{"id":17853,"date":"2026-07-14T05:00:00","date_gmt":"2026-07-14T12:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.nwea.org\/blog\/?p=17853"},"modified":"2026-07-13T08:00:29","modified_gmt":"2026-07-13T15:00:29","slug":"so-many-to-choose-from-3-tips-for-selecting-high-quality-supplemental-digital-resources","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.nwea.org\/blog\/2026\/so-many-to-choose-from-3-tips-for-selecting-high-quality-supplemental-digital-resources\/","title":{"rendered":"So many to choose from! 3 tips for selecting high-quality, supplemental digital resources"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n
<\/div>\n\n\n

It\u2019s a familiar drill for many teachers: you\u2019re prepping your plans for the week, thinking about how to approach your content and digging through all the resources your core program has to offer. Based on recent formative assessments<\/a>, you know you have a small group of students who will need scaffolding to access the content and a few students who have mastered the basics and are ready to dig in at a deeper level. Your core program lessons are fine, but the suggested support and enrichment activities either aren\u2019t robust enough or don\u2019t focus on what you know your students need. So, it\u2019s off to the internet and down the rabbit hole of supplemental digital resources. Suddenly, an hour has passed (or maybe two, or three) and you are still trying to find that \u201cjust right\u201d resource for what your students need.<\/p>\n

Been there, done that?<\/h2>\n

If that sounds familiar, you\u2019re not alone. A 2025 report from RAND<\/a> found that the majority of teachers \u201cmix and match\u201d materials from a variety of sources, with 97 percent using at least one supplemental product at least once per week. On average, teachers in the study reported regularly using two curriculums and five supplemental resource materials. As the report highlights, \u201cAlthough this pattern of mixing and matching is not inherently negative for instruction and student learning, it requires teachers to spend more planning time to figure out how to combine materials, and it is more difficult to support through professional learning and other resources that are often curriculum-specific.\u201d<\/p>\n

Quantity of supplemental digital resources is not an issue. A 2025 report from the Center for Education Market Dynamics (CEMD)<\/a> found 350+ supplemental math products in use across 1,700 districts. The quality of what\u2019s out there remains a big question, however. A 2019 study by the Fordham Institute<\/a> focusing on supplemental materials for high school ELA found that the majority of the materials reviewed were either mediocre or very poor, were not cognitively challenging, had weak standards alignment, and offered little support for teaching diverse learners.<\/p>\n

Despite both the increase in usage of supplemental materials and the research about the impact of high-quality curriculum materials<\/a>, teachers are rarely trained or given support<\/a> to help them select appropriate high-quality supplemental materials. Additionally, supplemental resources rarely go through the more rigorous selection process that core curriculum undergoes. CEMD notes, \u201cSupplemental materials are often chosen in a more ad hoc manner. Districts may purchase multiple resources to fill gaps, and schools or teachers may adopt additional site-based tools independently. Contracts are often shorter (one-year with renewal options), and many \u2018freemium\u2019 products are designed to gain teacher buy-in with basic features, encouraging individual classroom use in hopes of \u2018converting\u2019 that use into larger district-wide purchases.\u201d<\/p>\n

With the shift to more rigorous college-and-career\u2013ready standards, organizations such as EdReports<\/a>, Achieve<\/a>, and state DOEs have either developed rubrics or offer reviews of standards-aligned core curriculums. However, resources for evaluating the quality and alignment of these supplemental digital resources are scarce. We recognize the challenge of identifying quality materials, so we\u2019ve put together some tips to help teachers navigate the wide world of online supplemental content.<\/p>\n

Knowing what the goal is<\/h2>\n

Teachers turn to supplemental resources for a variety of reasons. In 2017, WestEd conducted a series of focus groups<\/a> to determine, among other things, why teachers use supplemental resources. They cite three main reasons:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Lack of engaging materials<\/li>\n
  2. The need for more differentiation and more personalized learning<\/li>\n
  3. Perceived gaps in core curriculum relative to standards and assessments<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    More recent surveys<\/a> point toward increased supplemental use to support practice and intervention.<\/p>\n

    All of these uses are valid, and being clear on your purpose for using a supplemental digital resource is critical. Searching for a lesson that explains key concepts in a different modality than your core program is very different from searching for a product that will allow students to explore math in a real-world situation or one that will provide intensive intervention. Each purpose inspires a different set of questions, so let\u2019s examine two of the \u201cwhys\u201d in greater depth.<\/p>\n

    1. Understand what engagement truly looks like<\/h2>\n

    \u201cEngagement\u201d is a term that gets tossed around a lot, but what does it really mean? Author David Sousa defines \u201cstudent engagement\u201d<\/a> as \u201cthe amount of attention, interest, curiosity, and positive emotional connections that students have when they are learning, whether in the classroom or on their own.\u201d<\/p>\n

    When looking at supplemental digital resources, it is easy to conflate engagement with gamification. Students may enjoy playing an educational game or app with unique characters, flashy graphics, and other bells and whistles, however, in the article \u201cPutting education in \u2018educational\u2019 apps: Lessons from the science of learning,\u201d<\/a> researchers caution, \u201cExtraneous animations, sound effects, and tangential games might be appealing to a child when activated but not add to the child\u2019s understanding of the primary content because they disrupt the coherence of the learning experience and the child\u2019s engagement.\u201d<\/p>\n

    When reviewing supplemental digital resources for the goal of increasing student engagement, ask yourself these questions:<\/p>\n