In education, the phrase “research-based” gets used a lot.
But what does it actually mean?
Arizona provides one of the clearest and most rigorous answers — see our presentation below for all the details!
Under its Move On When Reading (MOWR) law, the Arizona Department of Education doesn’t just encourage evidence-based literacy programs. It requires them — and it separates reading products into three distinct research pathways:
- Core programs
- Supplemental programs
- Intervention programs
Each must independently meet ESSA Tier 1, 2, or 3 evidence standards. And vendors must submit documentation during a defined annual window.
If a product isn’t vetted, it doesn’t appear on the approved list. That has real implications for district literacy plans and purchasing decisions.
Here’s what makes Arizona’s approach different:
1. Evidence Must Match the Use Case
A study showing impact in general classrooms doesn’t automatically validate a product as an intervention for struggling readers. Arizona requires the research to align to the claim.
2. Marketing Language Doesn’t Count
Testimonials. Growth charts. Usage metrics. None of those qualify as ESSA evidence tiers.
3. There Are Deadlines
Vendors must submit between July 1 and November 1. Districts must file literacy plans with curriculum selections on statutory timelines. Research isn’t an abstract concept here. It’s tied to procurement.
4. Core ≠ Supplemental ≠ Intervention
By separating instructional roles, Arizona prevents companies from repackaging one study across multiple claims.
It’s a structural safeguard.
Why does this matter?
Because as more states strengthen literacy laws, we’re seeing a shift from “aligned to the science of reading” to “show us the study.”
Arizona offers a blueprint for what that can look like in practice.
If you work in curriculum development, edtech, or district procurement, Arizona’s model is worth studying.
It raises the bar — and clarifies it.