat, and the microphone to engage consistently in group discussions. By maintaining attendance and engagement during both virtual and in-person training sessions, I ensure alignment with IMRA project goals. I always contribute during collaborative sessions by listening to peer perspectives and offering insights and analysis on assigned instructional materials. I have and will continue to adapt positively to sudden schedule adjustments and process changes to maintain steady productivity.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A- I demonstrate a comprehensive and deep understanding of TEKS, ELPS, and research-based instructional design principles throughout the evaluation of the material. By applying subject-matter expertise effectively during evaluations, I aim to ensure that all instructional concepts are pedagogically sound. Also, by identifying specific pedagogical strengths and alignment gaps within instructional materials, I clearly document my findings for publisher feedback. I use specific, textual evidence to justify all standards-alignment decisions and rubric scoring. By conducting thorough reviews, I ensure that the instructional materials evaluated reflect the appropriate level of cognitive rigor required by Texas state standards. 3B- I have met all established deadlines, ensuring that personal review aligns efficiently with the master IMRA schedule. I have submitted comprehensive, finalized reviews with no missing data fields, ensuring each evaluation input was complete. By maintaining a high level of attention to detail throughout the IMRA cycle thus far, I have verified rubric markers and cross-referenced material requirements to ensure highly accurate evaluations. I respond promptly and professionally to revision requests and feedback inquiries from the team lead, resolving discrepancies within the requested time frame. 3C-Grounding all evaluations in rubric language and applying the criteria consistently across instructional materials to maintain objective standards, my thinking and decision-making are evidence-based and unbiased. I can separate my personal preferences from the evaluation process, focusing solely on how effectively the materials fulfilled the specified state requirements; therefore, I support final evaluation conclusions with clear, verifiable examples extracted directly from the text, ensuring a transparent rationale for each score. During consensus meetings, I participate objectively, relying on factual evidence rather than subjective opinions to help our team resolve scoring differences. 3D-I will always advocate for rigorous, standards-aligned instructional materials, ensuring that all evaluated curricula meet the high benchmarks required for Texas classrooms. Each evaluation is focused on student outcomes and instructional impact, ultimately prioritizing materials that offer clear scaffolding and deep conceptual learning opportunities. By carefully reviewing assigned materials, I continually strive to ensure equitable learning opportunities that verify both demographic accessibility and strict alignment with core academic standards. 3D- To create effective support, I will continue to demonstrate a commitment to improving instructional quality by evaluating teacher guides and student resources to ensure classroom success. By contributing evidence-based recommendations and decisions during team meetings, I continually strive to ensure high-quality educational materials for all.

Personal goal

My goal for this IMRA cycle is to use my understanding of the TEKS, ELPS, and evidence-based evaluation to support my team in reviewing instructional materials for Texas classrooms. I want to contribute to our consensus meetings by offering clear, objective evidence to help us resolve differing viewpoints efficiently. To do this, I will complete my individual reviews ahead of schedule, so I am fully prepared for our team discussions. I plan to work with the team coach and use her feedback to sharpen the clarity of my written comments for publishers, ensuring my evaluations are accurate and fully aligned with state standards.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

• 1A- Cross-Grade Consensus Calibration: During a cross-team consensus discussion regarding a program claim, I maintained a criteria-based analysis of visible text evidence and participated in an extended calibration discussion across grade bands. While the K–2 panel maintained its rating, my evidence-based rationale contributed to grades 3–8 reaching unanimous agreement to assign a score of 0, preventing an unsupported instructional claim from being validated. • 1A - Real-Time Group Calibration Threads: Outside of formal review sessions, I actively participate in team communication channels to discuss complex indicators, clarify rubric interpretations, and support calibration efforts. These discussions help establish common understandings prior to consensus meetings and strengthen consistency in scoring decisions. • 1A -Peer Review Alignment Network: I collaborate with members of my grade-band team to review descriptive feedback prior to final submission. This process helps ensure reporting remains rigorous, aligned to rubric expectations, and consistent across reviewers. • 1A- Objective Consensus Support: During discussions where interpretations differ, I consistently redirect conversations toward observable evidence and rubric language. By encouraging reviewers to focus on documented evidence rather than assumptions, I help facilitate respectful dialogue and accurate consensus decisions. • 1B - QRC Report Documentation: When my independent review leads me to revise an initial rating, I document the evidence and rationale behind the change directly within the QRC report. This transparency allows team members to understand the progression of my analysis and supports more efficient consensus discussions. • 1B - Real-Time Collaborative Communication: I actively participate in team communication channels to discuss complex indicators, seek clarification, and exchange evidence-based feedback. These conversations help maintain calibration and support a shared understanding of rubric expectations. • 1B - Publisher Citation Development: When identifying instructional gaps or inconsistencies, I provide detailed, professional, and evidence-based citations that clearly explain concerns and support publishers in understanding the basis for evaluation decisions. • 1C - Asynchronous Training Verification: I regularly revisit training modules, recorded sessions, and state-provided guidance materials to verify interpretations and strengthen scoring accuracy. • 1C - Historical Report Analysis: I review completed reports from previous state review cycles to deepen my understanding of rubric application and state expectations. • 1C- IMRA Glossary Utilization: I routinely consult official IMRA glossaries and resource documents to ensure consistent interpretation of instructional terminology and minimize subjective judgment.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

• 2A - Platform Resource Utilization: I regularly use IMRA glossaries, guidance documents, and platform resources to support accurate scoring and maintain consistency in evaluations. • 2A - Advanced Dashboard Documentation: I utilize dashboard documentation features and specialized input fields to record detailed evidence and publisher citations accurately. • 2A - Digital Resource Verification: I navigate multiple publisher platforms to review digital instructional materials, verify functionality, and evaluate student-facing resources. •2B - Multi-Platform Troubleshooting: When technical issues arise, I proactively communicate with support channels and coordinate issue resolution to minimize workflow disruptions. • 2B - Student-Profile Auditing: I access student-facing learning environments to review materials from a learner perspective and gather additional evidence for evaluation decisions. • 2B - Asynchronous Workflow Documentation: I utilize shared comments and documentation systems to communicate evidence, rationale, and rating changes prior to consensus discussions.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

• 3A - Exemplar Benchmarking: I analyzed approved IMRA reports, including Stemscopes Math Pulse and DreamBox Math for Texas, to refine my understanding of high-quality evidence documentation and strengthen alignment with state expectations. • 3A - Structured Evidence Analysis: Prior to reviews, I deconstruct rubric indicators into examples, non-examples, and common misconceptions to support consistent and accurate evaluation practices. •3A - Comprehensive Digital Asset Verification: I systematically review teacher-facing materials, lesson blueprints, supplemental resources, and digital assets to ensure scoring decisions are based on a complete analysis of available evidence. •3A- Cross-Platform Evidence Validation: I routinely verify instructional claims across multiple digital environments and resource locations to ensure ratings accurately reflect the full instructional experience. • 3B - Independent Review Completion: I consistently complete assigned reviews and evidence documentation within established timelines. • 3B- Consensus Meeting Preparation: I attend required meetings fully prepared with supporting evidence and completed ratings. • 3B - Workflow Management: I utilize structured organizational systems to manage large volumes of instructional materials and maintain review quality across multiple assignments. • 3C - 3-3-3 Evidence Filtering Framework: Prior to reviewing materials, I identify examples of compliant evidence, non-compliant evidence, and common false positives to strengthen objectivity and maintain consistency. • 3C -Glossary-Based Calibration: I utilize official IMRA terminology and definitions to reduce subjective interpretation and ensure accurate application of rubric criteria. • 3C -Cross-Grade Evidence Verification: During consensus discussions, I consistently redirect conversations toward observable evidence and documented instructional content when differing interpretations emerge. • 3C -Training-Based Validation: I regularly reference state guidance and training resources when evaluating complex indicators to ensure decisions remain aligned to official expectations. • 3D - During a cross-grade consensus discussion, I identified that the instructional materials did not provide sufficient evidence to support a publisher’s claim. My analysis helped reviewers across grades 3–8 reach agreement while upholding the rigor and integrity of the evaluation process. • 3D -Detailed Publisher Feedback: I provide clear, evidence-based citations that accurately document instructional strengths and areas for improvement, supporting transparency and continuous improvement. • 3D -Student Experience Verification: I review student-facing resources and instructional pathways to ensure evaluation decisions reflect the actual learner experience. • 3D -Independent Evidence Confirmation: I verify publisher claims through direct review of instructional materials rather than relying solely on summaries or stated intentions, ensuring ratings are supported by documented evidence.

Personal goal

Through my work as a reviewer, I have strengthened my ability to develop detailed evidence summaries and construct precise citations that clearly connect findings to rubric criteria. This experience has reinforced the importance of evidentiary rigor and increased my interest in understanding the compliance requirements and procedural frameworks associated with publisher appeals. In the absence of formal guidance on the appeals phase, I have focused on ensuring that my evaluations are thoroughly documented, objective, and supported by clear evidence. These efforts have enhanced the defensibility of my review decisions and provided a strong foundation for future opportunities to participate in appeals-response work and gain a deeper understanding of the rebuttal process.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

• 1A- Cross-Grade Consensus Calibration: During a cross-team consensus discussion regarding a program claim, I maintained a criteria-based analysis of visible text evidence and participated in an extended calibration discussion across grade bands. While the K–2 panel maintained its rating, my evidence-based rationale contributed to grades 3–8 reaching unanimous agreement to assign a score of 0, preventing an unsupported instructional claim from being validated. • 1A - Real-Time Group Calibration Threads: Outside of formal review sessions, I actively participate in team communication channels to discuss complex indicators, clarify rubric interpretations, and support calibration efforts. These discussions help establish common understandings prior to consensus meetings and strengthen consistency in scoring decisions. • 1A -Peer Review Alignment Network: I collaborate with members of my grade-band team to review descriptive feedback prior to final submission. This process helps ensure reporting remains rigorous, aligned to rubric expectations, and consistent across reviewers. • 1A- Objective Consensus Support: During discussions where interpretations differ, I consistently redirect conversations toward observable evidence and rubric language. By encouraging reviewers to focus on documented evidence rather than assumptions, I help facilitate respectful dialogue and accurate consensus decisions. • 1B - QRC Report Documentation: When my independent review leads me to revise an initial rating, I document the evidence and rationale behind the change directly within the QRC report. This transparency allows team members to understand the progression of my analysis and supports more efficient consensus discussions. • 1B - Real-Time Collaborative Communication: I actively participate in team communication channels to discuss complex indicators, seek clarification, and exchange evidence-based feedback. These conversations help maintain calibration and support a shared understanding of rubric expectations. • 1B - Publisher Citation Development: When identifying instructional gaps or inconsistencies, I provide detailed, professional, and evidence-based citations that clearly explain concerns and support publishers in understanding the basis for evaluation decisions. • 1C - Asynchronous Training Verification: I regularly revisit training modules, recorded sessions, and state-provided guidance materials to verify interpretations and strengthen scoring accuracy. • 1C - Historical Report Analysis: I review completed reports from previous state review cycles to deepen my understanding of rubric application and state expectations. • 1C- IMRA Glossary Utilization: I routinely consult official IMRA glossaries and resource documents to ensure consistent interpretation of instructional terminology and minimize subjective judgment.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

• 2A - Platform Resource Utilization: I regularly use IMRA glossaries, guidance documents, and platform resources to support accurate scoring and maintain consistency in evaluations. • 2A - Advanced Dashboard Documentation: I utilize dashboard documentation features and specialized input fields to record detailed evidence and publisher citations accurately. • 2A - Digital Resource Verification: I navigate multiple publisher platforms to review digital instructional materials, verify functionality, and evaluate student-facing resources. •2B - Multi-Platform Troubleshooting: When technical issues arise, I proactively communicate with support channels and coordinate issue resolution to minimize workflow disruptions. • 2B - Student-Profile Auditing: I access student-facing learning environments to review materials from a learner perspective and gather additional evidence for evaluation decisions. • 2B - Asynchronous Workflow Documentation: I utilize shared comments and documentation systems to communicate evidence, rationale, and rating changes prior to consensus discussions.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

• 3A - Exemplar Benchmarking: I analyzed approved IMRA reports, including Stemscopes Math Pulse and DreamBox Math for Texas, to refine my understanding of high-quality evidence documentation and strengthen alignment with state expectations. • 3A - Structured Evidence Analysis: Prior to reviews, I deconstruct rubric indicators into examples, non-examples, and common misconceptions to support consistent and accurate evaluation practices. •3A - Comprehensive Digital Asset Verification: I systematically review teacher-facing materials, lesson blueprints, supplemental resources, and digital assets to ensure scoring decisions are based on a complete analysis of available evidence. •3A- Cross-Platform Evidence Validation: I routinely verify instructional claims across multiple digital environments and resource locations to ensure ratings accurately reflect the full instructional experience. • 3B - Independent Review Completion: I consistently complete assigned reviews and evidence documentation within established timelines. • 3B- Consensus Meeting Preparation: I attend required meetings fully prepared with supporting evidence and completed ratings. • 3B - Workflow Management: I utilize structured organizational systems to manage large volumes of instructional materials and maintain review quality across multiple assignments. • 3C - 3-3-3 Evidence Filtering Framework: Prior to reviewing materials, I identify examples of compliant evidence, non-compliant evidence, and common false positives to strengthen objectivity and maintain consistency. • 3C -Glossary-Based Calibration: I utilize official IMRA terminology and definitions to reduce subjective interpretation and ensure accurate application of rubric criteria. • 3C -Cross-Grade Evidence Verification: During consensus discussions, I consistently redirect conversations toward observable evidence and documented instructional content when differing interpretations emerge. • 3C -Training-Based Validation: I regularly reference state guidance and training resources when evaluating complex indicators to ensure decisions remain aligned to official expectations. • 3D - During a cross-grade consensus discussion, I identified that the instructional materials did not provide sufficient evidence to support a publisher’s claim. My analysis helped reviewers across grades 3–8 reach agreement while upholding the rigor and integrity of the evaluation process. • 3D -Detailed Publisher Feedback: I provide clear, evidence-based citations that accurately document instructional strengths and areas for improvement, supporting transparency and continuous improvement. • 3D -Student Experience Verification: I review student-facing resources and instructional pathways to ensure evaluation decisions reflect the actual learner experience. • 3D -Independent Evidence Confirmation: I verify publisher claims through direct review of instructional materials rather than relying solely on summaries or stated intentions, ensuring ratings are supported by documented evidence.

Personal goal

Through my work as a reviewer, I have strengthened my ability to develop detailed evidence summaries and construct precise citations that clearly connect findings to rubric criteria. This experience has reinforced the importance of evidentiary rigor and increased my interest in understanding the compliance requirements and procedural frameworks associated with publisher appeals. In the absence of formal guidance on the appeals phase, I have focused on ensuring that my evaluations are thoroughly documented, objective, and supported by clear evidence. These efforts have enhanced the defensibility of my review decisions and provided a strong foundation for future opportunities to participate in appeals-response work and gain a deeper understanding of the rebuttal process.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A- I listen to other and share my thinking as well. I offered to go back and add more concrete examples of evidence to make the job of our writer more manageable. 1A- I am timely in collecting evidence and offered support to new reviewers as they began evidence collection. I also encouraged them to feel free to look at my evidence as they began to collect their own evidence. 1b- I appreciate hearing the thinking of my teammates. When I notice that my scores are not adjacent to my teammates, I reach out to ask their thinking and I share my thinking. This allows us to align our evidence before a consensus meeting. It also allows me me to dig deeper to make sure ai have looked at everything allowing for a fair review. 1c- I try to regularly self-assess. By doing so, it allows me to continue to grow. I accept feedback from my peers and supervisors graciously to determine what I can do to correct areas that need correction.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A- I appreciate the tools provided to assist in the review process. The glossary is very helpful. The definitions give clarity as to what I am looking for. Additionally, the Writing Style Guidelines and Writing Best Practices have been very useful to align my writing of evidence. 2B- I engage in all in-person and virtual work. For example I was out of town for an unpacking and consensus meeting. I made sure I built in a break of my vacation activities to have a place to join and participate in the unpacking meeting. Since I would be on the road driving home for the consensus meeting, I made sure to have access to a hotspot so I could actively participate in the consensus meeting.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A- As a classroom teacher, it was my responsibility to make sure I understood the TEKS, ELPS, and instructional materials to ensure I was providing the best instruction possible for the children I served. When I became an instructional coach, it was imperative that I deeply understood TEKS, ELPS and instructional materials to adequately support the teachers I served. I apply my knowledge to reviews to ensure accurate reviews. 3B- I consistently meet deadlines. I schedule work time each day and honor the time I have set aside to work on the review. My work is complete by mid week. I take time to make sure I understand what I am looking for and I am purposeful when looking for good evidence. 3C- I regularly apply evidence-based reasoning in my work, however I am not afraid to ask for support if I get stuck or need clarification. I find that the support of others can often help me get my thinking back on track. 3D- The main reason I love being a part off these reviews is because I firmly believe that Texas educators and students deserve to have the best materials in their hands. I believe in the work of this process and I am very proud to be an active part of this process.

Personal goal

I am committed to go beyond the links provided by the publisher to search for evidence. I am also committed to staying focused on the Indicator Guidance statement ensuring the most accurate review of the materials.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A-Team Collaboration and Consensus Building-I have consistently participated in reviewer discussions and collaborative review activities throughout the evaluation process to this point. I have contributed ideas, asked questions, and shared observations during the review conversations to support the group. I have worked with my review team members to interpret the indicators and identifies appropriate evidence. 1B-Professional Verbal and Written Communication-I have worked to prepare clear and concise evidence summaries reflecting a professional tone with language aligned to IMRA expectations. I have communicated my findings using evidence based language to reflect the scoring criteria and expectations for review. 1C-Continuous Learning and Growth-I have actively studied the IMRA Evidence Guide, scoring criteria, the look-fors, examples, and non-examples to strengthen understanding of review expectations and ensure evidence summaries aligned to the rubric requirements. When I have questioned anything I have sought clarification and feedback throughout the review process and continuously refined evidence summaries to improve alignment between instructional materials and indicator language. I have reviewed publisher-provided evidence, cross-referenced it with the Evidence Guide, and adjusted documentation when stronger or more appropriate evidence was identified. I have worked to develop a consistent process for evaluating adaptive instructional materials by learning how platform features, implementation guides, dashboards, assessments, and technical specifications align to IMRA indicators.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A-I have successfully navigated the Literacy Path platform, Resource Library, Implementation Guide, Technical Specifications, and dashboard tools to locate evidence. I have used review documents and supporting resources to organize findings and document evidence for multiple indicators. 2B-I have participated in required review meetings, training sessions, and collaborative review activities. I have adapted to virtual review structures and independently completed assigned review responsibilities. Additionally, I have engaged in review discussions and remained responsive to feedback and questions throughout the process.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A-I have applied knowledge of TEKS-aligned instruction, intervention, differentiation, assessment, and progress monitoring to evaluate supplemental literacy materials against IMRA quality standards. I continue to analyze evidence related to adaptive learning pathways, diagnostic assessments, formative assessments, progress monitoring, and instructional supports to determine alignment with review indicators. Additionally, I have Evaluated materials for alignment to literacy best practices, including targeted remediation, acceleration, small-group instruction, standards mastery, and data-driven instructional decision-making and used expertise in curriculum implementation and instructional planning to identify evidence demonstrating support for educators, students, and families. 3B-I have consistently used approved reviewer resources, including the Evidence Guide, Implementation Guide, Technical Specifications, and platform tools, to verify evidence and support review decisions and completed assigned indicators and evidence summaries in accordance with the IMRA review process, ensuring documentation aligned to the scoring criteria and evidence requirements. Additionally, I have Met project timelines and review deadlines while completing thorough evaluations of assigned instructional materials. 3C-During this process, I have evaluated all materials using published IMRA criteria and evidence requirements rather than personal preference or familiarity with instructional programs, verified evidence locations within implementation guides, technical specifications, and platform resources before documenting findings, used rubric language and evidence guide look-fors to support decisions and ensure conclusions were grounded in documented program features and Maintained an objective focus on whether evidence met indicator requirements rather than whether the reviewer personally preferred the instructional approach. 3D-During the review process I have verified that materials included supports for diverse learners, targeted intervention, and opportunities for student growth, consistently sought strong evidence demonstrating alignment between program features and Texas instructional standards, analyzed evidence related to assessment, intervention, differentiation, progress monitoring, and family engagement to ensure materials met quality expectations, and Maintained a focus on identifying evidence that would support successful implementation and positive outcomes for Texas educators and students.

Personal goal

Participating in IMRA Cycle 2026 has been a valuable professional learning experience that strengthened my understanding of the instructional materials review process and the level of rigor required to evaluate resources for Texas classrooms. As a first-time reviewer, I gained a deeper appreciation for the importance of grounding decisions in evidence, aligning findings to the review criteria, and carefully examining how instructional materials support both teachers and students. My work as an instructional specialist has given me extensive experience supporting curriculum implementation, assessment practices, instructional planning, and teacher development across multiple campuses. Serving as a reviewer allowed me to apply that perspective in a new way by examining materials through the lens of quality, usability, and alignment. Throughout the process, I became more confident in analyzing evidence, interpreting rubric expectations, and identifying the instructional supports that help educators effectively meet student needs. This experience also reinforced the importance of high-quality instructional materials and the impact they can have on teaching and learning when they are implemented with fidelity. Reviewing materials deepened my understanding of the connections between standards alignment, assessment design, progress monitoring, intervention, and educator support. Moving forward, my goal is to continue growing my expertise in the instructional materials review process and to further strengthen my ability to evaluate complex programs efficiently and objectively. If given the opportunity to participate in future review cycles, I would welcome the chance to continue learning from experienced reviewers, contribute to collaborative discussions, and build upon the knowledge and skills I gained during this cycle. Regardless of future opportunities, I will continue applying what I have learned through IMRA to support teachers and students in my district and to advocate for high-quality instructional materials that positively impact student achievement.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A During the unpacking and consensus meetings I contribute my ideas and and encourage team mates to develop their thoughts and support their findings. 1B. In our team meetings when I have a difference with my team, I focus on the evidence found in the program(s) and not on emotions. Keeping all discussion to the evidence found. If a team mate finds a better case then I do not have a problem changing my input. 1C. Because this is my first time to participate in the IMRA process and I am constantly reviewing what I wrote and what I found. I want my team mates to be able to understand my work and wording. I am a math person and writing does not come easily for me therefore I have to work harder at it.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A I am rather tech savvy. The problem comes with so many different documents and abbreviations. Being my first year during the on-boarding I was so lost so much of the time. I am a visual and doer learner, therefore I need a list of step by step what to do and where to go. During this process I am building those lists to improve my progress and abilities. 2B. I do engage regularly in our virtual meetings. I also engaged a great deal during our face-to-face meetings. I am not as good as others in the engagement in the Group Me group and have a tendency to get lost in the communications. I am working on my participation and making sure I have my ducks in a row.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A I know the standards and make it a habit to unpack the standard by the verb, noun, and specificity to ensure I know what the students have to know and show. 3B I try very hard to meet deadlines and be focused on the work and the materials. I have had to have some support in the adventure due to the fact of my brother passing. My mind was not focused and I did miss a deadline. 3C If the evidence is there I will agree, if the evidence is not there, then I will listen to others in case they found it. I am willing to change my vote based on what my team mates have found. 3D It is imperative for our teachers and students to receive the best materials available. The future of Texas is in the classroom and we have to ensure our students are able to compete on the national and international level. The world is getting smaller and our students must be able to be successful.

Personal goal

The IMRA Cycle is very challenging and deep. Making sure the materials are there for all and all students have the opportunity to learn and grow. It is still somewhat confusing because there is no direct path or method as to what to do where and when. If we could have a list of steps as to what to do when. The directions given at the face-to-face were fast and furious and confusing when they really did not have to be. My goal is to research and write my evidence in more focused and direct therefore my writer of our reports has an easier time completing her portion of the job.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A-Facilitated collaborative team discussions that encouraged all members to contribute ideas, resulting in shared decision-making and stronger team cohesion. Proactively built positive working relationships across departments, creating an environment of trust, mutual respect, and effective collaboration. Guided teams through differing perspectives by identifying common goals and helping stakeholders reach consensus on priorities and action plans. Supported colleagues by sharing resources, expertise, and problem-solving strategies, contributing to improved team performance and collective success 1B-Communicated clearly and professionally in meetings, emails, and written documentation, ensuring information was accurate, timely, and accessible to all stakeholders. Fostered inclusive discussions by actively listening, acknowledging diverse viewpoints, and encouraging participation from all team members. Adapted communication styles to meet the needs of different audiences, strengthening understanding and promoting productive collaboration. Modeled respectful and solution-focused communication when addressing challenges, helping maintain positive relationships and a professional work environment. 1C-Actively sought feedback from supervisors and colleagues and incorporated recommendations into daily practice to enhance effectiveness and performance. Engaged in ongoing professional learning opportunities, applying new knowledge and skills to improve outcomes and support organizational goals. Demonstrated a commitment to continuous improvement by implementing new strategies, evaluating their impact, and adjusting practices based on results and feedback.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A-Consistently utilized review tools to monitor progress, document updates, and ensure tasks were completed according to established timelines. Maintained accurate records and generated timely reports using tracking systems, supporting informed decision-making and effective communication among team members. 2B-Actively participated in virtual meetings and in-person collaborations, contributing ideas, sharing updates, and maintaining productive working relationships across settings. Adapted communication and work practices to meet the needs of both remote and face-to-face environments, ensuring consistent engagement, responsiveness, and collaboration with colleagues and stakeholders.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A-Applied content knowledge and instructional best practices to evaluate curriculum materials, identifying strengths, areas for improvement, and overall alignment to learning standards. Reviewed instructional resources with attention to rigor, accessibility, and student learning outcomes, providing feedback that supported high-quality instructional design. 3B-Consistently completed reviews ahead of or by established deadlines while maintaining accuracy, thoroughness, and alignment to review expectations. Followed all review protocols and quality assurance processes, ensuring feedback was evidence-based, standards-aligned, and ready for stakeholder use without requiring significant revisions. 3C-Used established evaluation criteria and supporting evidence to make objective review decisions, ensuring recommendations were grounded in documented findings rather than personal preference. Demonstrated fairness and consistency when reviewing materials, seeking clarification or additional guidance when evaluating complex or ambiguous cases. 3D-Applied evaluation rubrics and quality standards consistently to identify instructional materials that support student learning, engagement, and academic success. Provided constructive feedback that helped strengthen the quality, alignment, and usability of instructional resources, contributing to continuous improvement efforts

Personal goal

I will strengthen my evidence-writing skills by providing more specific, measurable, and impact-focused examples that clearly demonstrate my contributions and performance.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A- During unpacking meetings, I contribute to the conversations by asking questions about the indicators. 1A- I also provide comments on the QRC and evidence to back up my partial or rejection. I am open to ideas and changes during meetings. 1B- As written submission support, I send messages to my team to discuss evidence writing. We collaborate on best practices when it comes to providing evidence. 1B- I send links to the resource page when a team member is struggling to locate information. 1C-I notice I need growth in understanding some of the indicator language. I use the glossary to guide me and ask questions during meetings. 1C- I look for feedback and take notes on reports I have written.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A- I write reports in a team collaborative document. 2A- I look for comments in the workbook on the reviewer tab. 2A- I add comments to google docs for reporting coaches to see. 2A- I use the review schedule to update my team on any changes in meetings. 2B-I contribute to online meetings by using my mic and video to comment. 2B- I share my screen during meetings to show location of evidence. 2B- In person training, I helped new reviewers find information from the training. 2B-During drafting meetings, I am able to work collaboratively on a document while still maintaining my screens for our meeting.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A-I use my knowledge of several grade levels to understand the materials. 3A- I use tools to find alignment across grade-levels when it comes to ELAR skills. 3A- I apply my skills of content vocabulary to understand content. 3B-I turn in written evidence on time. 3B- I complete example draft statements before drafting meetings. 3B-I have my evidence written for drafting reports by due date. 3B- I complete all training, videos, and evidence collection by due dates. 3C-I make unbiased decisions when looking at materials. 3C- I look at what the material has and what it is lacking to align with indicator language. 3D- I look at the indicator language and find evidence that aligns. 3D- I look at quality with an educator mindset to find high quality materials.

Personal goal

My goal is to learn more about the phonics skills in early elementary. I want to understand key terms for phonics knowledge.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - I was able to connect with a great review team. Collaboration and sharing varying perspectives enabled us to build trust among groups members. Our rapport had easily translated to our virtual collaborations and meetings. Communications are effective, efficient and productive.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - The platform has been a bit overwhelming in the amount of various locations for resources, information, submissions, ratings, etc. I feel that I am gaining confidence in using the platform as intended. Each of the three weekly meetings, I learn more about the IMRA systems and platform.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3C - I believe that my perspective is unbiased and view resources based on evidence present. As a collaborative effort, I can speak openly about my views and have productive discussions with team members. When reaching consensus, our decisions are based on evidence-based best practices for all students.

Personal goal

My goal is to become more proficient in navigating the platform and curriculum resources.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A- Consistently guide group discussion with rubric language ensuring all voices are heard, valued, and understood while remaining true to the criteria discussed. 1A- Prior to full program meetings, I contact our group of five to identify areas of missing information or discrepancy to align as a small group prior to large group discussion. 1B- During discussions, I take time to ask clarifying questions via text and email between team members and coaches. 1C- Particularly in drafting meetings, I constantly seek for ways to improve my understanding, writing, and ability to collaborate towards unified writing across grade bands.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A- I continually access the Evidence Guides, QRC materials, and exemplars to complete reviewing, tracking, and reporting promptly. 2B- I optimize my workspace when interacting with others. Virtually, this means setting up multiple screens to be able to engage with team members and materials simultaneously with control.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A- With fifteen years of teaching and curriculum experience, I feel confident in my understanding of TEKS, ELPS, and instructional materials to ensure rigorous and accurate reviews. The minor gaps I experience are related to the specifics of certain concepts that look different in Band (instructional materials presented) than they do in Choir (primary classroom experience). 3B- I consistently meet deadlines for voting, evidence descriptions, and drafting/writing. I have made several errors but worked quickly to rectify those. 3C- As much as I have strong opinions on parts of these instructional materials, I consistently evaluate them using rubric language and scoring criteria; constantly referencing look-fors and exemplars to ensure non-biased writing. 3D- I consistently champion high quality materials because, though I am a veteran teacher who can fill in gaps where things may be lacking, I consider multiple viewpoints and ensure materials also meet the needs of a new teacher/student using them for widespread success and access.

Personal goal

I've really enjoyed this process and the team I am working with. I would like to gain confidence with the program resources as it has taken me a little bit to understand the individual processes and how they work together. This will, in turn, aid me in better evidence and responses on first attempts without having to refine things, sometimes, after deadlines.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A. Team Collaboration & Consensus Building Evidence 1: I actively participated in consensus discussions with my review team, sharing evidence from instructional materials and collaborating with peers to reach agreement on indicator ratings. Evidence 2: I contributed to team meetings by listening to different perspectives, asking clarifying questions, and working collaboratively to ensure review decisions were aligned to the rubric and evidence. Evidence 3: As the team writer, I collaborated with reviewers to gather feedback, clarify ratings, and accurately represent the team's consensus in the final report. Evidence 4: I helped facilitate productive discussions by reviewing team comments, identifying areas of agreement and disagreement, and working with team members to reach consensus on final ratings and findings. 1B. Professional Verbal & Written Communication Evidence 1: I communicated my findings clearly and professionally in written comments, citing specific evidence from the materials to support my ratings and recommendations. Evidence 2: During team discussions, I respectfully shared my reasoning, responded to questions, and ensured my feedback remained focused on the review criteria and evidence. Evidence 3: As the designated team writer, I prepared clear, professional, and evidence-based summaries that accurately reflected the team's evaluations and recommendations. Evidence 4: I maintained professional communication throughout the review cycle by respectfully incorporating feedback from team members and ensuring that all viewpoints were represented in the final report. 1C. Continuous Learning & Growth Evidence 1: I reflected on feedback received during calibration and consensus sessions and adjusted my review practices to improve the accuracy and consistency of my evaluations. Evidence 2: Throughout the review cycle, I regularly reviewed guidance documents, rubrics, and training materials to strengthen my understanding of the indicators and improve the quality of my reviews.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A. Technical Proficiency & Use of Review Tools Evidence 1:I regularly used the IMRA review platform and related project tools to document evidence, complete reviews, and track my progress throughout the review cycle. Evidence 2: I effectively navigated review resources, rubrics, and reporting tools to submit accurate ratings and maintain organized records of my evaluations. 2B. Engagement in Virtual & In-Person Environments Evidence 1: I actively participated in virtual meetings, calibration sessions, and consensus discussions, contributing to collaborative decision-making and maintaining consistent engagement throughout the review process. Evidence 2: I adapted effectively to both virtual and in-person work settings by communicating with team members, meeting project expectations, and remaining engaged during all review activities.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A. Pedagogical & Content Knowledge (Accomplished) Evidence 1: I applied my knowledge of the TEKS and instructional practices to evaluate materials for alignment, rigor, and grade-level appropriateness. Evidence 2: I used my classroom experience and content expertise to identify strengths and gaps within instructional materials while maintaining alignment to the review criteria. 3B. Review Process Adherence & Timeliness Evidence 1: I consistently completed assigned reviews and submitted all deliverables by established deadlines throughout the IMRA review cycle. Evidence 2: I carefully followed all review procedures and evaluation protocols to ensure my ratings and evidence aligned with project expectations and standards. Evidence 3: I maintained an organized workflow by tracking assignments, review progress, and submission dates, allowing me to complete reviews efficiently and accurately. Evidence 4: I consistently produced thorough, standards-aligned reviews supported by clear evidence from the instructional materials, contributing to the overall quality of the review process. 3C. Evidence-Based Thinking & Unbiased Decision-Making Evidence 1: I based my ratings and recommendations on evidence found within the materials rather than personal preferences or instructional experiences. Evidence 2: During consensus discussions, I cited specific examples from the materials to support my decisions and remained open to considering evidence presented by other reviewers. 3D. Commitment to High-Quality Instructional Materials Evidence 1: I consistently applied the evaluation criteria to determine whether materials met the expectations for high-quality instruction and student learning. Evidence 2: I remained committed to ensuring that instructional materials were aligned to Texas standards and provided meaningful learning opportunities for students.

Personal goal

Reflection on IMRA Cycle 2026 Participating in IMRA Cycle 2026 allowed me to strengthen my understanding of instructional materials, TEKS alignment, and evidence-based evaluation practices. Throughout the review process, I collaborated effectively with team members, contributed to productive discussions, and communicated my findings professionally and respectfully. I consistently applied review criteria, met deadlines, and used evidence from the materials to support my decisions. This experience also helped me deepen my content knowledge and become more confident using the review tools and processes. Overall, I believe my performance aligns with the Accomplished level because I regularly demonstrated collaboration, professionalism, technical proficiency, and a commitment to high-quality instructional materials. Personal Goal As I continue my work as a reviewer, my goal is to move toward the Distinguished level by expanding my expertise in the review process and taking a more active role in supporting others. I plan to seek additional professional learning opportunities, strengthen my understanding of instructional materials across content areas, and contribute more intentionally to consensus-building discussions. By continuing to refine my evidence-based decision-making skills and sharing my knowledge with colleagues, I hope to further support the development and selection of high-quality instructional materials for Texas educators and students.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1.A Descriptive Summary The materials include an explanation of the stated purpose of the supplemental program by supporting a school district's Tier One instruction. The final statement states "... sequenced to best support the learning of reading comprehension throughout the school year." SourceProgress Learning 3rd Grade Reading (TEKS) Digital Platform, Location Implementation Guide, page 3, paragraph 3, Descriptive Evidence Two: The materials provide a clear explanation of the supplemental program's purpose by stating in the outline” …both the targeted solutions and the alignment with standards in assessment and remediation." The closing statements in the left column indicate that it includes adaptive intervention. Source 2.Progress Learning 3rd Grade (TEKS) Digital Platform . Location 2Getting started, What is Progess Learning ,Page One

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

Descriptive Evidence Summary One: "According to the guide, 'Progress Learning’s digital platform provides a full suite of assessment and reporting tools,' supporting educators to monitor student learning and TEKS mastery. The materials also include formative assessments, such as “Super Sheets,” which align with lesson standards and include item rationales to help teachers identify opportunities for reteaching and determine the need for small-group instruction. Additionally, the “Study Plan” offers students specialized practice aligned to lesson standards, along with feedback and individualized learning support. Additionally, the “Pre/Post Diagnostic Assessment” is used to identify which standards students have mastered, which need more attention, and which require critical remediation. The guide notes that these diagnostics generate individualized “Focus Areas” based on student performance, supporting specific intervention and ongoing progress monitoring." Source 1: Progress Learning 5th Grade (TEKS) Digital Platform Location, "RLA Implementation Guide, Pages 11, 12, 19, 20 Descritive Evidence Summary Two:"The materials offer instructional assessments and supplemental resources that support the program’s intended purpose, such as diagnostic, summative, and state-aligned practice assessments meant for targeted remediation and acceleration. For instance, the “Pre and Post Tests” section notes that these diagnostics include “2 questions per TEK” and are used to help teachers collect “data for every standard” via the Teacher Progress Report. Customizable assessment tools are also available through the “Assessment Builder” and “Assignment Center.” The “Summative and Domain Practice Tests” section explains that teachers may create assessments from the databank by selecting specific domains and adjusting the assessment length to align with state-tested content and instructional needs. Additionally, the materials support individualized student practice and progress monitoring. Students can complete summative assessments independently using the “Study Plan” or “My Plan” sections, allowing them to practice TEKS-aligned standards and receive immediate feedback, including video explanations for incorrect responses." Source 2 Help Center Article Location Two (Section)What types of diagnostic tests are available for Progress Learning?

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A The materials contain explicit (direct) prompts and guidance to support educators in modeling and explaining the skills to be learned. In the 'Explore Teacher Guide: Slideshow, Presenter Notes and Student Handouts,' presenter notes provide teacher-directed scripts such as, 'Imagine you are building a roller coaster...' and 'Eyes on your handouts, everyone! We are traveling back to the 1850s.' The materials direct teachers to read passages aloud, introduce vocabulary, and guide students in identifying setting details by having them underline words and phrases in the text. Teachers are also provided with text-dependent questions, including, 'Based on the details you underlined, how does the setting create a problem for Silas right away?' Additional instructional support includes discussion prompts, soundscape activities, partner discussions, and student handouts that reinforce the targeted skill. Source: Teacher Exploration Guide, Location: Slideshow Descriptive Evidence Example Two: The materials contain explicit (direct) prompts and guidance to help educators model and explain the skills to be learned. Evidence from the "Explore Teacher Guide: Slideshow, Presenter Notes and Student Handouts (continued)" directs educators to read passages aloud, have students underline words that describe the setting, and ask text-dependent questions such as, "Based on the details you underlined, how does the setting create a problem for Silas right away?" Additional guidance includes vocabulary instruction, conversation prompts, soundscape activities, partner discussions, and check-for-understanding activities. The slideshow, presenter notes, and student handouts work together to provide instructors with direct instructional guidance for explaining the targeted skills throughout the lesson. Source Two: Teacher Explore Guide, Location Two Slideshow Instruction, Background Teacher Guide

Personal goal

In the winter of 2025, I applied for the SAFAL/IMRA 2026 Cycle. During the interview process, I found the requirements detailed and explicit, which took time to review, analyze, and ensure consistency with the TEKS. IMRA reviewers are responsible for using SBOE-approved rubrics to evaluate instructional materials, provide detailed documentation, review alignment with the TEKS and ELPS, assess instructional quality, and ensure materials are suitable, appropriate, factually accurate, and consistent throughout the review process (State Board of Ed., n.d). At my training session in Dallas this spring, I found the information equally informative and, at times, overwhelming to absorb. By the end of the week, I felt more confident and had a clearer understanding of expectations. While reflecting on my journey so far, I have considered examples of effective instructional materials and practices, such as those found in the Progress digital platforms, which offer assessment tools and explicit teacher guidance. For instance, providing diagnostic and formative assessments aligned with standards, individualized practice plans for students, and features that enable ongoing progress monitoring. Additionally, teacher guides that include direct instructional prompts, presenter notes, and structured activities serve as strong models for supporting both teachers and learners. These examples directly relate to my roles as an IMRA reviewer because they highlight what to look for when evaluating instructional materials—namely, clear accordance with standards, evidence of assessment practices that inform instruction, and explicit instructional strategies that support all learners. By understanding and applying these evidence-based practices, I am better equipped to assess whether materials meet the SBOE's requirements and to provide thorough, actionable feedback for continuous improvement. Although these are not direct classroom examples, they inform my approach to the review process and serve as a guide for assuring that the materials I evaluate contribute to high-quality education. The IMRA Cycle 2026 reminds me, as an educator, of the significance of my work and the benefit it provides to educators and classrooms like mine. Considering both my experiences and these illustrative examples, I recognize the value of attention to detail, critical analysis, and making sure that materials meet state standards. My goal for the remainder of the cycle is to continue evaluating the TEKS, grow in my writing, and purposefully incorporate evidence-based strategies to meet the needs of all learners. Reference Texas State Board of Education. (n.d.). Reviewers: Instructional Materials Review and Approval (IMRA). https://sboe.texas.gov/state-board-of-education/imra/reviewers-imra

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - I actively participate in unpacking and consensus meetings by sharing evidence, explaining my scoring rationale, and adjusting my thinking when team evidence or guidance indicates a stronger alignment decision. 1A - I come to meetings prepared with completed workbook entries before unpacking and consensus discussions, which allows me to contribute to team calibration rather than using meeting time to complete initial scoring. 1A - I support team alignment across grade bands by comparing my K–2 evidence and scores with the broader K–5 team, especially when discrepancies appear, such as reviewing team consensus for indicators and reassessing my rationale for my own scoring. 1B - I communicate scoring rationale clearly in both live discussion and written evidence summaries, including explaining what a reviewed source includes and what required indicator language is not present when assigning a zero. 1B - I engage in meeting chat and live dialogue to ask clarifying questions, respond to team thinking, and contribute evidence-based explanations during consensus conversations. 1B - My descriptive evidence language has been used by the team Writer as an exemplar during meetings to show the level of detail and reviewer-style wording expected in the workbook. 1C - I seek clarification when indicator language or scoring expectations are unclear, including asking about the difference between evidence that shows grouping/data visibility and evidence that shows educator guidance for instructional structures. 1C - I revise my scores and summaries based on unpacking guidance, rejected publisher evidence, and team consensus patterns, such as reconsidering scores for indicators which we had extensive deliberation over - 2.2a, 2.2d, 3.3a, 3.3b, and 3.2c. 1C - I use feedback from the review process to improve my evidence-writing style, moving from general statements to more precise reviewer language that identifies the source, describes what is present, and explains what required criteria are missing.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - I consistently use the program workbook, IQ correlations, evidence guides, unpacking materials, and review folders to locate, compare, and verify evidence before entering or revising scores. 2A - I use multiple source types in the review process, including publisher IQ correlations, Ascend Teacher Software lessons, program design documents, diagnostic/progress monitoring materials, dashboards, and team consensus workbooks. 2A - I track rejected publisher evidence and do not rely on it when it does not align to the indicator and then look for specific non-publisher lesson sources or non-examples. 2B - I actively engage during meetings through both live conversation and chat, including responding to team questions, sharing evidence locations, and explaining how I interpreted rubric language. 2B - I prepare questions in advance when I notice scoring inconsistencies, such as lifting up analysis on whether a 3.2c score should change when some of the grade 3-5 team scored the indicator as zero. 2B - I contribute to consensus by bringing concrete examples from the materials, such as specific Ascend skill sets and lessons, rather than relying only on general program claims.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - I apply literacy and foundational skills knowledge when evaluating evidence, including distinguishing between phonics instruction, morphology, fluency routines, multilingual learner supports, and specially designed instruction. 3A - I identify whether evidence matches the specific instructional requirement of an indicator, such as recognizing that working groups and dashboard data do not necessarily constitute educator guidance for whole-group, small-group, or individual instructional structures. 3A - I use lesson-level evidence to evaluate instructional design, such as analyzing Skill Set 18, Lesson 126 on the three sounds of “-ed” for explicit phonics/morphology instruction, fluency practice, oral language, writing, multilingual support, and what the lesson does or does not include. 3B - I complete my assigned review work before unpacking and consensus meetings, which allows me to participate from a prepared position and respond to team calibration needs. 3B - I revise workbook entries after meetings to ensure raw scores, score summaries, and descriptive evidence summaries align with rubric expectations and team consensus. 3B - I maintain attention to required workbook conventions, including matching raw scores to score summaries, using specific source locations, and avoiding vague locations such as “any lesson” when a specific lesson or page is required. 3C - I make scoring decisions based on reviewed evidence rather than publisher claims alone, including changing scores when the evidence does not fully meet the indicator language. 3C - I consider team consensus and official guidance when engaging in alignment discussions. 3C - I distinguish between positive evidence and non-evidence by writing summaries that explain what the source includes and what required element is missing, especially for zero-scored indicators for this product. 3D - I evaluate whether materials provide actionable educator guidance rather than accepting broad program language, ensuring that evidence reflects actual implementation supports for teachers and students. 3D - I prioritize specific, observable evidence from reviewed materials, such as lesson routines, teacher prompts, dashboards, progress-monitoring tools, and program design pages, to determine whether materials meet rubric expectations. 3D - I maintain a high standard for evidence quality by identifying when materials include general supports but do not meet a specific requirement, such as when I noted that the product has multilingual supports without ELPS-level accommodations or general scaffolds without specially designed instruction guidance.

Personal goal

My midpoint goal is to continue strengthening the precision and consistency of my evidence summaries by ensuring each entry clearly identifies the source, explains what the reviewed material includes, and states when required indicator language is not present. I will continue preparing before unpacking and consensus meetings, using team discussion and reviewer guidance to calibrate my scoring, and revising entries so my raw scores, score summaries, and descriptive evidence summaries align. A specific area of continued growth is distinguishing between materials that provide general supports or data visibility and materials that provide explicit educator implementation guidance.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

I always treat everyone on the team with respect even when they are wrong. I have encouraged others on the team. I use only clear and respectful terminology when disagreements arise. I have souhhht clarity from safal staff and the coach as needed

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

I have attended all meetings. I have contributed to all indicator unpacking and helped other to understand the online materials.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

I regularly describe how this process will help districts choose aligned and effective curriculum using my regular job for examples (we just finished an adoption). I do share my opinions at time but always to highlight how we are evaluating by the rubric regardless of our opinions. I have pointed out to my team where I have discovered any bias and changed ratings at times to align to the rubric.

Personal goal

I have kept up to speed with evidence collection on ever week except the last one. My goal is to stay caught up

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1a I always attend meetings and am on time, I participate in our group chat, I tell others what I'm working on/things I've found, I've noticed some things in our grading others haven't and opened up dialogue 1b I complete my work using specific examples in the text in a timely manner using proper grammar, I seek to understand things better and use the rubric to help my communication 1c I change things as we are instructed, I have watched videos and explored things in our folders to help me better understand

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2a I am using rubrics and workbooks to report and track, I am making my own notes about these tools to help me understand better 2b I've been at every meeting, I help remind my team when we have meetings and check on them when they aren't there

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A I am using my content knowledge in Horticulture, I am trying to learn marketing and entrepreneurship 3b all of my work is on time, I respond quickly to emails, I respond quickly to group messages, I am trying to get ahead to better help my team and stay on track 3c I use the rubrics to guide my grading and reference them often, I've started highlighting things to make sure I am doing it correctly, when I don't understand I ask the group or coaches for clarification 3d I am working hard to find things that do not meet the rubric 100%, I often question things when others do not, I am working to make sure the materials fully meet standards of what I would want as a new teacher, I often feel like I'm I grading things with too much scrutiny compared with my peers

Personal goal

I am working on refining my language in the workbook and providing better evidence.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A I collaborate with team #97via group text to clarify directions, confirm thinking, and develop timelines. During meetings with both teams #96 and #97, I give verbal input during discussions about indicators and rationalizing rating points given. I have also complimented other team member's evidence writing. 1B While contributing to discussions via TEAMS, I communicate with my prepared materials based in fact and evidence. Unpacking work with the team is productive for me due to the fact that I have looked at the material and prepared questions or discussion points ahead of time. 1C Being familiar with all of the resources has made the process easier for me but has also enriched the evidence pieces I have contributed. Reading over the exemplars and looking at a model has assisting me in writing quality evidence statements. When there was a disagreement in a TEAMS meeting, I was able to refer to the IQ tab to confirm my thinking.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A My familiarity with the resources provided at the Kickoff contributed to the success of my team. On the last day of training, I was able to show my team the QRC document and how to utilize the links from the publishers. Utilizing the exemplars for non-examples assisting me in writing quality statements when the evidence wasn't present. 2B The virtual meetings provide confirmation for upcoming processes that we will be working on and the completion dates. Being prepared for the unpacking and consensus meetings has made my engagement in the conversations productive. I am able to provide rationale for my scoring and am able to explain my thinking. In person, there were members of the group who became frustrated with the pacing of others. I was able to create a compromise by fostering conversation and asking clarifying questions in a nonjudgmental way. When the group decoded to work in partners, every member was able to continue the work and we finished the work.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3B I have met all of the deadlines for completion of all evidence pieces in sections 1,2,3. I am confident in the quality of evidence and explanation of the sources used. I have attended all of the meetings and arrive on time. I have handwritten notes from every meeting to ensure that I am completing every task on time. 3C I ensure that my evidence is high quality by reading exemplars, editing my own work, and checking for spelling errors by copying my responses into a google document. Considering I am new to the work; I know that the quality of my evidence pieces can be improved with more knowledge gained from group discussions. 3D I rely on my knowledge of ELPS and ELA standards to evaluate the evidence provided by the publishers. In some cases, the links publishers provided didn't match a detail within the indicator. I was able to be specify in a consensus meeting concerning a lack of linguistic accommodations.

Personal goal

I will continue to improve my evidence statements and ensuring "active voice."

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

Personal goal

I strengthened my communication with my team which was great. For a personal goal I would like to be more outspoken virtually. I had no problem in person but not so much with our big virtual meetings.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A. Team Collaboration and Consensus Building -I actively participated in calibration and consensus discussions, contributing standards-based perspectives that helped the team reach agreement on ratings and instructional material evaluations. -I collaborated with fellow reviewers throughout the review process by sharing insights, asking clarifying questions, and considering multiple viewpoints to support accurate and consistent reviews. -I contributed to productive team meetings and work sessions by providing constructive feedback, engaging in professional dialogue, and supporting group decision-making aligned to review criteria. 1B. Professional Verbal and Written Communication -I consistently communicated feedback in a clear, professional, and respectful manner, ensuring comments were evidence-based and focused on instructional quality. -I modeled inclusive communication during review discussions by actively listening to colleagues, acknowledging diverse perspectives, and encouraging participation from all team members. -I provided detailed written rationales for ratings and recommendations, using precise language and references to standards to support transparency and understanding. -I facilitated productive dialogue during consensus conversations, helping maintain a professional tone while ensuring differing viewpoints were considered before final decisions were made. 1C. Continuous Learning and Growth -I actively sought feedback from leads and fellow reviewers and incorporated suggestions to strengthen the quality and consistency of subsequent reviews. -I engaged fully in reviewer trainings, calibration activities, and professional learning opportunities, applying new learning to improve review accuracy and alignment. -I reflected on review outcomes and identified areas for growth, making adjustments to review practices based on lessons learned and project feedback. -I shared newly acquired knowledge and effective practices with colleagues, contributing to team learning and continuous improvement throughout the review cycle.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A. Technical Proficiency and Use of Review Tools -I demonstrated proficiency in the review platform and associated tools by efficiently completing reviews, tracking progress, and accurately documenting evidence and ratings throughout the review cycle. -I supported team members by answering questions about review tools and processes, troubleshooting minor technical issues, and sharing effective strategies for navigating the platform and completing review tasks. 2B. Engagement in Virtual and In-Person Environments -I consistently engaged in virtual and in-person review sessions by actively participating in discussions, contributing ideas, and collaborating with colleagues to ensure productive outcomes. - I demonstrated adaptability and leadership across multiple work environments by remaining responsive, prepared, and engaged during meetings, calibration sessions, and collaborative review activities regardless of format.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A. Pedagogical and Content Knowledge -I applied deep knowledge of TEKS and instructional best practices to evaluate alignment, rigor, and coherence across reviewed materials, ensuring ratings accurately reflected student learning expectations. -I referenced specific TEKS and instructional design principles when analyzing materials, providing detailed evidence to support review decisions and recommendations. I contributed content expertise during calibration and consensus discussions, helping the team identify nuanced alignment issues and maintain consistency in ratings across materials. 3B. Review Process Adherence and Timeliness -I consistently completed assigned reviews on or ahead of deadlines while maintaining accuracy, thorough documentation, and alignment with review protocols. -I followed all review procedures with fidelity, submitting high-quality evidence and ratings that required minimal clarification or revision during the review process. 3C. Evidence-Based Thinking and Unbiased Decision-Making -I consistently based review decisions on evidence from the instructional materials and rubric criteria, ensuring ratings remained objective and standards-driven. -I approached consensus discussions with an unbiased mindset, carefully considering multiple perspectives while grounding recommendations in documented evidence rather than personal preference. 3D. Commitment to High-Quality Instructional Materials -I advocated for rigorous, standards-aligned instructional materials by carefully evaluating how resources support student learning, accessibility, and instructional effectiveness. I maintained a strong commitment to quality throughout the review process by applying evaluation criteria consistently and ensuring recommendations reflected the best interests of Texas educators and students.

Personal goal

My experience with the first part of IMRA Cycle 2026 provided valuable opportunities for me to grow as a Quality Reviewer. While I am still building confidence in the review process, I approached each assignment with a commitment to learning, collaboration, and continuous improvement. I have been working to navigate the review platforms effectively, deepen my understanding of the review criteria, and contribute meaningfully to team discussions and consensus-building efforts. One area where I identified an opportunity for growth is in locating and citing evidence within instructional materials. Although I am becoming more comfortable with the process, I recognize that strengthening my ability to efficiently find specific supporting evidence and provide precise citations will improve the quality and clarity of my reviews. This skill will also enable me to contribute more effectively during discussions and provide more actionable feedback to publishers. My goal for future review cycles is to improve my proficiency in identifying, organizing, and citing evidence within curriculum materials so that I can provide more thorough, accurate, and standards-based feedback. To achieve this goal, I plan to continue learning from experienced reviewers, seek feedback on my citation practices, and develop strategies for navigating instructional materials more efficiently. By strengthening these skills, I hope to contribute even more effectively to the review process and support the selection of high-quality instructional materials for Texas educators and students.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - During unpacking and consensus meetings, I actively participate and collaborate with other team members. I respectfully listen to others, and participate to provide my input, ask questions, and provide feedback when needed. I get ready ahead of time for the meetings, and follow through the meetings with my notes. Then, I check and compare the topics in the meetings with my notes in order to decide when to participate. I acknowledge the other team member’s ideas, then I agree or disagree based on the evidence I collected. I am open to other ideas and feedback from others in order to continue growing and learning. Sometimes, I realize that I have to change my scores because other team members provide more evidence that I have not seen, and sometimes I can show evidence that other team members have not seen. 1B - I regularly express ideas professionally and respectfully, I wait for the other person to finish talking to start talking. I acknowledge the other person's idea, then I provide my ideas. I start my sentences with “I agree” and mention my additional evidence. Otherwise, I respectfully disagree and provide my ideas or evidence. I promote inclusivity during the discussions by waiting for my turn to talk, and avoiding interrupting or taking over all the topics, so other team members have more options to express their ideas or evidence. 1C - I regularly engage in self assessment by comparing my work to the High Quality Descriptive Evidence Summary Exemplars, the examples in the Evidence Collection Best Practices, and the IMRA reports from other similar books. Then, I apply my own feedback and modify my work to improve it.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A I regularly and effectively use tools for reviewing the materials. I anticipate and open the files that I need in order to work on the quality review process, such as the Supplemental Mathematics Evidence Guide that provides the breakdown of the indicators, examples and non-examples that I use when in doubt. I also use the Evidence Collection Best Practices for information on how to write the evidence, sentence starters, and exemplars that I use for self assessment and feedback. Other tools that I use for exemplars, self assessment and feedback are the High Quality Descriptive Evidence Summary Exemplars and the IMRA reports from similar books. For tracking purposes, I review the calendar and review schedule in the Workbook. I also created a Google Doc in which I take notes from unpacking and consensus meetings in order to add my to do lists for changes if necessary. In the Google Doc, I also created a table with my own calendar to track the days and the indicators that I am working on. I regularly check my emails from my team in order to fulfill all of the activities before the due dates. For reporting, I use the workbook and make any necessary changes during the consensus meetings to keep my scores and evidence updated. 2B I fully and consistently collaborate in all settings virtual and in-person. I participated every day of the kick off in-person training. I worked with my team mates, learning from their experiences and providing my ideas. I always participate in the virtual meetings for unpacking and consensus sessions, I am open to new ideas and feedback, and respect everyone. I like to participate and share with my teammates or help them if needed. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1iqIm7f1va87_mv7yUrMp-Go3FV5vPWSi/view?usp=sharing

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3.A - I have knowledge of the TEKS, ELPS and Math content expertise that allow me to effectively evaluate materials. I also regularly review the TEKS and participate in the breakdown - unpacking meetings to get more details of the TEKS, ELPS and content that I will review. 3.B - I always meet deadlines in the review process, I also go ahead and start looking for evidence before the unpacking meeting in order to be more prepared to work and make decisions with my team. I still need some occasional support if necessary. 3.C - I consistently use the guides to find evidence and avoid bias for the quality review process and during the discussions in the consensus meetings. If there are indicators in which I have a different score than other people, I listen and check their references to compare with mine and make the best decision based on evidence. 3.D - I regularly demonstrate commitment to quality materials by having a time schedule in my daily routine. I spent the right amount of time to fulfill the review process before the due date. Every time that I work in the quality review, I have the necessary files open and constantly review and compare in order to do an outstanding job to ensure that I apply the evaluation criteria effectively. The files include: Supplemental Mathematics Evidence Guide, Evidence Collection Best Practices, High Quality Descriptive Evidence Summary Exemplars, IMRA reports from similar books, Innovamath platform, and workbook.

Personal goal

IMRA Cycle 2026 has been a rewarding experience for me at different levels, personal and professional. Compared to my previous experience as a suitability reviewer, IMRA 2026 as a quality reviewer let me see the connections between teaching and all of the hard work reviewing materials in order to provide high quality materials for Texas students. I have learned new things, and I have met people that support me in the process. The training modules in Canvas were really helpful in providing the information necessary before the kick off training. That allowed me to practice how to do the quality review and collaborate with my team in person. The unpacking and consensus meetings are really helpful because I can see the review process through different perspectives (grade levels and teams). My personal goal is to be more skillful and resourceful through the quality review process and to master how to write high quality descriptive evidence.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - During our team calls on TEAMs, I regularly share my reasoning and evidence for scores. 1B - When sharing my evidence, I speak in a professional manner and ask follow up questions to ensure I understand. 1C - I regularly ask my team for feedback when I am unsure on a score. I share why I think it deserves a score, listen to my team, then revisit my evidence for the score.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - I consistently utilize the evidence guide for examples and non examples when writing my evidence. 2B - During our team calls, I regularly engage in conversation and ask clarifying questions.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - I am immersed in the TEKS on a daily basis in my professional work. I am dedicated to providing the best quality reviews to ensure that Texas public school children have access to the most rigorous and meaningful materials. 3B - I am consistently ahead in my deadlines. I am looking ahead and well prepared for my meetings with evidence in the workbook. 3C - I consistently reference the guidance materials provided by SAFAL to ensure that I am unbiased and citing evidence appropriately and correctly. 3D - I am committed to giving the evidence reviews my best quality work. I look at the materials through an educator lens to ensure that all educators can gain access (if these materials are adopted) to only the best instructional materials.

Personal goal

I have enjoyed participating in weekly discourse with my teams to ensure consistently and clarity when writing evidence. My personal goal moving forward is to challenge myself to cite the very best evidence with the most robust explanation.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A. I am constantly in communication with my team Via text messaging. Also, I will speak in team meetings when needed to share ideas or support another teammates thinking. 1B. Whenever I am speaking to a teammate I always have the utmost respect and understanding. Most of my team is brand new, so it took them time to understand the process and they had a lot of questions, so I always responded in a polite and helpful manner. They were unconfident in their evidence collecting and thoughts, but I would consistently reassure them they are doing great and to keep going. 1C. Whenever I am collecting evidence I am reflecting on what would make this easier for our writer when making her reports and checking in with her. I also will listen to feedback I have been given on my evidence in the past and self assess to make sure I am aligned with where I need to be.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A. When we were voting, I would create new citations for the team once we agreed on new evidence. I also refer back to the evidence guides consistently when completing evidence. 2B. I will participate and share ideas in team meetings, such as providing reasoning behind my evidence. I also talk and collaborate with my team on scoring to make sure we are all aligned while collecting evidence.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A. I have been a Texas Educator for 11 years working in grades kinder, 2nd, and 3rd. I am extremely familiar with the TEKS and content taught in the grades I am reviewing as a result. I also work in a school that has multiple languages within each classroom, so I am always working with ESL strategies and using the ELPS. I am also rated as an exemplary teacher according to TEA. 3B. I have always had my evidence in on time. I have completed my voting by the due date. If I needed more time than when my coach wanted the evidence in, I would email in a timely manner to ask for an extension, but it was always in 24 hours before consensus. 3C. I consistently look at the materials from an unbiased point of view and when I notice myself thinking that this isn't how I would teach it I take a step back and refocus. When I have difficulty deciding whether it is just my thinking of the product isn't actually meeting the indicator, I ask my team for guidance to help me differentiate. 3D. I am always wanting the best for students and teachers in Texas. If I didn't believe what we're doing is important I wouldn't be doing it. I am a classroom teacher and know what I would want, and what is helpful to my students.

Personal goal

My goal is to get on a better evidence collecting schedule in order to finish my evidence collecting by Saturday.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A-I text and email my group regularly to discuss the week's tasks 1A- I engage during our Teams meetings and contribute to the weekly discussions 1B- I am professional and use respectful tone and language during discussions. 1B- I value that all voices be heard and respect those speaking and expressing ideas 1C- I am involved in 2 phonics books studies this summer 1C- I am consistently involved in our region PD for Reading and ELA throughout the year

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A- This is my second year as a reviewer so I understand the google drive documents 2A- I took the time to learn the new products platform so that I was ready to review

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A- I have been an educator for 20 years 3A- I consistently participate in PD to learn new technologies and instructional methods. 3A- I am a curriculum advisor for my district 3A- I regularly give PD for my district and mentor new teachers 3B - I am a professional and I follow the rules as we all should 3B- I set up a personal schedule for myself throughout the week to ensure I have met all deadlines 3B- I keep notes so that I am prepared for my consensus meeting to contribute to the conversation 3C- As a 2nd year reviewer, I am able to focus only on the indicators and look for evidence in the product. 3C- For the more complex indicators, I know to rely on my team for discussion and clarity vs. my opinion 3D- I advocate for high standards in my district as a curriculum advisor 3D- I am here doing this work because I believe high quality for our students is important 3D- I want the best materials for my children and grandchildren that is why I am doing the work 3D- I take the job seriously and do my best every week to complete the tasks as assigned

Personal goal

This year's product is a little more difficult being an AI powered supplemental. I am working to learn more about this type of product so that I ensure rigorous and accurate reviews

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A- I review and comment on remarks made in the workbook to ensure I have the data ready/available to build consensus "Chelsey Dosher 11:38 AM May 28 If I don't have the reason I rejected next to the evidence, I'm worried I will not be able to defend it in an appropriate amount of time when we are asked "why" we rejected something in our meetings. Is there another location you want our detailed reasons for rejection added?" 1B- I maintain professional verbal and written communication "The Amira Reading Suite materials provide educator guidance for differentiated instruction and activities for students who have demonstrated proficiency in grade-level skills. The "Amira Tutor User Manual" explains that the program uses "Adaptive Instruction" to provide a "dynamic adjustment of support levels, text complexity, and instructional focus based on student performance patterns." The manual also describes "Comprehension Conversations" as "dynamic, AI-led Socratic dialogues that mirror authentic classroom discussion and strengthen understanding by prompting students explain, reflect, and connect ideas." This supports the indicator because the materials show how proficient students can continue receiving appropriately challenging instruction through adjusted text complexity, instructional focus, and higher-order comprehension practice." 1C-I am continuously learning how to improve my feedback and evidence submissions based on my group leader's comments Leader Feedback "Belinda Kinney 10:07 PM May 27 @[email] If you reject a QRC example, you do not include it in your descriptive evidence. Also, please do not resolve comments. We leave them open so we can refer to them later. Thank you!" My correction- moved rejection feedback to correct workbook "CD-The materials do not provide educator-facing guidance for differentiated instruction or activities for students who have not yet reached proficiency in grade-level skills. The materials include information about how the AI-powered coach adapts instruction directly for students, but they do not guide teachers to use specific instructional moves, activities, or supports for students who have not yet reached proficiency. Because the differentiation is delivered by the AI component rather than through educator guidance, this evidence does not fully support the indicator. TR- The publisher provided QRC materials do not align to the indicator language; however, there is evidence of indicator alignment found within the instructional materials."

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A- I access multiple files in the workbooks and training videos to ensure I fully understand the expectations. If I cannot locate a file or instruction I require, I reach out to other group members or our group leader for help. 2B- I work almost daily in the workbook to review and correct feedback. I have also attended every meeting that has been held thus far.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A- My pedagogical competence is supported by 24 years of experience in secondary English language arts education, including roles as a classroom teacher, department leader, MTSS coordinator, interventionist, and special education teacher. I regularly use curriculum analysis, assessment data, and evidence-based instructional practices to support diverse learners. This background enables me to evaluate instructional materials for standards alignment, instructional quality, differentiation, and classroom applicability with confidence and objectivity. 3B-I have met all deadlines. Group leader has never had to remind me to complete work. 3C-In the beginning I was approving nearly all publisher's material examples. After learning more through our group meetings and leader comments, I felt more confident to use my knowledge and expertise and rate evidence with a critical, but honest lens. 3D-I follow all IMRA program instructions, steps, guidance, writing rules, and timelines to ensure Texas students receive the highest quality curriculum.

Personal goal

My personal goal is to be more helpful to my team by locating additional examples or stronger evidence when it is required.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

Personal goal

I will continue using the rubric and writing high standards evidence through the entire process.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - I regularly participate in both unpacking and consensus discussions with my team. I often lead my group in prework, going through the QRCs so my team can see my notes as they go through the evidence. 1B - Our team works well together and we take turns leading discussions. We divide work when we need and communicate when we need help. 1C - As the writer of the team, I regularly self-assess with my evidence collection, making sure my writing is improving. I regularly get feedback from my reporting coach on my writing, and I implement her feedback with my writing with each iteration. For example, one feedback recently was that my sentences were too long, so I made sure for the next time I was writing to apply the feedback and break up sentences that were too long.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - I worked with my team at the in-person training to make sure our votes for the standards alignment were done correctly and on the same evidence. Since most of my team was new, I explained the difference between the narrative and activities requirements for the process standards versus the other standards during our standards alignment work. My reporting coach suggested working with drafts prior to putting our writing work in the WKB, and now I create the draft reports each week for the different grade levels. I take the edits from one grade level's draft report and apply the edits throughout the other 3 grade level drafts. I am the writer, so I update the QRCs with our team decisions with unpacking the indicators. 2B - I update the QRCs and Cross-Alignment notes for unpacking and consensus meetings. I take my team's expertise into consideration even when we don't initially agree. I also will make sure I am citing evidence when I do not agree with my team during concensus. I collaborate with my reporting coach to improve my indicator evidence reports. I lead in my team's group chat to send reminders and given help with tasks we have during the week.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - I lead my team in giving feedback to the publisher during standards alignment to ensure that materials better align to the TEKS. I work with my team to get examples from the materials for the review, and give my team feedback with collecting better evidence as needed. 3B - I have met all deadlines with the standards alignment and review process. I get my draft reports in by Fridays so my reporting coach can give feedback on Saturdays and I get edits done on so reports can be submitted by Monday. 3C - I write the reports to review the material. In collaboration with my reporting coach, I make sure our evidence can be mapped to each point we are giving for the indicators. 3D - I regularly review materials with fidelity to make sure our evidence is clear and accurate. We are careful to look for what is included and not included in the materials based on the indicators so that reports include accurate information for districts and teachers to make the best informed decisions about materials they use for students.

Personal goal

The process this year has been easier since this is my second time reviewing the materials and being the writer for my team. I have been able to help the 3 new members of my team when they have questions or were stressed about collecting evidence before the review process started. My personal goal is to write high quality reports with good evidence with less and less edits with each report.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - I actively participate in calibration meetings, contributing examples and observations and evidence from the materials to support group decision-making. 1B - I ensure all team members have opportunities to contribute to the discussions and foster an inclusive environment. 1C - I reflect on my review practices and identify areas for growth. When feedback is reported, I use it to fix the evidence and help ensure accuracy for next time.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - I utilize resources, the evidence guide, and workbooks to support my evidence. I remain flexible when when needed. 2A - When the evidence guide was updated, I incorporated the changes into my workbook and communicated with my team that the indicators had changed. 2B - I worked with the waitlisted team at in-person training and have transitioned to a new team and have been working with them to find and collect evidence.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - I identify strengths and areas of concern within instructional materials based on Texas standards. 3B - I complete my evidence within established deadlines while maintaining attention to detail and accuracy. 3C - I consistently ground my ratiings and recommendations in specific evidence from the materials. 3D - I advocate for high-quality instructional resources by carefully considering how materials will impact teachers' implementation and students' academic success.

Personal goal

I was excited to be offered the opportunity to be a part of the review team. Since I have started, I have consistently met deadlines, remained professional, collaborated effectively with team members, contributed to discussions and finding providing evidence that aligns with the rubric. My personal goal is to continue strengthening the precision and depth of my evidence-based justification.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1a - I have organized meetings with team members to discuss the QRC alignment using Google Meets. 1a - I contribute pieces of evidence I have found to further assist other members with voting considerations for the indicators we evaluate each week. 1b - I provide advice and support to fellow team members who are new to the process using positive language to encourage best outcomes. 1b - Whenever we are in disagreement, I make sure to listen to the other person's opinion with an open mind, correcting myself if I had a misunderstanding regarding evidence or a rating. 1c - I have worked at correcting my evidence writing using the comments that my review coach has left on the workbook, and make note of the mistakes made to ensure they are not repeated. 1c - I have made a point of looking carefully at the exemplars provided so that I may show improvement in my evidence writing. Self-reflection has helped me understand how I have made errors that could have been prevented had I read the indicators more carefully, for example.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2a - I have been able to become adequately adept and moving along the necessary resources by taking the time to practice on a daily basis, which has helped me understand how to navigate them. 2a - I am able to find resources needed for my reviews without seeking support from review coaches. 2b - I have perfect attendance in all trainings, not only with the Safal team, but with my own teammates as well for our own consensus virtual meetings. 2b - I actively participate with feedback, advice, and findings in all the meetings we have held to date. 2b - I have the ability to lead meetings with my other teammates whenever we have had the need to meet to reach consensus on our own specific assignments. I have been able to keep us within the time alloted in order to make best use of everyone's time. 2b - I implemented a routine for our group in which we will take turns facilitating virtual meetings in order to provide equity with workload.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3a - I am an experienced bilingual-certified teacher and am therefore very familiar with the ELPS and how students are rated. 3a - I have taught for over twenty years, therefore I am very knowledgeable in the TEKS for the grade levels assigned to me. 3a - I reviewed Math materials last year with IMRA, therefore I am familiar with HQIM expectations. 3a - As an instructional coach, I have provided trainings to staff on what to look for in choosing materials that align with the highest expectations for student learning. 3b - I have consistently met the deadlines assigned each week to rate indicators. 3b - I have consistently met the deadlines assigned within our team to review our own materials in our grade bands. 3b - I submitted all training evidence within the alloted time frame to Safal. 3c - I have been able to keep evidence reporting aligned with rubric language, however some cases have proven difficult due to lack of consistency within the materials. 3c - I have been able to separate my own opinions from how materials are presented if a piece of the indicator language is missing, even if the rest of the lessons look acceptable, and have voted accordingly. 3c - Whenever a colleague has demonstrated that an indicator has not fully met criteria, I look at my own evidence and exercise professional judgment to ensure that any items I may have missed are present in the materials, and share how my own findings meet the criteria by strictly citing the language of the rubric. 3d - During reviews, I look carefully at each lesson to ensure all the lessons are in alignment with the TEKS and ELPS as required by the state. 3d - I understand that all the lessons in the materials must include the RBIS as indicated in our trainings, and look for evidence of those practices in the lessons. 3d - The scope and sequence in the materials has to demonstrate a logical progression in the learning of the TEKS.

Personal goal

I have come to understand the importance of adhering to the language of the indicators to guarantee that the materials that we approve have all the necessary elements to guarantee that our Texas students will be able to reach grade level proficiency. With this in mind, I am setting a personal goal of carefully going through the materials I have access to for review, and looking very carefully for the RBIS alignment.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A– During standards alignment, I helped facilitate team communication to ensure that we were in agreement about whether standards were met or not. 1A- I am prompt at responding to texts from my team as we work on Quality Review. 1B- I express ideas professionally in my communication with my team and during consensus and unpacking meetings with the coaches and other teams. 1B- I ensure that all my teammates' voices are heard as we work together and collaborate in our review. 1C- Following consensus meetings, I review my evidence to ensure it matches the feedback that has been given. 1C- I carefully read all communication and check that I am following the guidance and other information that is provided.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A- I effectively use the project tools provided for reviewing, tracking, and reporting. 2A- I use the project resources to ensure that I am providing the best review information possible. 2B- I engage in the virtual work that is required each week via the project workbook. 2B- I participate actively in the weekly unpacking and consensus meetings.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A- I deeply understand the TEKS as I have previously written curriculum and led TEKS-based PD. When I have questions about TEKS language, I refer back to the TEKS guide. 3A- I deeply understand the ELPS. When I have questions, I refer to the ELPs to ensure that my understanding matches the standard language. 3A- I take time to ensure deep understanding of the instructional materials and their intention. 3A- I ensure rigorous and accurate reviews as I consider the TEKS, ELPS, and how the instructional materials apply the standards. 3B- I ensure that I have completed the required workflow by each weekly deadline. 3B- When I had an issue one week, I made sure to communicate the concern to the coach. 3C- I evaluate each piece of evidence to ensure that my opinion is unbiased. 3C- I consistently refer to the TEKS and/or ELPS to ensure that my evaluation of materials is based in the standards. 3C- During discussions with my team, I ensure that my thinking is based in the evidence and the standards. 3C- I am open to feedback and ideas from my team to ensure that my thinking stays unbiased. 3D- I apply the evaluation criteria effectively by reviewing the indicators and carefully applying them to the materials. 3D- I am committed to ensuring that the materials meet the quality standards, and I carefully review each piece of evidence to effectively apply the criteria.

Personal goal

My goal is to continue developing my evidence summaries to fully meet the needs of the writer for our team. I will use the feedback from the coach and from our consensus meetings to ensure that the evidence I collect is thorough, based in the standards, and aligns with the quality rubric.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A-Our team created a group chat to facilitate ongoing collaboration and the exchange of ideas throughout the product review process. For example, during a discussion about the ELPS, some team members believed that the instructional materials did not include them. I located the relevant section, shared a photo with the team, and pointed out where the ELPS were incorporated in the materials. Ultimately, while the resource provides this support, the teacher—who has the best understanding of their students' needs—will determine when, where, and how to effectively implement the ELPS and related instructional strategies in the classroom. 1A-Another example of our collaborative process involved working through a practice problem together to verify that it was solved correctly. Through our discussion, the team concluded that the problem was both rigorous and well-designed, as it effectively integrated the addition of polynomials with the application of the laws of exponents. This type of task promotes deeper mathematical reasoning by requiring students to apply multiple concepts within a single problem. 1B-This occurred during one of our consensus meetings, where my teammates and I initially assigned different ratings to the indicator under review. Although I believed the instructional material met the requirements and supported a higher rating based on the evidence presented, the consensus process ultimately favored the majority opinion. As a result, the facilitator, Katie Perez, accepted the majority rating despite the evidence that had been shared. While I respectfully disagreed with the final decision, I agreed to the consensus in support of the team's collaborative process. 1B-I have consistently been willing to share links and page references to supporting evidence in order to clarify my findings and assist the entire review team in understanding the basis for my ratings. This collaborative approach has helped ensure that discussions are grounded in the instructional materials and the evidence presented. Additionally, I have revised one of my indicator ratings after a colleague provided clarification regarding the specific expectations of the indicator and the evidence reviewers should be evaluating. I viewed this as a valuable opportunity to improve the accuracy and consistency of my review and to align my evaluation with the established criteria. 1C-As we progressed through the review exercise, my group members and I maintained consistent communication to effectively leverage each other’s experience and expertise, ensuring a collaborative and well-informed evaluation process. 1C-I am actively seeking professional development opportunities to enhance and strengthen my skills. 1C-I am excited to participate in the SAFAL IMRA professional learning opportunity as I continue to refine my skills while striving for greater accuracy and precision in my work.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A-I am consistently referring to the rubric and accompanying manual in PDF form to ensure accurate and aligned evaluations. 2A-The links to the instructional materials, including both the teacher and student practice books, are being regularly reviewed. In addition, I am evaluating the technology components of the program to ensure they are functional and effectively meet their intended instructional objectives. 2B-I have not missed any of the unpacking or consensus meetings, and I have ensured that my camera remains switched on throughout the sessions. 2B-I ensure that I use the “Raise Hand” feature and wait to be called upon before sharing my contributions. Given that there are approximately 16 participants in the online session—an increase from last year—there are often multiple individuals wishing to speak simultaneously.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A-I bring extensive experience to my work, having taught in multiple countries and developed a strong understanding of diverse instructional contexts. I have a deep knowledge of the TEKS, ELPS, and instructional materials, which enables me to ensure rigor, alignment, and high-quality implementation in my practice. 3A-I consistently refer to and adhere to the TEKS and rubrics to ensure that my evaluations and instructional decisions remain aligned and standards-based. 3A-As a content reviewer, I bring a strong command of both pedagogical practice and K–12 mathematics content knowledge, enabling me to evaluate instructional materials with depth and precision. I consistently apply this expertise to ensure that materials are rigorous, standards-aligned, and effectively support student learning across grade. 3B-Before each consensus meeting, my evidence, rationale, and statement scores are always prepared and ready. 3B-I also ensure that my summaries include page numbers and relevant language from the chapter to support clarity, accuracy, and conciseness. 3C-To the best of my knowledge, I have rated the material based on the provided rubric and the evidence I have observed directly within the textbook. 3C-When in doubt about a rating or interpretation of the rubric, I collaborate with my colleagues to reach a shared understanding. Together, we work through the stated rubric, the textbook content, and our professional experience to arrive at a well-supported and consistent decision. 3D-I am committed to ensuring that, by the end of the rubric review process, teachers using the teacher edition can confidently attest to the high quality of the materials, and that students are effectively empowered and prepared to engage successfully with the world beyond the classroom. 3D-I understand that at the conclusion of this review process, my name will be formally recorded as one of the reviewers, and I am committed to ensuring that my work reflects professionalism and high standards. I consistently advocate for rigorous, high-quality instruction that supports all students, including bilingual learners, ensuring their needs are effectively addressed.

Personal goal

My goal is to ensure rigorous and high quality instructional material ensuring Texas educators and students receive the best instructional programs/product and resources.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - During the standards alignment, we shared standards that we thought did not have evidence in our team chat. I frequently responded to team members, finding evidence to support the standard on two occasions that allowed the team to vote and move forward. 1A - During the kickoff meeting, I supported the reporting of repeated dashboard issues, raising our team's colored ticket and communicating with staff. 1B - In our team chat, I seek others input on anything uncertain to ensure clarity as I work through the indicators on the rubric. 1C - After the kickoff training, I had a better understanding of the suitability standards and have collaborated with my team in their submission during our review.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - I fully utilize the workbook to manage review processes, deadlines, and resources as I conduct the review. 2A - Though the dashboard has been wonky, I have used my previous review experience to navigate this year's review. 2B - Across virtual and in-person settings, I maintained active participation and communicate regularly through our team chat.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - During standards alignment, I used my content expertise to recommend citations that were not provided by the publisher to keep the content from being rejected. 3B - I have completed 100% of standards alignment and assigned quality review with minimal corrections and on or ahead of schedule. 3C - I consistently tied review conclusions to documented evidence and rubric language, distinguished observations from interpretations, and revised decisions when additional evidence warranted a different outcome. 3D - I consistently ground myself in the language of the rubric for high quality materials and use the exemplars to ensure my reviews meet their standards.

Personal goal

My first experience with reviewing high quality instructional materials was during the new science TEKS review, which was 2 years ago. Some things have changed since then, which have dramatically helped improve the process. (The training videos and quizzes and the in-person kick off, as an example.) This time around, my goal is to become a resource for fellow reviewers by providing technical support and sharing strategies that improve efficiency, consistency, and overall review quality.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A I regularly work with my team in group chats or one-on-one collaboration as needed to complete my reviewer work 1B I regularly express my opinions and ideas in a professional manner aiming to ensure clarity and inclusivity in our group discussion in-person, virtually or in our team chat 1C I regularly self-assess and look for opportunities for growth while engaging in this process. I seek feedback from my team when I am struggling in an attempt to grow in my reviewer capacity

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2B I attended the IMRA in-person kick-off meeting in Dallas. 2B I have been present in all of our virtual meetings with our coaches

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A I have been in education for 28 years. I have taught everything K-5 with the majority of my experience being in ELA classrooms. I've been an ELA instructional coach/specialist/master teacher in multiple districts for the past 12 years. I've trained districts and campuses across Texas and in Tennessee on ELA content and instructional strategies as an educational consultant 3A I have written TEKS based curriculum documents for various districts and analyzed tests and instructional materials for standards alignment 3A I understand HQIM key vocabulary as it is associated with the application of resources 3B I understand the review processes and timelines but have needed some support 3C I have a strong belief i n unbiased evidence collection when it comes to HQIM and all things within the scope of the educational realm. I believe in evidence to support our work as educators. As an educator, I am always checking my thinking and am not afraid to admit when my thinking needed adjusting. 3D I am employed as an instructional coach and have evaluated teachers on their use of HQIM and use the materials in PLCs and Campus and district trainings.

Personal goal

2A I am still learning to navigate review platforms and require additional support. I would like to move this to Accomplished or Distinguished by the next self-assessment. I think this will also help with my overall evidence collection as well.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1B - As the reviewer responsible for the written submission report, I believe I consistently demonstrate professional thought and idea expression. Additionally, I can effectively combine the thoughts and ideas of my team members to create a cohesive piece of writing.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - The written submission report has undergone a change since the previous cycle. Instead of using Google Docs, we now use Google Sheets. While I’m familiar with both tools, the frequent updates to the spreadsheet have necessitated some adjustments on my part.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3B - I haven’t missed a deadline yet, and I don’t intend to. I’ll be unable to work during a family vacation, but I’ve made plans to work ahead to ensure compliance.

Personal goal

It’s been smoother than last year, which is surprising considering I have more work this year, specifically collecting evidence.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - A teammate sent the following text to me, "Angela, thank you for speaking up in our team meetings. You are thorough in the work you do and I appreciate all you add to the conversation." 1A - At one point, I had a different score than all other members on each of our teams. I was able to give evidence to guide our team to understand where the evidence was located and add to the score. 1B - I listen before speaking when possible and try to understand how and where others found different evidence or understood the indicator differently before I speak up to express my findings and understanding. When others don't seem to be understanding each other, I try to "interpret" or fill in gaps to help the discussion. 1C - When others are thinking differently than me, I try to listen and research to come into consensus with others. This last consensus meeting, I had scored higher in one area than in others. My teammates explained how my evidence was not fully in line with the evidence and I made the needed changes and learned more about evidence collecting.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - I use the QRCs, alignment, evidence guide, workbook, and glossaries regularly. I love the resources tab being on the workbook to pull our resources together for easy access. 2B - I spend many hours researching and searching to understand the indicators with each breakout and to locate information within the curriculum. 2B - I attend every meeting on time. I want to be there to hear from my teammates and am prepared to stay on as long as we need in order to reach consensus. I have participated in each of our consensus meetings so far.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A&C - I have applied my understanding of TEKS and ELPS to search for evidence within our materials of each indicator. When I come across times that I am uncertain after utilizing the exemplars, glossaries, and other tools, I document what I see and then talk with my team to gain clarity and make the final decision. I have had times that I found the evidence was not fully meeting the standards and times that I have been able to guide others to a new understanding of the evidence available. 3B&D - I have completed my work ahead of each deadline and have put in many hours to ensure that I am providing high-quality reviews that accurately indicate what standards are met and how. I am more than willing to spend time talking with teammates to hash out the indicators and their breakouts. I want to rate myself as Distinguished in each of these categories because I feel like I am championing high standards by demonstrating commitment to quality materials through many hours of strong effort. However, I feel like we all make mistakes and need to be open to discussion and learning as we go, which does not fit well with 3A and 3C Distinguished.

Personal goal

For the most part, I have enjoyed working on IMRA 2026 up to this point. I have felt frustration over the accepting and rejecting of the QRC evidences. It has made this process twice as much work and repetitive. I cannot accept or reject materials without digging into the indicator and the material deeply. It has definitely increased the workload. My goal is to try to take notes and gather as much evidence as possible while researching and deciding to accept or reject so that I can repeat less as I go back to write a review and document evidence for each indicator.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A- 1. I consistently contributed to team discussions by asking clarifying questions, offering evidence-based reasoning, and helping the group reach shared understanding during consensus meetings. 2. I actively supported team rapport by engaging respectfully with all reviewers and modeling collaborative problem solving with the team. 1B- 1. In meetings, I expressed my reasoning clearly and respectfully, using questioning to deepen or probe team understanding and maintain an inclusive, productive tone. 2.I regularly communicated feedback with clarity and professionalism, ensuring my written comments were specific and aligned to the provided rubric. 1C 1. I sought to refine my review practice by asking questions that clarified expectations, strengthened alignment, and ensured accurate reviewing. I used this information to help me self assess my thinking as well. 2. I used feedback from leads and peers into my work, demonstrating growth across the review process thus far and improving the precision and quality of my evidence statements.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A 1.I regularly used the review workbook, rubric guides and reporting tools accurately and independently, completing all required entries prior to meetings. 2. I demonstrated proficiency by navigating the tools efficiently and supporting smooth team workflow. 2B 1. I’ve attended every scheduled meeting including the Wednesday draft meetings. I’ve also consistently participated with focus, preparation, and professionalism. 2. I have also contributed actively in discussions and maintained strong engagement through virtual collaboration. 3. I contributed to the productive environment by being mentally present, prepared and responsive to questions or probing thoughts. 4. I have demonstrated strong engagement by also leading some discussions or probing questions as well.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A 1. I consistently applied TEKS aligned reasoning in my evaluations, grounding my judgments in evidence from the materials and demonstrating understanding of instructional/lesson design. 2. When given feedback, it has been an accurate interpretation of supplemental Math and instructional intent that supports scoring criteria. 3B 1. I completed all assigned reviews before team meetings, ensuring my work was ready for discussion. 2. I adhered closely to review protocols, maintaining consistency in scoring and documentation across the review. 3C 1. I have grounded judgments in citations and evidence from the materials. 2. When discussing questions, I reflected on the rubric evidence and examples to help align my thoughts when contributing information. 3D 1. I am consistently analyzing the materials provided to offer precise evidence and advocate when there is evidence of possible alignment. 2. I have elevated the process by asking questions that clarified expectations and strengthened team alignment.

Personal goal

Reflecting on my work during the IMRA review cycle thus far, I consistently demonstrated professionalism, technical skills, and quality. I’ve strengthened team collaboration by fostering inclusive discussions, asking clarifying questions that deepened shared understanding, and helping the group reach evidence aligned consensus. I have also maintained a high level of professionalism in both written and verbal communication, ensuring clarity, respect, and alignment with the standards. My goal for the next cycle is to deepen my impact through continuous self-reflection, questioning and intentional support and collaboration. I would like to focus on strengthening my ability to identify potential misalignments and articulate them to my team to help anticipate potential misalignments before they arise. This can possibly streamline our consensus and add value to our discussions.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A, Accomplished: (1) I regularly work collaboratively and contribute to productive team discussions. I have attended all meetings and met deadlines on evidence collections. (2) During consensus meetings, I listen actively to understand the reasoning of teammates when our ratings are different. I reference the exemplars, and the materials to justify my ratings when they are different from everyone else's 1B, Accomplished. (1)I reached out to my team through GroupMe to request consensus meeting to start 30 minutes later and explained whey I was requesting it. I respected the coach's decision to stick to the original schedule and made adjustments accordingly. (2) When I disagree with a teammate's rating or reasoning, I respectfully share my evidence, my screen, and articulate the differences in my ratings. 1C, Accomplished: (1) Of course. I decided to be a reviewer again because I want to continue to learn from the state and from other educators what HQIMs are, and to ensure that the teachers and students I serve at my district use HQIMs and are engaged in high-quality learning. (2) It is always extremely useful to listen to other's perspectives. Feedback is always a gift. Being able to express differences in opinions and seeing others' perspectives improves my understanding of the indicators.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A, Accomplished. (1) I utilize the Sandbox to compile screenshots of my evidence. (2) I always refer to the examples and non-examples and the resources in the folders to verify that I am collecting appropriate evidences and presenting them accurately. 2B, Accomplished. (1) I have attended all online meetings. (2) During meetings, I listen actively, ask questions, and provide clarifications as appropriate.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A, Distinguished. (1) I train teachers at my district about the TEKS. (2) I collaborate with the Multilingual department at my district to ensure that instructional practices and walkthrough tools include look-fors for the accurate implementation of the ELPS. (3) I write district assessments for all math courses at my district. 3B, Accomplished. (1) I regularly adhere to review processes and deadlines with only occasional support. I ensure that my 2-evidences are duly entered before the consensus meeting, except for the 3.3 indicators for Statistics because of an extremely busy workweek. (2) I will go back and complete the required 2 evidences for Statistics. 3D, Distinguished. (1) I train instructional specialists and teachers on the implementation of HQIMs. (2) I actively participate in my district to create walkthrough tools to ensure there is clarity on what HQIMs and high-quality instructional practices look like. (3) When I collect evidence, I examine the examples and non-examples to ensure my rating is accurate and justified.

Personal goal

My goal is to collect evidence early, then go back and review their accuracy and quality to ensure that curriculum materials that teachers and students at my district might use later are high quality ad have gone through rigorous review.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1B: During team discussions, I ask clarifying questions and contribute ideas that support shared understanding and consensus-building. My participation has helped ensure that review decisions are grounded in a common interpretation of the criteria and evidence. 1C: I have consistently applied feedback to improve the quality of my evidence collection and documentation. As a result, the number of evidence submissions identified as “good evidence” has increased each week, demonstrating growth in my ability to locate, analyze, and present evidence aligned to the review criteria.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A. Evidence 1: I developed and regularly maintain a comprehensive spreadsheet to track indicators and document evidence across review cycles. This tool allows me to record and organize evidence for future indicators, helping me work proactively and efficiently throughout the review process. 2A. Evidence 2: I consistently use the required review platforms and digital tools to access materials, annotate information, collect evidence, and complete reporting tasks. I am able to navigate these systems independently and effectively, supporting accurate documentation and timely completion of assigned work. 2B. Evidence 1: During the in-person training week, I actively participated in team discussions, collaborated in dividing responsibilities, and helped establish and maintain a timeline for completing review tasks. 2B. Evidence 2: In virtual meetings and communications, I consistently contribute ideas, ask clarifying questions, and share my perspectives to support team decision-making and maintain productive collaboration.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A. Evidence 1: I regularly consult and reference printed copies of the TEKS for both grade levels I am reviewing to verify alignment and ensure that my evaluations are grounded in grade-level expectations and state standards. 3A. Evidence 2: I intentionally review the purpose and requirements of each indicator before conducting a review and apply my pedagogical knowledge to evaluate materials objectively, using evidence from the materials rather than personal opinion to support ratings. 3B. Evidence 1: I begin evidence collection and review activities immediately and maintain an organized system for tracking evidence across indicators. Because I document evidence as I encounter it, I often have relevant evidence identified before an indicator is formally assigned for review, allowing me to complete reviews efficiently and ahead of schedule. 3B. Evidence 2: I consistently meet established deadlines and maintain steady progress throughout the review cycle by proactively organizing tasks, monitoring timelines, and planning ahead for upcoming indicators. 3B. Evidence 3: I have taken the initiative to study IMRA guidance documents and exemplar reviews to strengthen the quality of my writing and ensure that my evidence statements align with expectations for high-quality, standards-based reviews. 3B. Evidence 4: While the review process requires two pieces of evidence per indicator, I have frequently provided a third piece of evidence when I determined that the initial evidence was not sufficiently strong. This demonstrates my commitment to thoroughness, accuracy, and ensuring that ratings are supported by the strongest available evidence. and recommendations. 3C. Evidence 1: I intentionally complete my own evidence collection and analysis before reviewing the work of other reviewers. This practice helps ensure that my findings and written evidence are independently developed and based solely on my evaluation of the materials. 3C. Evidence 2: I consistently use the RLA Evidence Guide, indicator criteria, look-fors, and provided examples to evaluate materials and determine ratings. This ensures that my decisions are aligned to established review expectations rather than personal interpretation. 3C. Evidence 3: I carefully review my evidence statements before submission to verify that they are objective, evidence-based, and free from personal opinions or subjective language. 3C. Evidence 4: I support ratings and conclusions with documented evidence from the materials and focus on what is explicitly present in the program. This evidence-driven approach allows me to make fair, consistent, and unbiased decisions across indicators and grade levels. 3D. Evidence 1: This is my third time serving as an IMRA Quality Reviewer, demonstrating my ongoing commitment to supporting the review process and helping ensure that Texas educators have access to high-quality instructional materials. 3D. Evidence 2: I voluntarily dedicate significant time and effort to the review process because I value the impact that thorough, evidence-based curriculum evaluations have on educators, students, and instructional decision-making across the state. 3. Evidence 3: As a classroom educator, I have benefited from the work of curriculum reviewers and understand the importance of providing clear, accurate, and trustworthy information that educators can use when selecting and implementing instructional materials. 3D. Evidence 4: As a Center Director responsible for selecting curriculum resources for five preschool classrooms, I have relied on curriculum review information to make informed decisions. This experience has reinforced my appreciation for comprehensive instructional material reviews and strengthened my commitment to producing high-quality evaluations that support other educational leaders and teachers.

Personal goal

Participating in IMRA Cycle 2026 has been a valuable professional experience that has strengthened my understanding of curriculum evaluation and the importance of high-quality instructional materials. Throughout the review process, I have worked to ensure that my evaluations were evidence-based, objective, and aligned to the review criteria and Texas standards. This experience has reinforced the importance of careful analysis, collaboration, and maintaining high expectations when reviewing materials that may ultimately impact educators and students across the state. As a third-time IMRA Quality Reviewer, I have continued to refine my review practices by developing organizational systems for tracking evidence, studying exemplar reviews, and consistently seeking opportunities to improve the quality of my written evidence. I have appreciated the opportunity to collaborate with other reviewers, learn from shared discussions, and contribute to a process that supports informed curriculum decisions for Texas schools. My experiences as both an educator and a center director have further reinforced the value of rigorous curriculum reviews and the important role they play in helping educators select effective instructional materials. Personal Goal: During future review cycles, I will continue to strengthen my evidence-writing skills by further refining the clarity, precision, and conciseness of my evidence statements. While I consistently strive to provide thorough and standards-aligned reviews, I want to continue improving my ability to communicate findings in a way that is both comprehensive and highly efficient for readers. By continuing to learn from exemplar reviews, feedback, and collaboration with fellow reviewers, I will further enhance the quality and impact of my contributions to the IMRA review process.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A – Participated consistently in virtual consensus meetings, contributing evidence-based observations and engaging in collaborative discussions regarding indicator ratings and program evidence. 1A – Worked with fellow reviewers to compare interpretations of rubric criteria and program materials, supporting consensus decisions through discussion and reference to specific evidence locations. 1B – Maintained professional communication during meetings and written correspondence, ensuring feedback, questions, and evidence submissions were clear, respectful, and aligned to review expectations. 1C – Applied feedback received from facilitators regarding descriptive evidence writing and revised submissions to strengthen alignment to indicator language and evidence expectations. 1C – Engaged in reviewer training sessions, reviewed support materials, and sought clarification when needed to improve understanding of review processes and rubric application.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A – Utilized the IMRA review platform, evidence collection tools, competency checks, and tracking documents to complete assigned reviews, document evidence, and monitor progress throughout the review cycle. 2A –Applied review tools consistently to locate instructional materials, record findings, submit evidence, and participate in the review process according to established procedures. 2B – Participated actively in both in-person reviewer training sessions and virtual meetings, adapting to different collaboration formats while completing assigned review responsibilities. 2B – Maintained regular participation during virtual consensus discussions and collaborative review activities, contributing to team conversations and review tasks throughout the cycle.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A – Applied deep knowledge of mathematics TEKS, ELPS, and instructional practices to evaluate instructional materials for alignment, rigor, and accessibility throughout the review process. 3A –Used classroom experience as a secondary mathematics educator to analyze student and teacher materials and identify evidence aligned to rubric expectations and content standards. 3B – Completed assigned reviews, evidence submissions, and reviewer responsibilities according to established timelines and review procedures. 3C – Evaluated materials using documented evidence from program resources and rubric criteria, ensuring ratings were supported by evidence rather than personal preference. 3D – Applied IMRA evaluation criteria consistently to support the identification of high-quality instructional materials that promote meaningful student learning and teacher success.

Personal goal

Participating in IMRA Cycle 2026 was a valuable professional learning experience that expanded my understanding of the instructional materials review process. Through reviewing materials, participating in consensus discussions, and collaborating with other educators across Texas, I gained a deeper appreciation for the level of analysis required to evaluate instructional resources effectively. The experience also strengthened my ability to support decisions with evidence and apply rubric criteria consistently. Moving forward, my goal is to continue developing my expertise in instructional materials evaluation and to use what I learned through IMRA to support high-quality instruction and student learning in my own classroom and professional work.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A: During the IMRA 2026 kickoff training, I intentionally supported new reviewers by answering questions, sharing guidance on review expectations, and helping them navigate the review process. By providing encouragement and resources, I helped establish a collaborative team environment and build rapport among reviewers from the beginning of the project. 1A: I actively participate in our team group chat, where reviewers regularly communicate, ask questions, and share resources. I frequently provide guidance and support to team members, helping foster open communication and ensuring that reviewers feel comfortable seeking assistance and sharing ideas. 1A: Throughout the review process, I have encouraged open dialogue and constructive feedback among team members. When challenges arise, particularly during report writing and evidence collection, I collaborate with colleagues to problem-solve and reach solutions that align with the review criteria and project expectations. 1A: During a recent consensus meeting, our review coach assigned writers to lead breakout room discussions. In my breakout room, I facilitated the conversation by guiding reviewers through each indicator, encouraging participation from all team members, and helping the group work through differing perspectives to reach consensus. 1A: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the consensus process, I created a document that captured each reviewer’s rating for every indicator. This tool allowed the team to quickly identify areas of agreement and disagreement, focus discussions where needed, and work toward consensus. After facilitating the discussion, I documented the final ratings and supporting evidence to ensure an accurate and collaborative outcome. 1B: During consensus meetings, I communicated expectations, questions, and feedback clearly while ensuring all team members had opportunities to contribute. When leading discussions, I intentionally invited participation from reviewers and encouraged multiple perspectives to ensure everyone felt included in the conversation. 1B: I consistently communicate professionally in meetings, breakout sessions, and our team group chat. Whether asking questions, providing guidance, or responding to colleagues, I strive to use respectful and constructive language that supports positive working relationships and productive collaboration. 1C: As a first-time writer, I proactively sought feedback from the writing coach to ensure my reports met quality expectations and aligned with IMRA requirements. I reflected on the feedback provided and applied suggestions to strengthen the clarity, organization, and quality of my written reports. 1C: Throughout the review process, I actively look for opportunities to expand my knowledge and improve my practice. I regularly reflect on my work, identify areas for growth, and seek guidance from experienced team members and coaches to build my capacity as both a reviewer and writer.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A: Throughout the review cycle, I consistently use the IMRA workbook and QRC workbook to complete reviews, document findings, and track progress. I successfully submitted all required writing reports through the IMRA workbook, ensuring documentation was completed accurately and according to project expectations. 2A: To support my team's review process, I created a consensus spreadsheet that compiled reviewer ratings and evidence in one location. This tool allowed the team to quickly identify areas of agreement and disagreement, organize evidence efficiently, and facilitate productive consensus discussions. The spreadsheet improved our ability to track information and make informed decisions throughout the review process. 2B: I have attended all required meetings and actively participated in discussions throughout the review cycle. Whether in whole-group sessions, team meetings, or breakout rooms, I consistently contribute ideas, ask clarifying questions, and collaborate with colleagues to support the review process. 2B: I have taken on leadership responsibilities within my team by helping organize discussions, supporting team members, and facilitating collaboration. During consensus meetings, I guided conversations, encouraged participation from all reviewers, and helped the team work toward agreement while maintaining a positive and productive environment. 2B: When I was informed with less than 24 hours' notice that I would be leading a breakout-room consensus meeting, I quickly adapted to the change. I prepared materials, organized reviewer ratings and evidence, facilitated the discussion, and successfully guided the team to consensus while documenting final decisions and supporting evidence. 2B: I actively collaborate with team members outside of formal meetings through our group communication channels. I provide guidance, answer questions, share resources, and work alongside colleagues on report-writing and review tasks. This ongoing support helps maintain strong communication and collaboration across both virtual and independent work settings. 2B: To support virtual collaboration, I created a consensus-tracking spreadsheet that allowed team members to view ratings and evidence in one place. This resource improved communication, helped identify areas requiring discussion, and supported efficient decision-making during consensus meetings.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A: I regularly apply my knowledge of the K–1 TEKS and ELPS when evaluating instructional materials and collecting evidence. This understanding allows me to accurately analyze alignment, identify strengths and gaps within materials, and support my ratings with standards-based evidence. 3A: During team discussions and consensus meetings, I use my understanding of the K–1 TEKS and ELPS to contribute to evidence-based conversations about alignment and instructional quality. I reference standards when explaining ratings, discussing evidence, and helping the team reach informed decisions during the review process. 3B: I consistently attend all required meetings and come prepared to actively engage in discussions and review activities. By staying informed and prepared, I am able to contribute effectively to team discussions, consensus meetings, and project tasks while following established review procedures. 3B: I closely follow the IMRA review schedule and have successfully met all deadlines throughout the review cycle. I complete assigned reviews, writing tasks, and consensus responsibilities on time, ensuring that my work supports the overall progress and success of the review team. 3C: Throughout the review process, I base my ratings and recommendations on evidence collected from the instructional materials and alignment to the review criteria. During discussions and consensus meetings, I reference documented evidence to explain my reasoning and support objective decision-making. 3C: When I encounter challenging indicators or situations where additional perspective is needed, I seek guidance from team members, coaches, or project resources. By asking questions and engaging in collaborative discussions, I ensure that my decisions remain evidence-based, objective, and aligned to IMRA expectations rather than personal opinion. 3D: I am committed to ensuring that Texas students and educators have access to high-quality instructional materials that support student learning and achievement. This commitment motivates me to carefully evaluate materials against established criteria and provide thoughtful, standards-based feedback throughout the review process. 3D: Throughout the review cycle, I have consistently applied the IMRA criteria, TEKS, and ELPS when reviewing instructional materials and collecting evidence. By engaging in evidence-based discussions, participating in consensus meetings, and contributing to the writing process, I help ensure that final recommendations reflect the quality and rigor expected for Texas classrooms.

Personal goal

Reflecting on IMRA Cycle 2026, I am proud of the growth I experienced as both a reviewer and a first-time writer. Throughout the cycle so far, I strengthened my understanding of the review process, collaborated effectively with my team, and sought feedback to improve the quality of my work. One experience that contributed significantly to my growth was being told to facilitate a consensus discussion and guide my team through the consensus-building process. This opportunity allowed me to develop my leadership, communication, and decision-making skills while supporting productive collaboration among reviewers. My goal is to further develop my leadership and facilitation skills by supporting reviewers, lead collaborative discussions, and contribute to high-quality, evidence-based review outcomes.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A- I verbally contribute to the discussions during consensus meetings each week. 1B - I add to the consensus discussions as needed through the chats and ask clarifying questions as needed. 1C - I make sure to look over the other evidence from other reviewers to see how my evidence can be improved for the next week.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - Before each consensus meeting I make sure to open the workbook, evidence guide, and program 2B - I have engaged in all virtual unpacking and consensus meetings including the holiday. 2A - I engaged in the in-person training and collaborated with my 4 team members to successfully complete all of our tasks prior to leaving Dallas.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3B - I have adhered to all deadlines for completing tasks and evidence collection based in standards-aligned evidence. 3C - I have include evidence in collection, but have struggled with items that involve reasoning for the AI coach feature included in the product. 3D - I consistently commit to ensuring educators receive option for instructional materials best suited for Texas standards by participating in two IMRA cycles. 3A - I apply my content expertise to ensure all materials meet the Texas standards for math as well as the ELPS by grounding my evidence in the TEKS and language competencies.

Personal goal

Goal: Before my next consensus I will improve my time management and collect evidence for 30 minutes each day to include at least two pieces of descriptive evidence summaries that always begin with a topic sentence and include specific examples from the materials.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A-I regularly work collaboratively and contribute productively within team discussions. In our indicator meetings, I have presented evidence and directed teachers to locations that support the provided rubric. I have also reached out to my team members in a group text when we are searching for and finding evidence to assist them in locating evidence as well or redirecting them to the evidence guide. 1B-I regularly express ideas professionally, ensuring clarity and inclusivity in discussions. I recognize in our discussions as a team that others on the team are valued members for their education and professional experiences. I like to listen and will participate within discussion as needed. It is important to listen and let myself be heard. Our group is a very large group and it is important to listen to others as well as learn. I use the tools in the meeting room to vote and participate as well as my voice. 1C- I regularly engage in self-assessment and apply feedback to improve. I realize that I can continue to learn and grow as a professional. I greatly appreciate the constructive feedback that is offered by coaches and team members alike. This helps me to grow as a professional. I have utilized the feedback given with regards to writing through comments in the workbook or comments in the meetings.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A-I regularly use project tools effective for reviewing, tracking and reporting by toggling back and forth between the QRC, utilizing the resource tabs within our provided workbook, and am able to locate HQ exemplars as I collect my evidence. 2B-I regularly engage effectively in both virtual and in person work, adapting as needed. On my campus I am a leader in our literacy department. On this team I recognize this is my first year participating in the IMRA process. There are two educators that have participated in the IMRA process several times in different roles. While we were at kickoff, I used that time to ask them questions about the process and learned from them. They were helpful and I welcomed being a rookie under their wing. They were great as they also respected my expertise in the field of literacy, but shared their expertise as an IMRA reviewer. This prepared me to be able to participate once we returned home to engage effectively within our consensus and unpacking meetings.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A-I deeply understand the TEKS, ELPS, and instructional materials. This is evidenced by my continuous use of the vertically aligned TEKS that I have used in the 19 years of teaching. I also understand the importance of the ELPS as they guide the planning for our bilingual or ESL programs. It is imperative that our educators and students have access to high-quality instructional materials within our state and one of the reasons I have applied to participate in this process. 3B- I regularly adhere to deadlines and the review process with occasional support. I have set aside regular working hours this summer to focus on this project as I value the process. I understand that in order for our team writer to be able to complete her work that each team member must have their part completed. 3C-I regularly apply evidence based reasoning. Evidence based reasoning is utilized as I review the materials. I often think about the first year teacher and as I am reviewing and use the rubric to guide my decisions. I use the rubric as I break apart each verb ensuring that each point is addressed as I review the material. 3D-I consistently champion high standards ensuring Texas and students receive the best instructional materials. This is observed as I have consistently applied to serve on TEA committees throughout my educational career. Particularly the IMRA project as I review the Indicator Guide and review the materials. I comb through each piece the publisher has given us looking for evidence that fits each indicator.

Personal goal

I will improve my descriptive evidence writing.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - A teammate sent the following text to me, "Angela, thank you for speaking up in our team meetings. You are thorough in the work you do and I appreciate all you add to the conversation." 1A - At one point, I had a different score than all other members on each of our teams. I was able to give evidence to guide our team to understand where the evidence was located and add to the score. 1B - I listen before speaking when possible and try to understand how and where others found different evidence or understood the indicator differently before I speak up to express my findings and understanding. When others don't seem to be understanding each other, I try to "interpret" or fill in gaps to help the discussion. 1C - When others are thinking differently than me, I try to listen and research to come into consensus with others. This last consensus meeting, I had scored higher in one area than in others. My teammates explained how my evidence was not fully in line with the evidence and I made the needed changes and learned more about evidence collecting.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - I use the QRCs, alignment, evidence guide, workbook, and glossaries regularly. I love the resources tab being on the workbook to pull our resources together for easy access. 2B - I spend many hours researching and searching to understand the indicators with each breakout and to locate information within the curriculum. 2B - I attend every meeting on time. I want to be there to hear from my teammates and am prepared to stay on as long as we need in order to reach consensus. I have participated in each of our consensus meetings so far.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A&C - I have applied my understanding of TEKS and ELPS to search for evidence within our materials of each indicator. When I come across times that I am uncertain after utilizing the exemplars, glossaries, and other tools, I document what I see and then talk with my team to gain clarity and make the final decision. I have had times that I found the evidence was not fully meeting the standards and times that I have been able to guide others to a new understanding of the evidence available. 3B&D - I have completed my work ahead of each deadline and have put in many hours to ensure that I am providing high-quality reviews that accurately indicate what standards are met and how. I am more than willing to spend time talking with teammates to hash out the indicators and their breakouts. I want to rate myself as Distinguished in each of these categories because I feel like I am championing high standards by demonstrating commitment to quality materials through many hours of strong effort. However, I feel like we all make mistakes and need to be open to discussion and learning as we go, which does not fit well with 3A and 3C Distinguished.

Personal goal

For the most part, I have enjoyed working on IMRA 2026 up to this point. I have felt frustration over the accepting and rejecting of the QRC evidences. It has made this process twice as much work and repetitive. I cannot accept or reject materials without digging into the indicator and the material deeply. It has definitely increased the workload. My goal is to try to take notes and gather as much evidence as possible while researching and deciding to accept or reject so that I can repeat less as I go back to write a review and document evidence for each indicator.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - A teammate sent the following text to me, "Angela, thank you for speaking up in our team meetings. You are thorough in the work you do and I appreciate all you add to the conversation." 1A - At one point, I had a different score than all other members on each of our teams. I was able to give evidence to guide our team to understand where the evidence was located and add to the score. 1B - I listen before speaking when possible and try to understand how and where others found different evidence or understood the indicator differently before I speak up to express my findings and understanding. When others don't seem to be understanding each other, I try to "interpret" or fill in gaps to help the discussion. 1C - When others are thinking differently than me, I try to listen and research to come into consensus with others. This last consensus meeting, I had scored higher in one area than in others. My teammates explained how my evidence was not fully in line with the evidence and I made the needed changes and learned more about evidence collecting.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - I use the QRCs, alignment, evidence guide, workbook, and glossaries regularly. I love the resources tab being on the workbook to pull our resources together for easy access. 2B - I spend many hours researching and searching to understand the indicators with each breakout and to locate information within the curriculum. 2B - I attend every meeting on time. I want to be there to hear from my teammates and am prepared to stay on as long as we need in order to reach consensus. I have participated in each of our consensus meetings so far.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A&C - I have applied my understanding of TEKS and ELPS to search for evidence within our materials of each indicator. When I come across times that I am uncertain after utilizing the exemplars, glossaries, and other tools, I document what I see and then talk with my team to gain clarity and make the final decision. I have had times that I found the evidence was not fully meeting the standards and times that I have been able to guide others to a new understanding of the evidence available. 3B&D - I have completed my work ahead of each deadline and have put in many hours to ensure that I am providing high-quality reviews that accurately indicate what standards are met and how. I am more than willing to spend time talking with teammates to hash out the indicators and their breakouts. I want to rate myself as Distinguished in each of these categories because I feel like I am championing high standards by demonstrating commitment to quality materials through many hours of strong effort. However, I feel like we all make mistakes and need to be open to discussion and learning as we go, which does not fit well with 3A and 3C Distinguished.

Personal goal

For the most part, I have enjoyed working on IMRA 2026 up to this point. I have felt frustration over the accepting and rejecting of the QRC evidences. It has made this process twice as much work and repetitive. I cannot accept or reject materials without digging into the indicator and the material deeply. It has definitely increased the workload. My goal is to try to take notes and gather as much evidence as possible while researching and deciding to accept or reject so that I can repeat less as I go back to write a review and document evidence for each indicator.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A I focus on building strong relationships with the reviewers on my team to foster trust and create an inclusive environment where all perspectives are valued. This enhances engagement and ownership of our work. I drive collaboration by actively listening, asking insightful questions, and encouraging diverse viewpoints to ensure productive discussions. To reach consensus, I solicit input from all team members while aligning our decisions with IMRA goals and criteria. When opinions differ, I promote open dialogue and use evidence to guide us toward unified decisions. 1B I maintain a professional tone in all conversations, creating a safe space for team members to share their thoughts openly. By modeling respectful communication, I ensure that everyone feels heard and valued in our discussions. I intentionally invite contributions from quieter members and celebrate diverse perspectives to foster inclusivity. I respect differing viewpoints by asking clarifying questions to ensure all perspectives are considered before making decisions. 1C I routinely reflect on my IMRA work to assess my successes and identify areas for improvement in scoring consistency and understanding. I incorporate feedback from peers to make meaningful adjustments in line with the rubric. By analyzing past decisions, I recognize patterns and set goals for ongoing improvement in my performance.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A I confidently utilize the IMRA platform and scoring tools to effectively review submissions, navigate materials, and document my decisions. My expertise in using the Dashboard allows me to cast votes, submit feedback, or report errors smoothly. By consistently engaging with our digital tools for reviewing and reporting, I enhance my daily operations and ensure informed decision-making. 2B I am highly proficient with Microsoft Teams for our online meetings, which greatly aids our discussions on indicators and helps us reach consensus as a cohesive group. I actively contribute in both online and in-person meetings and adapt my participation as needed, ensuring that I remain engaged and significantly impact the team’s success.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A I regularly use my content expertise to evaluate materials and make informed scoring decisions while continually refining areas of alignment. I apply my understanding of standards and instructional practices to identify strengths and gaps in materials, which supports accurate reviews. Additionally, I utilize my pedagogical knowledge to guide my scoring and engage in ongoing learning through the review process to enhance alignment. 3B I consistently adhere to IMRA review processes and meet deadlines, staying organized and on track with my assignments. I manage my review work independently, completing tasks on time and reaching out for support only when necessary. I remain mindful of timelines and expectations, ensuring that my scoring and documentation are submitted accurately and within the required deadlines. 3C I consistently use evidence-based reasoning to guide my scoring decisions, grounding my evaluations in the rubric and established criteria. I rely on the text and indicators to support unbiased decision-making, ensuring my judgments are objective and aligned with expectations. I apply evidence carefully in most cases and seek clarification only when items are particularly complex or require additional interpretation. 3D I consistently demonstrate a strong commitment to high-quality instructional materials by thoughtfully and accurately applying the evaluation criteria in my reviews. I carefully utilize the rubric and standards to assess materials, ensuring that my scoring reflects both rigor and instructional quality. I focus on identifying strengths and areas for improvement in materials, intending to support the creation of high-quality instructional resources for students.

Personal goal

I will enhance my professionalism in team collaboration, continuous learning, and growth throughout the review process. My goal is to deepen my pedagogical and content knowledge while consistently applying evidence-based reasoning and making decisions that are unbiased and aligned with established criteria.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A I answer team texts regarding evidence collection and have helped teammates better understand the IMRA process. I participate in all Unpacking and Consensus meetings siting evidence and rubric language when the teams are not in agreement. 1B I engage respectfully when attending weekly meetings and ask clarifying questions when we are not in alignment. I am respectful to the coaches and assume the best of intentions with everyone on the team. In team texts, I address members by name and take time to complement people for specific tasks. I often express my appreciation for all of my teammates and what they bring to the group. 1C I don't ask for feedback on my evidence writing and know other group members have.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A I am able to navigate the product to find evidence in several different places instead of always relying on the evidence provided by the publisher. I have attended virtual meetings, completed all trainings and used the workbook with no technical difficulties. 2B I regularly attend and participate in virtual meetings and trainings. I have passed all required assessments and have adapted to glitches in technology and processes.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A I have taught and written curriculum in grades K-5 and have a solid understanding of the TEKS and ELPS. I understand the importance of verbs and unpacking standards to ensure common understanding. 3B My evidence is ready before the deadline each week. I regularly help members of my group problems solve utilizing resources such as the IMRA glossary and evidence guides. 3C I do not put personal opinions in my evidence statements. I utilize resources provided during the IMRA training and adhere to the standards and explanations in the evidence guides.

Personal goal

I am considering a writing role next year and would like to improve my evidence with more precise language and improved vocabulary.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - I continue to work collaboratively with my team via group text message and during virtual meetings since kick off training. 1A - When either of us have questions we work together to problem solve and have productive team discussions during unpacking and consensus meetings. 1B - I regularly communicate with both teams and coaches in a professional manner. 1B - When asking clarifying questions, I ensure to speak professionally and I do not exclude anyone from team discussions. 1C - At the weekly consensus meetings I read my teammates descriptive summaries and I reflect on how I can improve with my own descriptive summaries. 1C - Each week I feel that my descriptive summaries get better due to reflecting and listening to the overall feedback from the coaches about what they are looking for.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - I use the supplemental rubric, evidence summary, and QRC weekly to assist me in writing my descriptive summaries. 2A - Each week I use the workbook to report my descriptive summaries and use the program consensus tab to verify if I am on the right track. 2B - I effectively engaged in in person kick off training where I worked with my team to complete the assigned tasks during kick off and began our evidence collection. 2B - I effectively engage in virtual work twice per week with my the teams during unpacking and consensus meetings.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - I have a deep understanding of TEKS having taught ELAR for 17 years and use that expertise in writing my reviews. 3A - I have a deep understanding of ELPS having taught ELAR for 17 years to English Language Learners and use that expertise and experience in writing my reviews. 3A - I have a deep understanding of literacy instructional materials having taught ELAR for 17 years in two states and use that expertise and experience to ensure that the materials are rigorous when writing my reviews. 3B - I consistently meet the descriptive summary deadlines weekly and completed my asynchronous trainings ahead of the deadline. 3B - I consistently write standards aligned reviews every week for my descriptive summaries by using the supplemental rubric and supplemental evidence guide. 3C - I consistently use the supplemental rubric to ensure that I am writing unbiased evidence based thinking when writing my descriptive reviews and having discussions with my teammates. 3C - I consistently use the supplemental evidence guide to ensure that I am writing unbiased evidence based thinking when writing my descriptive reviews and having discussions with my teammates. 3C - I consistently use the QRC to ensure that I am writing unbiased evidence based thinking when writing my descriptive reviews and having discussions with my teammates. 3C - I consistently use the RLA glossary to ensure that I am writing unbiased evidence based thinking when writing my descriptive reviews and having discussions with my teammates. 3D - I consistently review instructional materials for their rigor and alignment to the TEKS. 3D - I frequently review instructional materials through TEA and Pearson to ensure alignment to the TEKS so that Texas students have access to high quality materials.

Personal goal

So far I have enjoyed IMRA Cycle 2026 and collaborating with my team. However, this experience has been a learning curve because I have previously participated in an IMRA cycle as a suitability reviewer but the quality reviewer process has been very different. My personal goal would be to improve in writing my descriptive summaries. I have been improving each week but am still struggling with finding the happy medium between being succient but also thorough.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A- I regularly contribute to the collaborative conversation and provide evidence. 1B- I regularly express my ideas with clarity while keeping an open mind.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A- I consistently use the review tools including the QRC, the workbook, and the online curriculum. I work with my team to locate information for review through text message and email. Other teammates feel free to reach out. 2B-I engage both virtually during our weekly meetings and in-person. My collaborative team worked well together to solve tasks.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A- I am a core curriculum coordinator for my district. This position requires an expertise of grade level TEKS and ELPS. I am also a reading academy cohort leader. These positions require a deep understanding of literacy and how it develops.

Personal goal

My personal goal is to be collaborative with the other teams during consensus.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A. I consistently collaborate with my SLAR team through daily communication, including text messages, meetings, and consensus discussions, to ensure our work is completed effectively and accurately. I consistently maintain a friendly, supportive, and professional attitude while offering clarification, feedback, and assistance whenever teammates need support. I actively contribute to productive discussions and help foster a respectful team environment that encourages collaboration and shared understanding. 1B. I consistently communicate my ideas in a professional, respectful, and clear manner during Zoom meetings, written correspondence, and team discussions. I carefully listen to others, provide constructive feedback, and contribute thoughtful suggestions that support effective teamwork and problem solving. I also strive to be a dependable resource for my teammates by answering questions promptly and helping maintain smooth and positive communication within the team. 1C. I regularly engage in self-assessment and reflection to ensure the quality and professionalism of my work. I actively utilize available resources, guidance documents, and workbook materials to strengthen my understanding and improve my performance throughout the review process. When clarification is needed, I seek support proactively and consistently go above and beyond to complete tasks accurately, effectively, and professionally.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A. I consistently and effectively utilize the workbook and all provided review tools to accurately document, track, and report research data throughout the review process. I regularly reference the RLA Supplemental K-5 Evidence Guide to ensure indicators and “look-fors” are scored accurately and aligned to the rubric expectations. In addition, I use the High-Quality Descriptive Evidence Summary Exemplars and Evidence Collection Best Practices resources to write clear, professional, rubric-aligned evidence statements that support precise and consistent evaluations. 2B. I consistently engage and collaborate effectively with my teammates in both virtual and in-person environments through meetings, written communication, and daily text discussions. I maintain a respectful, supportive, and professional attitude while fostering positive communication and strong team rapport in all interactions. I also adapt positively to changes, challenges, and technical difficulties, ensuring collaboration and productivity continue smoothly and effectively.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A. I demonstrate a deep understanding of the TEKS, ELPS, and high-quality instructional materials through my extensive educational background and experience as an educator. With certifications in Generalist EC-4, Bilingual EC-4, Spanish EC-12, and Gifted and Talented education, along with years of classroom teaching experience, I am able to analyze instructional materials with a strong pedagogical lens and ensure alignment to rigorous academic standards. Throughout the review process, I carefully apply my knowledge of curriculum design, language acquisition, differentiation, and instructional best practices to provide accurate, thorough, and standards-aligned evaluations. 3B. I consistently meet project deadlines while maintaining high-quality, standards-aligned reviews throughout the evaluation process. I carefully analyze instructional materials and provide multiple pieces of evidence for indicators when appropriate to ensure evaluations are accurate, thorough, and supported by the data collected. I also remain highly organized, responsive, and proactive in completing tasks efficiently while maintaining attention to detail and professionalism in all aspects of the review process. 3C. I consistently apply evidence-based reasoning by focusing on empirical evidence, rubric alignment, and documented findings rather than personal opinions or preferences. When reviewing materials or supporting teammates, I ensure that all feedback, discussions, and recommendations are grounded solely in the evidence collected and aligned to the established evaluation criteria. I also carefully analyze data objectively and seek clarification when necessary to maintain fairness, consistency, and accuracy throughout the review process. 3D. I consistently demonstrate a strong commitment to high-quality instructional materials by carefully applying the evaluation criteria and utilizing all provided resources to ensure accurate and meaningful reviews. I regularly reference the workbook tools, evidence guides, exemplars, and best practices documents to strengthen the quality, clarity, and alignment of my evaluations. My background in education and instructional practices allows me to recognize rigorous, student-centered materials that effectively support Texas educators and students while maintaining high professional standards throughout the review process.

Personal goal

My experience during IMRA Cycle 2026 has been both professionally and personally rewarding. Through this process, I have gained valuable knowledge in instructional materials review, strengthened my understanding of TEKS and evaluation practices, and developed meaningful professional relationships with teammates and coaches from diverse backgrounds and experiences. As I continue through the evidence collection process, my personal goal is to continue growing in confidence and expertise as a reviewer by deepening my knowledge of the review tools and criteria, while also continuing to support and collaborate effectively with my team to ensure high-quality, accurate, and standards-aligned evaluations.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A, I keep in contact with the team and with the coaches and maintain open communication when questions arises.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A- I have been using the resources in the folders to support the reviewing and writing work.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

I worked as a district specialist working in curriculum and instruction and a lot of the work that we do we need to make sure the TEKS and ELP are aligned to the lessons.

Personal goal

My personal goal is to continue learning what a HQIM looks like and needs to have to better serve students and teachers.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A -During meetings, I listen carefully to my teammates and contribute relevant questions or comments based on their input. For example, this year I had been asked about the process of quality review, as I had already participated in the previous year, and I was able to help my teammates find the resources that were going to help them be successful reviewers. - I support team consensus by sharing my own findings during discussions. I’ve shared the exact location of my evidence, explaining how they align with the indicator to support our final decisions. - I consistently show respect for my colleagues’ perspectives by listening attentively, waiting for my turn to speak, and responding thoughtfully to others’ ideas. 1B - I speak professionally and respectfully with all teammates, even when we have different scores or perspectives. I share my point of view clearly and maintain a respectful tone to support productive dialogue. - When I’m unsure about the alignment of a piece of evidence, I note my questions and concerns in the score notes and bring them up during our consensus meetings to seek clarity. Before the consensus meeting, I am also able to ask my teammates about their perspectives on my evidence. - When I feel confident about the intent of an indicator, I ask team members for confirmation or work with them to reach a shared understanding. - In my written evidence, I use the language of the indicator and include specific examples from the materials. I review each part of the indicator to ensure my evidence is complete and aligned. 1C - I read the examples for each of the indicators to self-assess my writing and make improvements to my own work. - During and after consensus meetings, I take notes on the evidence my teammates found and revisit the materials to deepen my understanding and improve my ability to identify strong evidence. - I ask for the writers' feedback to be able to improve my writing and evidence collection on further indicators.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - I can effectively use the materials’ and reviewers’ tools. Over time, I consistently demonstrate expertise in navigating the materials’ website and finding evidence more efficiently. When I encounter problems loading materials or reviewers’ folders and tools, I troubleshoot quickly using my knowledge and skills. For example, when I joined a Microsoft Teams meeting, but couldn't access the rooms for team discussions, I tried different solutions until I was able to connect and participate. - I have answered questions from teammates and suggested ways to solve technical difficulties we encountered. 2B - I actively participate in our virtual consensus meetings by connecting on time, keeping my video on, and contributing thoughtfully to discussions. - During in-person meetings, I stay focused on the task, engage in all conversations, and complete my work efficiently. - I adapt my communication and participation style to fit the virtual or in-person environment to support effective teamwork.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - With eight years of teaching 3rd to 5th grade, I have deep knowledge of the TEKS for these grade levels, which I apply to find evidence in the materials and identify both strengths and areas for improvement. - When materials use wording different from the TEKS, I recognize this and understand how alternative phrasing can support teachers in effectively teaching the skill. - I ensure that instructional materials rigorously address the TEKS and enable students to master the required skills. - I actively use my content knowledge during team meetings to clarify alignment and support evidence-based discussions about the materials. - I evaluate whether materials effectively meet TEKS expectations and provide guidance to help teachers address student needs and master essential skills. 3B - I consistently finish my evidence finding by Saturday to allow time for feedback and make corrections if needed, ensuring that my work is submitted on time and meets the high-quality expectations. - I go through all parts of each indicator to ensure that I have strong, standards-aligned evidence and assign scores accordingly based on the rubric. - I keep myself organized by keeping at least four tabs open: one to review the indicator language and rubric examples, one for a Word document and workbook where I write and proofread my evidence, and another with the materials to find two of the most relevant evidence pieces for each indicator. - If I can’t find the evidence right away, I return to that indicator later to give it my full attention and carefully review the materials, always managing my time to finish the work by Saturday. - I use the tools provided by Safal to follow the quality review process accurately. Once I have the scores, I follow the correct procedure in the spreadsheet to find the appropriate tab for my name, indicator, and grade level, and record the information properly. 3C - I keep my personal opinions out of the review process. While I may see ways to improve, I focus on what the indicator requires. If the evidence is present, I report it objectively in the spreadsheet. - I feel confident in my scoring because I take the time to find strong evidence. In cases where an indicator is unclear or the materials are complex, I ask for guidance or clarification to ensure I’m aligned with expectations. - If an indicator seems unclear or I find conflicting examples, I note my thinking and bring it to the consensus meeting for clarification. 3D - I consistently use the rubric to guide my review and make sure I find evidence for each part of the indicator. - I carefully review the materials to ensure that the evidence I select is accurate, aligned with the rubric, and supports high-quality instruction. - I use the evidence guide every time I have to write evidence. I read the glossary to understand what is asked. I read the look fors, and something that has helped me a lot this year is the examples and non-examples to ensure the evidence submitted follows the indicator.

Personal goal

My reflection on the IMRA 2026 process is that reviewing Spanish handwriting instructional materials for grades 3–5 has helped me better understand the level of thought and analysis that goes into ensuring students and teachers have access to high-quality materials and how important these skills are for students and teachers. The rubrics and review process play an important role in evaluating whether materials meet expectations and support student learning. This process has helped me grow professionally and deepen my understanding of instructional materials and standards alignment. Throughout this cycle, I strengthened my ability to locate and evaluate evidence, apply the rubric consistently, and collaborate with team members during consensus discussions. I became more efficient in organizing my work, navigating the materials, and finding evidence that aligned with the indicators. I also learned from the perspectives and experiences of other educators, which helped me think more deeply about the review process. One area of growth I continue to notice, since my participation in last year cycle, is the need for clear and consistent expectations around quality review and how to write the evidence that looks like what our coach wants and asks for. Having greater consistency across training and review discussions would help me make decisions with even more confidence and accuracy. My personal goal is to learn more about the process, taking the time to understand the reasoning behind the rubrics.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A- I am an active participant in our consensus meetings and reference the materials, evidence guide, and unpacking presentations to help ensure our consensus is tightly aligned. 1A- Each week, I keep track of the standards where our team is not in alignment. I connect with the team a day before our meeting to outline our discrepancies and provide teammates an opportunity to further elaborate prior to the consensus meeting. 1A - I text my team throughout the week to touch base on where we are at with the work. When a teammate did not have any data in the workbook an hour prior our meeting, I recognized that it was abnormal for her. I texted her personally stating, "Just checking to see if you’re good for tonight. I know you’re always on top of things and may have your work somewhere else before entering it in. Let me know if you need anything!"

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2B- I was sent the following message from a teammate: “Thank you for being someone I can bounce ideas off of and know that you will be willing to think deeply about the evidence and have hard conversations as we work together. Collaborating with you is making this process so much better.” 2B- A teammate and I met up in person to unpack some of the indicators that required more discussion and further discuss what quality evidence would look like. 2B - During our weekly meetings, I intentionally add to the conversation with my understanding of the TEKS and research-based instructional practices and where they are reflected in the materials.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - As a curriculum coordinator, I have developed TEKS-aligned curriculum for my district. 3A - I have developed college pedagogical coursework for new teachers for IWU. 3A - I co-lead the textbook adoption for my district with a fellow curriculum coordinator. 3A - I trained K-5 classroom teachers on the new TEKS.

Personal goal

I recognize the value of ongoing feedback in strengthening my effectiveness as a reviewer. While I have developed confidence in evaluating the materials based on the Evidence Guide, collaborating with team members, and contributing to consensus meetings, I want to be more intentional about seeking feedback from my coach throughout the process to identify specific areas for growth as a reviewer.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - I have attended all trainings and meetings. 1A - I have shared my position on accepting or rejecting evidence and at times, changed my vote based on other's member's perspectives. 1A - I asked questions about sample problems that did not accurately represent the TEKS. Our coach confirmed later that we could submit feedback, but that was not a flag or grounds for rejecting evidence. 1B - I share ideas and ask questions for clarity. 1B - I ask others to share perspectives when they have expertise (Ex. the 5th grade teacher on our team is a content expert.) 1B - I interact with the group in our texting group. 1C - I used the grammar tips (active voice) to guide my writing style. 1C - I applied the guidance to include language from the standard and include an example in my evidence.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - I use the IMRA Quality Rubric Evidence Guide regularly to view key terms and misconceptions. 2A - I use the workbook to document my evidence. 2B - I have participated in every session by asking questions and contributing ideas. 2B - I have adapted my schedule when the group needed to change meeting times.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - I evaluate the problems in the adaptive software based on my mathematical knowledge. 3A - I applied my knowledge of the four domains of the ELPS in my evaluations. 3B - I have submitted all tasks on time. 3B - I am prepared for unpacking and consensus meetings. 3C - I used the exemplars in the rubric to develop my evidence. 3C - I pointed others to the rubric to view the exemplars. 3C - I rejected evidence that was too vague. 3D - I value the IMRA process to provide effective materials for teachers and students. 3D - I advocate for HQIM among my colleagues. 3D - I implemented HQIM in my school. 3D - I believe the review process improves learning for Texas students.

Personal goal

My personal goal is to explore the AI features of the adaptive software for use as evidence in my reviews.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A-Accomplished; 1. During consensus and unpacking meetings, I am an active participant and provide input based on my prior independent review of the instructional materials. 2. I collaborate with all team members and collaborate to ensure all deadlines are met and provide suggestions to team members seeking clarity. 1B-Distinguished; 1. Professionalism is maintained and grounded on factual information during all calls and interaction with coaches and team members. 2. Email communication is professional and timely. 3. During consensus meetings, feedback is given and received in a professional manner. 4. Professional communication is maintained with all team members in both email/texts. 1C-Accomplished-1. Feedback is implemented in a timely manner. 2. Feedback is frequently asked prior to receiving in order to improve my evidence collection writing.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A-Accomplished; 1. IMRA website and workbook is being utilized correctly and consistently. 2. Reviewing tools are being utilized correctly and all deadlines are being met or exceeded. 2B-Accomplished; 1. Regularly participates in all virtual meetings with both ELAR/SLAR team members and coaches. 2. On the spot adjustments and improvements are utilized to make IMRA review process more efficient. Suggestions are also added to improve the process.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A-Accomplished 1. Content knowledge in 4-5 TEKS and ELPS is shown in evidence collection. I am able to identify supporting evidence other than what is listed in the QRC due to my expertise in the TEKS & ELPS and practice reviewing instructional materials. 2. Instructional coaching and best pedagogical practices make the instructional material review process simple as I am able to highlight RBIS being implemented throughout the materials. 3B-Accomplished- 1. Deadlines are met for all deliverables. 2. Quality review work is calendared in and time stamped in order to ensure work is of high-quality and not transactional. 3C-Accomplished- 1. IMRA Evidence Guide language is used on all pieces of evidence collection. 2. Occasional support is provided by coaches during IMRA review process. 3D-Accomplished-1. Self-evaluations and rubric criteria is followed consistently during review process. 2. Seeks clarification when rubric language is unclear in order to ensure review process is of high quality.

Personal goal

The IMRA review cycle 2026 has been a positive learning experience thus far. While this is my first cycle, I am quickly understanding the process and the rationale in which the process takes place and the end result being achieved. A personal goal for myself moving forward is to continue to exceed deadlines in evidence collections. This will help me continue to collect high quality evidence and submit high quality written reviews for my team member's report writing.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A. My team has a group thread where we discuss our work before we get to consensus meetings. 1A, 1B. I am very active in the group in part due to being the writer of the group and having to get clarification on evidence and/or ratings. During our weekly meetings, I am actively engaged with my team and coach, and I respond to communication from coaches (i.e. emails, feedback on spreadsheets, or text messages). 1C. I have had to reflect on a more efficient way to collect every group member's evidence in order to then create a written report. I decided to create a chart with every member's evidence and use it to determine what evidence I will use to craft the report.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A. As the writer of the group, I spend a substantial amount of time accessing and verifying information in order to ensure that the report is accurate and complete. I utilize each of my team members' tabs in our workbook as well as the QRC spreadsheets for RLA K-3 and 4-5 and the IXL platform regularly to effectively perform my duties. 2B. I have two meetings with my team for all reviewers (Unpacking & Consensus). I effectively collaborate during these meetings and speak up whenever I need clarification. I also have a meeting for writing in which I have found that I now must ensure that the team is providing enough evidence to support their rating, so this requires me to reach out to them sometimes individually and other times collectively. Within our thread, team members now look to me for leadership when they have questions. When we met in person, I was effectively engaged with my group. We have developed a rapport, and I speak with almost all of them outside of the team's thread, and we speak in our thread almost daily.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A. I regularly apply my RLA content expertise to evaluate the assigned supplemental program for accuracy, rigor, and alignment to the TEKS. In each review cycle, I analyze materials to ensure they reflect HQIM standards and meet IMRA criteria and provide evidence as proof of this. 3B. I consistently meet all deadlines associated with both parts of my role as reviewer and report writer. I complete the required spreadsheet byproviding thorough evidence for each indicator and complete the IQ Correlation sheet as well. In addition to my reviewer responsibilities, I submit my weekly report writing requirements on time and ensure they accurately reflect the findings of my review team. I ensure that my work clearly and accurately reflects TEKS alignment. 3C. I consistently use evidence based reasoning to justify my evaluations using TEKS, IMRA evidence guidance, and the materials being evaluated. DIscussions are centered around evidence that supports review decisions. 3D. I regularly apply IMRA's evaluation criteria with accuracy and consistency, ensuring that all evidence is TEKS aligned. My commitment to quality is shown in the thoroughness of my reviews and the clear feedback that I provide.

Personal goal

My personal goal is to further strengthen the consistency and depth of my evidence based evaluations by refining how I document and communicate my findings across indicators. I will continue to apply IMRA criteria with fidelity while enhancing the clarity and specificity of the evidence I provide.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

I am present at every meeting. I always provide and participate in discussions. I listen to my teammates and their ideas. I encourage my teammates. We have respectful discussions and work together well.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

The information provided as a quality reviewer, I use it faithfully. I actively participate in person and online in every meeting. I am flexible with our meeting schedule.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

As an educator, high quality materials are very important. I am a life-long learner. I meet our weekly deadlines and meetings in a timely manner.

Personal goal

This year's IMRA cycle 2026 process is much smoother than last year. I like the changes that have been made and my goal is to get through this cycle with more understanding and contributing my knowledge to the best of my abilities.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A- Accomplished- I collaborate effectively with my team and contribute to productive discussions through multiple communication channels, including text, email, and weekly consensus meetings. I actively participate in discussions as needed. For example, during a team conversation about student self-reflection tools, I contributed to clarifying alignment with the rubric. I have also remained after our weekly meetings on several occasions to further clarify expectations and align with our reporting coach and writing supervisor. 1B- Accomplished- I consistently express my ideas in a professional and respectful manner, ensuring clarity while encouraging all team members to participate. For example, during discussions on rubric alignment for 3.3C, I shared where I located evidence of written discourse while also listening to each team member’s input to determine the strongest evidence for our written report. I am able to communicate my perspectives while remaining open to feedback and willing to adjust my thinking when supported by valid evidence. 1C- As the writing support team member, I actively seek feedback from both our writing coach and reporting coach on submitted evidence and our written report. Each week, I request specific comments on how to improve my work and how to better support my team in aligning writing with best practices. This feedback is then used to refine both my own contributions from the previous week, and used to improve my writing for the following week.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A- Accomplished- I regularly use project tools effectively for reviewing, tracking, and reporting. I am highly familiar with the Resources tab in our Reviewer Workspace. In addition to the Evidence Guides, Rubrics, and QRC, I frequently reference writing support materials such as Writing Style Guidelines, Writing Best Practices, HQ Exemplars, and Evidence Collection Best Practices. I also utilize the Squak and Revise Series links to ensure my writing aligns with required guidelines. 2B- Accomplished- I am able to fully engage in both virtual and in-person settings, adapting as needed. For example, after receiving an email outlining adjustments to our standards alignment, I revisited our work and made the necessary notes and revisions. During our in-person training, our team worked efficiently and collaboratively, completing a significant amount of work while dividing responsibilities to maintain pacing and meet expectations.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A- Accomplished- I regularly apply my content expertise to evaluate materials effectively and ensure that evidence is accurately aligned to the rubric. With a Master’s degree in Math Curriculum and Instruction and more than 20 years of classroom experience teaching mathematics, I am confident in my ability to interpret math expectations and identify supporting evidence. Each week, I contribute detailed evidence that not only addresses the rubric criteria but also explains the instructional implications and impact in the classroom. 3B- Distinguished- I consistently meet deadlines and produce high-quality, standards-aligned reviews. Following each weekly meeting, I dedicate significant time to completing assigned tasks and ensuring my work is thorough and accurate. For example, after our June 1 meeting, I completed detailed evidence for each rubric indicator, consolidated our team’s writing, and finalized the written report by June 2. I also consistently complete all assigned pre-work by the established deadlines. My standards alignment work was completed by mid-May, with subsequent revisions made promptly in response to feedback. Additionally, I have attended all team and writing support meetings on time and prepared to contribute. 3C- Accomplished- I regularly apply evidence-based reasoning and seek clarification when needed to ensure accuracy and alignment. Throughout the review process, I have only required additional guidance on two rubric indicators. In those instances, I proactively sought clarification rather than making assumptions, as I believe it is important to ensure that my reasoning is fully supported by the evidence and aligned with the expectations of the team. 3D- Accomplished- I consistently demonstrate a commitment to high-quality instructional materials by applying evaluation criteria thoughtfully and thoroughly. I take pride in providing detailed evidence each week and carefully examining both examples and non-examples to strengthen my analysis and support my conclusions. As a current classroom teacher, I understand the importance of high-quality instructional materials and am passionate about ensuring that curriculum resources provide meaningful support for both educators and students in K–2 mathematics.

Personal goal

As a writing support team member for the first time, my goal is to improve my writing reports. I will continue to enhance the clarity, consistency, and quality of team reports by studying exemplar reports, incorporating feedback from coaches, and sharing writing strategies with my team. My goal is to ensure all reporting reflects strong evidence, clear reasoning, and alignment with TEA expectations.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

Personal goal

One area I would like to continue developing is collaboration during the review process. While I actively participate in discussions and consensus meetings, I want to be more intentional about deeper dialogue with fellow reviewers.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

IA- I follow through on assigned responsibilities and consistently support the team's work between meetings. IC- I seek feedback from review coach and implement suggestions.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A- I maintain organized records of project progress, meeting notes, action items and completed work for myself. 2B: I use digital tools effectively (video conferencing platforms- TEAMS, shared documents (Google Drive components), and collaboration tools to communicate, plan, and complete work.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A- Compare materials against standards, alignment tools, rubrics, evidence guide to determine effectiveness. 3B- I anticipate potential challenges and adjust timelines or workflows to meet project deadlines. 3C- I collaborate with colleagues and seek guidance when addressing complex situations. 3D: I consistently usse established rubrics/evidence guides, TEKS, and various tools to assess the quality of the materials I have been assigned this IMRA Review.

Personal goal

Although this cycle has been different from 2025, I have adapted to the changes in the evidence writing I am completing for the IMRA Quality Review 2026. I have supported new teammates, solicited feedback from coaches and strive to do my best. Goal: Throughout the 2026 IMRA Review Cycle, I will strengthen my knowledge of ELPS through ongoing study, calibration activities and collaboration, resulting in more precise and evidence-based reviews. I appreciate the opportunity I have as a quality reviewer for IMRA. It's an important job and the program has come so far since my first Proclamation in 2014. Thank you for having high standards for our students.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A- I consistently prioritize collaboration by actively engaging with team members, sharing ideas, and listening to diverse perspectives to support shared goals. During team discussions, I contribute constructively by offering solutions, asking clarifying questions, and building on others’ input. I follow through on commitments, support teammates when needed, and help maintain focus on outcomes, ensuring our collaboration remains purposeful and productive. 1B- I prioritize communicating my ideas clearly and concisely to ensure shared understanding. During consensus meetings, I remain open-minded and respectful of differing opinions, recognizing the value each team member brings to the discussion. I actively contribute by asking clarifying questions, checking for understanding, and inviting diverse perspectives to support informed, collaborative decision-making. 1C- I consistently engage in self-reflection to evaluate my performance and identify areas for growth. I actively seek and value feedback from my team, using it as a tool to refine my practice and enhance my effectiveness.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A- I consistently apply my math content knowledge to effectively review, track, and report student data in alignment with state education requirements. I analyze program content using rubric, program tools, and content data to ensure accurate documentation that supports instructional goals and demonstrates compliance with state standards. This process allows me to provide evidence-based reporting that supports accountability and helps drive informed educational decisions. 2B- I engage in both virtual and in-person content review and consensus meetings with equal effectiveness, adapting my approach to meet the demands of each setting. I utilize digital tools to collaborate, analyze, and document feedback in virtual environments, while also contributing actively during in-person sessions. Regardless of format, I maintain a high level of focus, communication, and professionalism to ensure that the review process remains thorough, consistent, and aligned with established standards.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A- I regularly apply my content expertise to evaluate math materials with a strong focus on accuracy, rigor, and alignment to standards. My reviews are consistently thorough and effective in alignment which are promptly identified and addressed to ensure instructional quality and coherence. 3B- I consistently adhere to established review processes and meet deadlines independently, with minimal need for support. This reliability ensures a timely and thorough completion of tasks while maintaining high-quality standards. 3C- I regularly apply evidence-based reasoning to inform my decisions and analyses, demonstrating sound judgment in most situations. In complex or challenging cases, I seek guidance as needed to ensure accuracy and maintain the highest standards of quality. 3D- I consistently champion high standards to ensure that Texas educators and students have access to the highest-quality instructional materials. By rigorously evaluating content and advocating for alignment with state standards, I support effective teaching and meaningful learning outcomes across diverse classrooms.

Personal goal

My personal goal is to continue building confidence by deepening my understanding of instructional design and expanding my leadership in the review process.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A - I regularly speak up when our lead asks a question and no one else is answering. I come to meetings prepared, having done the pre-work and ready to contribute my thoughts. 1B - I sometimes struggle in verbal communication due to my ADHD and Auditory Processing Deficiency, but I am positive and respectful. My written communication is improving as I use tools like Grammarly. 1C - I take note of what kind of improvements my Writing Coach asks for, and am intentional about looking out for them in future writing cycles. I have made it a personal goal to submit a perfect week of DES's that need no revision.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A - I use several project tools to guide my writing for reporting. Examples include Grammarly, Squawk and Revise Lessons, High-Quality Descriptive Evidence Summary Exemplars, and Quality Report Writing Best Practices. Additionally, I consistently use the Quality Rubric Evidence Guide in reviewing. 2B - I am always on time and prepared for Teams Meetings. I keep my camera on and contribute.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A - I regularly use my knowledge of middle school and Algebra I TEKS to identify content. Any time I am unsure, I reference the TEKS snapshot. 3B - I am consistently finishing my work well ahead of the deadline. I am asked to prepare 2 pieces of evidence for the drafting meeting. However, I bring approximately 10-20 pieces of evidence. I complete my first round of drafting early afternoon each Friday and finalize on Saturday. My weekly DES's are always complete days before they are due. 3C - I regularly demonstrate evidence-based reasoning when I compare the materials to the rubric HQIM examples. Sometimes I have trouble determining whether the evidence meets the rigor of the indicator. When this happens, I communicate to my team that I am unsure of the score I have chosen and am willing to change it if someone sees it differently. 3D - I demonstrate commitment by doing all the things I've written about in this self-evaluation.

Personal goal

I have greatly enjoyed this IMRA Cycle. This year, I chose to apply for the writer role, which I had not done before. I found the first week of drafting challenging. However, I picked it up rather quickly and am excited about improving my writing now that I am receiving feedback from a coach. I already set a personal goal before this. That goal is to submit a perfect first draft that needs no corrections.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A – Distinguished Evidence: 1. Consistently collaborated with review team members during consensus discussions, helping reconcile differing perspectives and ensuring ratings were aligned to rubric criteria and evidence from the materials. 2. Fostered productive team dialogue by actively listening to colleagues, asking clarifying questions, and encouraging consideration of multiple viewpoints before reaching consensus. 3. Contributed to calibration efforts by referencing rubric language and established review processes, helping maintain consistency across reviewer evaluations. 4. Helped build positive working relationships within review teams by communicating respectfully, supporting colleagues, and maintaining a solutions-oriented approach throughout the review process. 1B – Accomplished Evidence: 1. Regularly communicated findings and recommendations clearly and professionally in written evidence statements, ensuring alignment with rubric indicators and reviewer expectations. 2. Participated in team discussions using respectful and inclusive communication practices, contributing ideas and feedback in a constructive manner. 3. Produced objective, evidence-based comments that accurately reflected the strengths and limitations of instructional materials reviewed. 1C – Accomplished Evidence: 1. Applied feedback from quality assurance reviews, team discussions, and calibration activities to strengthen evidence statements and improve review accuracy. 2. Engaged in self-reflection throughout the review process, identifying opportunities to improve efficiency, consistency, and alignment to rubric expectations. 3. Participated in training, calibration, and professional learning opportunities to expand understanding of IMRA processes and instructional materials evaluation criteria.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A – Accomplished Evidence: 1. Effectively utilized IMRA review platforms, publisher materials, and evidence collection tools to document findings, track progress, and complete assigned reviews within established timelines. 2. Consistently navigated digital review resources, rubric documents, and reporting systems to evaluate instructional materials and maintain accurate review records. 3. Applied review tools efficiently to organize evidence, support ratings, and ensure alignment between rubric criteria and reviewer documentation. 2B – Accomplished Evidence: 1. Actively participated in virtual review meetings, calibration sessions, and consensus discussions, contributing ideas and feedback while maintaining professional engagement. 2. Adapted to various review formats and schedules, collaborating effectively with team members in virtual environments to meet project expectations and deadlines. 3. Maintained consistent communication with review team members and project leaders, responding to requests, participating in discussions, and supporting the completion of review activities.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A – Accomplished Evidence: 1. Applied knowledge of the TEKS, instructional design principles, and grade-level expectations to evaluate instructional materials for alignment and rigor. 2. Analyzed lessons, assessments, and instructional supports to determine whether materials met rubric requirements and supported student learning outcomes. 3. Demonstrated understanding of content-specific instructional practices when reviewing materials, ensuring evaluations were grounded in both standards and pedagogy. 3B – Accomplished Evidence: 1. Completed assigned reviews and review tasks within established project timelines while maintaining attention to detail and quality. 2. Followed IMRA review protocols and procedures consistently, ensuring ratings and evidence were documented according to project expectations. 3. Managed review responsibilities effectively by prioritizing tasks, meeting deadlines, and responding promptly to requests from facilitators and project staff. 3C – Accomplished Evidence: 1. Based ratings and recommendations on documented evidence from instructional materials rather than personal preferences or prior experiences. 2. Utilized rubric criteria and supporting evidence to justify evaluation decisions during independent reviews and consensus discussions. 3. Considered multiple perspectives and reviewed evidence objectively when determining ratings, ensuring fair and consistent evaluations. 3D – Accomplished Evidence: 1. Consistently applied IMRA evaluation criteria to identify strengths and areas for improvement within instructional materials. 2. Maintained a focus on student outcomes and instructional quality when reviewing materials, ensuring evaluations reflected the intent of the rubric. 3. Contributed to the selection and evaluation process by providing thoughtful, standards-based feedback designed to support high-quality instructional resources for Texas educators and students.

Personal goal

My goal for future review cycles is to continue strengthening my expertise in standards alignment and instructional materials evaluation while improving the precision and efficiency of my evidence collection and written justifications. I also hope to contribute more actively to consensus-building discussions and continue supporting high-quality review outcomes for Texas educators and students.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

Personal goal

A personal goal is to continue becoming more comfortable with quality review and to provide more descriptive evidence.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A I consistently build strong team rapport, foster open and effective collaboration, and help reach consensus. At convening, I established our group chat right away so that we could collaborate. I ask questions of my team when I am uncertain. I admit when I was wrong about our work. I help reach consensus by summarizing what we have said and bringing the conversation back to the evidence guide. 1B I regularly express ideas professionally, ensuring clarity and inclusivity in discussions. In Teams meetings, I consider my thoughts carefully before contributing to the discussion. In Teams meetings, I wait my turn to speak. In Teams meetings, I refer to my teammates by name when referencing their ideas. 1C I regularly engage in self-assessment and apply feedback to improve. When I noticed comments that my evidence was lacking specific examples, I added specific examples to my evidence. I read my evidence several times before adding to the workbook and I re-read my evidence before the consensus meeting to look for errors. I seek feedback from our team’s writer about what I can do differently to make her job easier.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A I regularly use project tools effectively for reviewing, tracking, and reporting. I use the evidence guide effectively for reviewing publisher materials. I use the Workbook for tracking my points and reasons for any reduction in score on that indicator. I use my Workbook tab effectively for reporting my evidence. 2B I regularly engage effectively in both virtual and in-person work, adapting as needed. During convening, I engaged with the in-person work from start to finish each day. I am present, camera on and mic off, for all Teams meetings. I listen to my teammates’ ideas and contribute when I can. When my team is discussing a concept, I will often open my computer and log in even if I was not engaged in the work originally.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A I regularly apply content expertise to evaluate materials effectively, with minor gaps in alignment. I applied my knowledge of the science of teaching reading to insist that when letters are used in the lesson it does not meet phonological awareness criteria. My team and I engaged in a professional conversation about the difference between the individual work students do during guided practice and the individual work students do during independent practice. I regularly apply my ELAR expertise to evaluate materials effectively, 3B I regularly adhere to review processes and deadlines with only occasional support. I am on time to all Teams meetings and I stay until the end. I completed all my training on time. I keep up with the IMRA schedule, occasionally seeking support from my team when I don’t understand expectations. 3C I regularly apply evidence-based reasoning but may need guidance for difficult cases. I refer repeatedly to the evidence guide when preparing for unpacking meetings. When preparing for the unpacking meeting, I take notes from the evidence guide about questions I want to ask our Review Coach. I use language and reasoning from the Evidence Guide when writing my evidence. 3D I regularly demonstrate commitment to quality materials, applying evaluation criteria effectively. When we are not at consensus, I use the Evidence Guide and TEKS to explain my position to my team. I spend extra time on more difficult indicators and the indicators that are not met by the materials, because I know that my efforts will help the publisher create a more effective product. Even if we are already at consensus, I share new information if I find it. It’s important for our report to be accurate.

Personal goal

I collaborated effectively with my team, consistently met deadlines, and communicated professionally. I used feed back to improve my work and relied on evidence-based reasoning to compose my evidence. My goal is to write clearer, more precise evidence.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1B-My evidence summaries, curriculum feedback, teacher coaching, and stakeholder communication are consistently clear, professional, and aligned to rubric language. 1C- I actively seek feedback, pursue leadership development, and continuously strengthen my expertise in TEKS, ELPS, instructional materials, and educational leadership.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A-I demonstrate strong proficiency with IMRA tools, evidence collection, rubric analysis, data tracking, and curriculum evaluation platforms. 2B- My experience facilitating PD, coaching teachers, leading meetings, and collaborating across teams reflects adaptability and consistent engagement.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A-My deep understanding of TEKS, ELPS, multilingual learner supports, literacy instruction, and curriculum alignment exceeds expectations. 3B-My work history demonstrates meeting compliance requirements, deadlines, documentation expectations, and review protocols with high accuracy. 3C- I consistently use rubric language, observable evidence, and standards-based reasoning when evaluating materials rather than relying on personal preference. 3D- My career has centered around improving instructional quality, supporting teachers, and ensuring equitable access to rigorous materials for multilingual learners.

Personal goal

I consistently perform at the accomplish level across most IMRA competencies. My strengths include deep pedagogical knowledge, evidence-based evaluation practices, professional communication, and a strong commitment to high-quality instructional materials. Throughout curriculum reviews, I apply TEKS- and ELPS-aligned analysis, collaborate effectively with review teams, and maintain adherence to review processes and timelines. I approach evaluations objectively, grounding decisions in observable evidence and rubric criteria. My experience supporting multilingual learners, coaching educators, and implementing instructional programs allows me to analyze materials through both an instructional and implementation lens. Moving forward, I will continue refining my technical proficiency with review tools and expanding my expertise across content areas to further strengthen the quality and impact of my reviews.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

Personal goal

My goal is to complete reviews early. I also plan to attend all teams meetings.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A – I regularly contributed to productive consensus discussions as a Supplemental Mathematics quality reviewer for grades 6–8 English and Grade 6 Spanish. I reviewed group evidence, compared colleague entries against the IMRA Supplemental Mathematics Evidence Guide, and revised my own entries when evidence was not sufficiently verifiable or did not clearly apply to my assigned grade levels and language version. For example, during the review of indicators 3.1, 3.2, and 3.3, I checked whether the consensus evidence aligned with the guidance language, whether it applied to grades 6–8 English or Grade 6 Spanish, and whether the cited evidence was accurate and locatable. This demonstrates collaboration, professional judgment, and a commitment to accurate consensus.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A – I regularly used IMRA review tools and supporting resources to track evidence, verify locations, and revise entries for Supplemental Mathematics grades 6–8 English and Grade 6 Spanish. I used the Evidence Guide, Quality Reviewer materials, program documents, TEKS correlation resources, scope and sequence documents, and review spreadsheets to check indicator language, source titles, and location accuracy before finalizing evidence. For example, I reviewed source locations when evidence appeared duplicated, unclear, or not specific enough to my assigned grade-level and language-version review. I then revised entries so another reviewer could locate and verify the evidence. This demonstrates effective use of review tools for accurate tracking and reporting.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3C – I consistently used unbiased, evidence-driven thinking when evaluating Supplemental Mathematics materials for grades 6–8 English and Grade 6 Spanish. I did not rely only on general impressions or group consensus; instead, I checked whether evidence was verifiable, whether the source and location matched the claim, and whether the evidence directly addressed the indicator guidance. For example, when reviewing indicators in the 3s section, I questioned whether evidence applied to my assigned grade levels and language version and revised entries when the original support was too general, duplicated, or not explicitly aligned to the rubric. This reflects unbiased, evidence-driven decision-making grounded in the IMRA guidance language.

Personal goal

During IMRA Cycle 2026, I strengthened my ability to evaluate Supplemental Mathematics instructional materials for grades 6–8 English and Grade 6 Spanish by closely applying the Evidence Guide, checking evidence for verifiability, and comparing evidence statements to the specific rubric language. I learned that strong evidence must be specific, locatable, grade-level appropriate, language-version appropriate, and directly connected to the scoring guidance rather than simply related to the general topic of the indicator. My personal goal is to continue improving the precision of my evidence collection by verifying sources and locations before entering responses, using rubric language consistently, and contributing to consensus discussions with clear, evidence-based reasoning. I will continue to focus on ensuring that each evidence statement accurately reflects the assigned grade level, language version, and indicator guidance so that my reviews support fair, accurate, and high-quality instructional materials evaluation.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A & B evidence: these are intertwined. I regularly collaborate and contribute to team discussions during our in person training and via group text during our evidence collections. We seek clarity from one another and discuss thoughts on specific points together. During standards review we did this and now we communicate via text and a team workbook for our indicators. Specifically, during standards alignment I regularly sought clarity from our coaches or other staff on expectations during each phase of being a reviewer.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A-I can use the programs and reporting effectively. I am not fully fluid in all aspects but I am fluent using them. At times it takes me a few extra steps but I do not require additional support to access reviewing materials/tools. 2B- During in person work I consistently collaborated with coaches and teammates. Always reaching a group consensus when searching for clarification. During virtual meetings I participate via chat at least 2 times each meeting (some more than others) as well as several reactions per meeting when needing whole group input. During virtual meetings I participate via the microphone at least one time each meeting to clarify or explain justification.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A- I have a deep understanding of TEKS and ELPS to apply to this process as I have been teaching a grade level in my review section for a minimum of 6 years as well as 2 years in the grade level above. This gives me a deep understanding of vertical alignment expectations. I have also served in a math curriculum committee during the 25-26 school year where I evaluated two HQIM curriculums and assessed them based on the RBIS rubric and IMRA review information available. 3B- I have consistently completed material needs on time or in advance. 3C- I seek clarity in grey areas of our tasks where assistance is needed from others who have experience in reviewing or have a deeper understanding of the process. I consistently take my opinion out of my review process so it is unbiased. 3D- I review materials and reference rubrics regularly to ensure I am following the expectations of a reviewer effectively. I use the materials that are used in IMRA reviews within my district and know how critical it is to have HQI materials available for students and staff.

Personal goal

My personal goal is to seek feedback from my coach on my evidence citing and how I can improve it.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A, 1B- Our team has a group text thread. In this thread we support each other in evidence alignment and clarify any questions that any team members may have. We have also set up virtual meetings outside of our unpacking and consensus meetings. 1B- During our weekly meetings, I share out and provide information that could be helpful to other reviewers when discussing the location of evidence. 1C- I apply feedback provided by the coaches and reach out to them when needing clarification or communicating timelines.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A- I use the workbook as intended, when I received feedback from my coach about my sheet, I adjusted what was needed. 2B- I engage in virtual meetings, for example, in consensus I share where I may have found some evidence if someone else mentions that they have not found it.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A- This year I have 6th grade. I have not worked with 6th grade before so I reach out to my team mate who has when I need help understanding something. 3B- I reached out to my coaches when I was unable to meet the 12pm Saturday deadline that was set, I originally thought my deadline for evidence collection was Monday before consensus. I have since adjusted to meet the new deadline. 3C- When I am having a difficult time finding evidence for an indicator, I reach out to my team to get ideas of where they have found evidence to support me. 3D- I use the rubric provided along with examples and non-examples to guide me as I score the material to ensure high standards.

Personal goal

This year I have had to go back and adjust my evidence statements quite a bit due to feedback given to our writer during his writing meetings. Some of the feedback given to him could be helpful if it were shared whole group because sometimes it feels like double work. My goal is to become distinguished in 1A. My team does communicate daily, however I would like to work something out so that we reach consensus as a team prior to our consensus meetings.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A-I regularly collaborated with other reviewers during consensus discussions, providing evidence-based feedback and engaging in professional dialogue to support accurate and consistent ratings. I actively worked with team members to resolve discrepancies, and reach consensus throughout the review process. 1B- I consistently communicated my ratings and feedback clearly, professionally, and respectfully in both written reviews and team discussions. 1C- I reflected on feedback from lead reviewers and applied it to strengthen the accuracy and consistency of my reviews. I also utilized guidance documents and training materials to continuously improve my reviews moving forward.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A- I have effectively used the review platform and project tools to complete reviews, document evidence, track progress, and submit accurate ratings in a timely manner. 2B- I have actively participated in virtual trainings and consensus meetings. I have adapted to different formats and schedules as needed. I consistently engaged in discussions, collaborated with team members, and contributed to the review process in both independent and collaborative settings.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A- I demonstrated deep knowledge of the TEKS, ELPS, and evidence-based literacy practices when evaluating instructional materials for alignment and quality. As a dyslexia therapist with specialized expertise in K–2 literacy instruction and structured literacy, I was able to identify instructional practices, including three-cueing systems and other approaches that may not align with current reading research. I consistently applied this expertise to conduct rigorous, evidence-based reviews, support accurate ratings, and contribute to high-quality discussions throughout the review process. 3B- I regularly followed review procedures, met project deadlines, and completed assigned review tasks accurately and on time. As a new reviewer, I occasionally sought guidance to ensure alignment with review expectations, and I effectively utilized the support and expertise of my team to strengthen the quality and consistency of my reviews. 3C- I consistently used evidence from the instructional materials and review criteria to support my ratings and feedback. As a new reviewer, I occasionally found it challenging to separate my personal preferences from the review process. Through collaboration with my team and guidance from our team writer, I was able to reflect on my thinking, remain focused on the rubric and evidence, and make objective, unbiased decisions throughout the review process. 3D- I regularly demonstrated a commitment to high-quality instructional materials by consistently applying the evaluation criteria and using evidence from the materials to support accurate ratings and feedback.

Personal goal

I will continue to strengthen my ability to make objective, evidence-based decisions by consistently grounding my ratings in the rubric and review criteria and seeking feedback when needed to minimize personal bias.

Professionalism evidence (1A–1C)

1A. Team Collaboration & Consensus Building - I regularly initiate communication with my team through text messages to keep us updated with due dates, meetings, etc. I also reply in a timely manner. In addition, I regularly reply to our coach's email on behalf of my team. 1B. Professional Verbal & Written Communication - I regularly express my ideas, share my thinking or the evidence behind my ideas, and ensure everyone has a voice by asking directly the teammates that haven't participated what they think. 1C. Continuous Learning & Growth - I regularly apply our coach's feedback to my work. I also seek feedback from our team writer so I can facilitate her work. Based on feedback, I have improved the way I collect and document evidence by specific examples.

Technical Skills evidence (2A–2B)

2A. Technical Proficiency & Use of Review Tools - I regularly access the program resources to effectively document evidence. I have familiarized myself with all resources in our shared drive. I have also adapted resources provided by our coach to effectively use our time together when it comes to consensus meetings. 2B. Engagement in Virtual & In-Person Environments - I have attended all in-person and virtual meetings/trainings on time. When changes come up, I am flexible and adapt my schedule to meet my team's needs.

Quality evidence (3A–3D)

3A. Pedagogical & Content Knowledge - I regularly evaluate materials with the indicators and standards in mind. When I don't understand something, I refer to the glossary and evidence guide. As a calibration technique, I reach out to my team to consult. 3B. Review Process Adherence & Timeliness - I consistently turn all my work in on time and with good quality. I have gradually received less feedback from my coach, which shows continuous improvement. Last time, I received kudos. I also read, review, and follow directions, completing trainings prior to attending meetings. I maintain a perfect attendance record for all virtual and in-person calibration meetings. 3C. Evidence-Based Thinking & Unbiased Decision-Making - I regularly use unbiased, evidence-driven thinking in all reviews and discussions. When difficult cases arise, I seek guidance from the evidence guide and collaborate with my teams. Sometimes, my team reaches out to me for support as well. 3D. Commitment to High-Quality Instructional Materials - I regularly demonstrate a deep commitment to high-quality instructional materials by applying the evaluation criteria to the materials reviewed. I know our students and educators deserve rigorous, aligned, and effective resources, and I'm proud to be a part of this review process to contribute.

Personal goal

By the end of the review cycle, I will achieve a "Distinguished" rating on Competency 1A by establishing a proactive pre-meeting consensus framework. First, I will synthesize individual team members' data in our shared drive. Then, I will communicate with my team to discuss the indicators that reflect no consensus, encouraging everyone's participation and facilitating a collaborative environment where we all respectfully share the rubric-based evidence that supports each score.