Product and content
ABZ has working games, storybooks, assignments, student access, teacher reporting, and a public content registry.
Inspect the public registry →Evidence & Research
What ABZ is built on—and what we are still working to prove.
ABZ is a working K–8 literacy-practice platform. Its activities, skill coverage, and standards mapping can be inspected today. ABZ has not yet published evidence that using the platform improves student learning.
The short answer
What can ABZ honestly say today?
These three cards separate what exists from what is being measured and what has not been proved.
Verified usage
ABZ is building a clean measurement baseline that separates production use from testing and defines exactly what each metric counts.
Read the measurement definitions →Learning outcomes
No structured classroom outcome study has been completed. ABZ does not currently claim that the platform causes reading growth.
See the planned next step →For real-world use
What this means for you
Teachers
Use ABZ as supplemental practice and inspect activities by grade and skill before assigning them. Dashboard patterns can guide attention, but they are not a diagnosis.
Choose by skill →Families and tutors
Preview an activity and choose practice that matches the learner’s current need. ABZ is not a replacement for a complete curriculum or professional assessment.
Browse activities →Schools and researchers
ABZ is seeking a responsible Grade 1 or Grade 2 classroom partner for a small, structured pilot with an external literacy measure.
Discuss a pilot →Instructional foundation
How literacy research informs ABZ
ABZ draws on established instructional practices, including explicit phonemic-awareness instruction, systematic phonics, and practice with connected text.
Important distinction: these sources support instructional choices. They are not evidence that ABZ itself improves learning, and ABZ’s full activity library has not received an independent curriculum audit.
Publicly inspectable
Verified product facts
These figures describe what ABZ contains. They are not reach, satisfaction, or learning-outcome claims.
Proposed pilot shape
- Choose one setting.Grade 1 or Grade 2, ideally two or three classrooms.
- Define the study together.Agree on one literacy skill, an external assessment, schedule, data rules, and required approvals.
- Run a small implementation.Six to eight weeks, about 15 minutes three times per week, alongside normal instruction.
- Report honestly.Publish positive, mixed, or null findings with sample size, missing data, dosage, and limitations.
Low-friction ways to help
Start with the level that fits your time.
A teacher can help ABZ learn without immediately committing a school to a formal research study.
Educator reality check
Preview ABZ and answer three focused questions about classroom fit, instructional need, and likely barriers. No student use is required.
- One short call or written response
- No account setup required
- Helps refine the pilot before recruitment
Guided classroom tryout
ABZ helps one teacher set up a class, selects a small activity pack, and asks for brief voluntary feedback after the teacher has had time to use it.
- ABZ handles setup and onboarding
- Teacher chooses the schedule
- One five-minute check-in each week
Structured outcome pilot
A school and ABZ define one grade, skill, external measure, implementation plan, privacy requirements, and reporting rules before starting.
- Best fit for Grade 1 or Grade 2
- Normal reading instruction continues
- Results reported regardless of direction
Two different questions
Educator feedback and outcome research are not the same thing
Educator feedback partner
Teachers try ABZ, then voluntarily share what fits their classroom, what creates friction, and what they need next.
This can answer:Is ABZ useful, understandable, and practical for educators who chose to try it?
This cannot answer:Does ABZ improve student reading outcomes?
Classroom outcome pilot
A school and ABZ agree in advance on implementation, one external assessment, privacy protections, analysis, and reporting.
This can begin to answer:Was ABZ practice feasible, and how did participating students’ measured literacy performance change?
This still cannot automatically prove:That ABZ alone caused the change, especially without a strong comparison design.
No commitment required
Tell us what kind of participation feels realistic.
This short form is for adult educators, school leaders, tutors, and researchers. Do not include student names or other student information.
✓ ABZ handles initial setup
✓ A conversation is not a study commitment
✓ Feedback does not need to be positive
Current boundaries
What ABZ does not claim
- No completed controlled or quasi-experimental ABZ learning-outcome study
- No independent review of the complete skill taxonomy or curriculum mapping
- No claim that engagement, completion, or in-product “mastery” equals learning
- No accessibility certification or complete library-wide WCAG audit
- No use of informal feedback from three prototype teachers as effectiveness evidence
For deeper review
Reports, methods, and the public record
Public registry
Content & Standards Audit
Activity inventory, skill taxonomy, grade coverage, partial CCSS mapping, downloads, and counting rules.
MethodologyMeasurement Definitions
How ABZ defines practice, engagement, growth, mastery, and teacher-reported usefulness.
Dated archivePublic Research Log
Protocols, hypotheses, corrections, research entries, sources, and the complete historical record.
Help us learn responsibly
Interested in educator feedback or a small classroom pilot?
Tell us about your grade, instructional need, current assessment, and what responsible participation would require in your setting.