Rigorous Curriculum Design: A Roadmap for Creating a Cohesive, Comprehensive, and Relevant Curriculum

Larry Ainsworth & Kyra Donovan

Rigorous Curriculum Design: A Roadmap for Creating a Cohesive, Comprehensive, and Relevant CurriculumLarry Ainsworth & Kyra Donovan

The need for a cohesive and comprehensive curriculum that intentionally

connects standards, instruction, and assessment has never been greater than

it is today. Educators across the nation need to be able to answer this question

at any point during each school year: “How well are my students doing in their

efforts to learn the state standards?”

A rigorous—and relevant—curriculum must provide educators with an organized

framework that enables them to continually monitor student progress toward

mastery of the standards. This curriculum design model should also serve as a

predictor of student achievement success on end-of-year standardized tests. By

consistently focusing on intended learning outcomes and assessment evidence

of student learning, educators can adjust their instruction based on student

learning needs. They can better utilize available instructional resources to help all

students learn their grade-level or course-specific standards.

Rigorous Curriculum Design: A Hands-On Model The updated edition of Rigorous Curriculum Design (2019) reintroduces the

original 2010 volume by Larry Ainsworth, a carefully sequenced, hands-on model

that curriculum designers and educators in every school system can follow to

create a progression of units of study that keep standards, instruction, and

assessment tightly focused and connected. Applicable to every grade, course,

and content area, this new volume describes and illustrates:

• What a rigorous—and relevant—curriculum is and how to create,

sequence, and pace such a curriculum

• How to build the foundation for designing a rigorous

grade- or course-specific curriculum

• How to design a comprehensive curricular unit

of study, from start to finish

• How to use formative assessments as credible evidence of student

learning to guide instruction before, during, and after each unit

• How to monitor student progress toward desired learning outcomes

throughout the year

• How leaders can organize, implement, and sustain this model throughout

the school and/or school system

What Exactly Is Rigorous Curriculum Design?Often confused with the true goal of student learning—attainment of the standards—

curriculum is not the end in and of itself. Rather, it serves as the means to the end.

What is unique about the RCD model is that it is a standards-based framework

that enables educators to answer in the affirmative this fundamental question: “Are

my students learning the standards?”

A rigorous curriculum is an inclusive set of intentionally aligned components—

clear learning outcomes with matching assessments, engaging and relevant

learning experiences, and high-effect-size instructional strategies—organized

into sequenced units of study that serve as both the detailed road map and the

high-quality delivery system for ensuring that all students achieve the desired

end: the attainment of the designated grade- or course-specific standards within a

particular content area.

Our vision for designing such a curriculum is founded on two basic requisites: (1)

the deliberate alignment between standards, instruction, and assessment, and (2)

the inclusion of both rigor and relevance in the design process.

Curricular architects must acknowledge that the function of a rigorous curriculum

is to raise the level of teaching and learning so that students are prepared for

the future with skills that “drive knowledge economies: innovation, creativity,

teamwork, problem solving, flexibility, adaptability, and a commitment to

continuous learning” (Hargreaves & Shirley, 2009).

Elements of a Rigorous and Relevant CurriculumA comprehensive curriculum that is both rigorous and relevant needs to include

the following:

• Specific learning outcomes (learning targets) that students are to

achieve from pre-kindergarten through Grade 12 in all content

areas

• Vertical alignment of those learning outcomes (grade to

grade, course to course) in curricular frameworks

• Quality units of study, defined by us here as “a

series of lessons, learning experiences, and

related assessments—intentionally aligned

to specific Priority Standards and related

Often confused with the true goal of student learning—attainment of the standards—curriculum is not the end in and of itself. Rather, it serves as the means to the end.

A rigorous curriculum is an inclusive set of intentionally aligned components—clear learning outcomes with matching assessments, engaging and relevant learning experiences, and high-effect-size instructional strategies—organized into sequenced units of study that serve as both the detailed road map and the high-quality delivery system for ensuring that all students achieve the desired end: the attainment of the designated grade- or course-specific standards within a particular content area.

supporting standards—for an instructional focus that may last anywhere

from two to six weeks”

• Emphasis on standards-based skills and content knowledge

• Academic vocabulary specific to each content area and pertinent to

each unit of study

• Explicit linkages to state assessments and to college and career

readiness

• Higher-level thinking skills

• Interdisciplinary connections

• Authentic and relevant student-centered performance tasks that

engage learners in applying concepts and skills to the real world

• Ongoing formative assessments to gauge student understanding

• Sequencing of “learning progressions” (Popham, 2008; Heritage, 2013),

the conceptual and skill-based building blocks of instruction

• High-effect-size teaching strategies

• Differentiation, intervention, special education, and English language

learner strategies to meet the needs of all students

• A common lexicon of terms (curriculum glossary) to promote consistency

of understanding

• Embedded use of resources and multimedia technology

• A parent communication and involvement component

• A curriculum philosophy that is compatible with or a part of the

school system’s mission statement

Build a Strong FoundationBefore constructing the curricular units of study, it is critical to first build a strong

foundation. Otherwise, curriculum design teams are erecting a superstructure on

an uncertain base. Here is an overview and brief description of each of the five

foundational steps:

1. Prioritize the Standards. Prioritize and vertically align from grade to grade

and course to course the state standards or learning outcomes (grade- or

course-specific learning expectations) for selected content areas. These

represent the “assured competencies” that students are to know and be able

to do by the end of each academic school year in order to be prepared to

enter the next level of learning.

Prioritizing the standards makes sense from a logical and practitioner’s

perspective, but the idea has long been supported in the published research

and writings of Robert Marzano, W. James Popham, and other highly

respected education thought leaders. Here is a representative sample of

compelling statements in support of prioritizing the standards.

Robert Marzano: “The sheer number of standards is the biggest

impediment to implementing the standards” (Sherer, 2001, pp. 14–15).

“To cover all this content, you would need to change schooling from K-12 to

K-22 (interview by Scherer, 2001, p. 15).

W. James Popham: “Teachers need to prioritize a set of content standards

so they can identify the content standards for which they will devote

powerful, thoroughgoing instruction, and then they need to formally and

systematically assess student mastery of only those high-priority content

standards” (Popham, 2003b, p. 36).

“Reduce the number of eligible-to-be-assessed curricular aims so

that (1) teachers are not overwhelmed by too many instructional

targets and (2) a student’s mastery of each curricular aim

that’s assessed can be determined with reasonable

accuracy. Teachers who can focus their instructional

attention on a modest number of truly significant

skills usually can get their students to master

those skills—even if the skills are genuinely

challenging” (Popham, 2004, p. 31).

Teachers need to prioritize a set of content standards so they can identify the content standards for which they will devote powerful, thoroughgoing instruction, and then they need to formally and systematically assess student mastery of only those high-priority content standards (Popham, 2003b, p. 36).

2. Decide on the Curricular Units of Study. Name all the specific units

of study for each grade level and course in those selected content areas.

Through these units of study, implemented during the year or course, students

will learn and be assessed on their understanding and application of the

Priority Standards in focus.

3. Assign the Standards—Priority and Supporting. Assign Priority Standards

and supporting standards to each unit of study, while considering “learning

progressions,” those building blocks of concepts and skills that students

need to learn before they can learn other ones. Confirm that every Priority

Standard is assigned to one or more units of study that will be scheduled for

administration up to and following state exams.

4. Prepare a Pacing Calendar. Referring to the school district master

calendar, create a curriculum pacing calendar for administering the units of

study to ensure that all Priority Standards will be taught, assessed, retaught,

and reassessed throughout the school year—prior to state tests and then to

the end of the school year.

Adjust the number of days or weeks designated for each unit of study so

that all units with the heaviest concentration of Priority Standards can be

completed during the months leading up to the high-stakes tests. Factor in a

“buffer” period between units for the purpose of reteaching and reassessing

close-to-proficient students, intervening and reassessing far-from-proficient

students, and enriching proficient and above students. Extend the pacing

calendar to schedule the remaining units of study during the weeks or months

following the state tests. Again, adjust the length and/or duration of each unit

of study so that it can be implemented before the end of the school year.

Learning progressions do need to be considered when design teams are

pacing curricular units, both horizontally and vertically. An ideal pacing

calendar provides suggested horizontal learning progressions within grades

and courses and suggested vertical learning progressions between grades

and courses. Notice the emphasis on the word “suggested.” W. James Popham

and Robert Marzano support learning progressions and pacing calendars. W.

James Popham (2007) points out that

“with few exceptions, there is no single, universally accepted and

absolutely correct learning progression underlying any given high-level

curricular aim” and that “any carefully conceived learning progression is

more likely to benefit students than teachers’ off-the-cuff decision-

making” (p. 83).

Ideally, a pacing calendar would guarantee a viable curriculum

for every student. Robert Marzano (2003) explains the

relationship between viability and time:

“In the current era of standards-driven curriculum,

viability means ensuring that the articulated

curriculum content for a given course or given

Learning progressions do

need to be considered

when design teams are

pacing curricular units,

both horizontally

and vertically.

grade level can be adequately addressed in the [instructional] time

available” (p. 25).

5. Customize the Unit Planning Organizer. Modify the provided unit planning

template to reflect your school’s or district’s needs regarding a unit of study.

Add your own language if needed so that teachers are not trying to learn an

all-new curriculum vocabulary.

How to Design a Rigorous Curricular Unit of StudyCreating an entire unit of study will help teacher design teams deeply understand

the standards in the unit, as well as tightly connect the Priority Standards to the

assessments in the unit. Here is a brief description of each of the twelve unit-

design steps:

1. “Unwrap” the Unit Priority Standards. “Unwrap” (analyze, deconstruct) the

assigned Priority Standards for each specific unit of study to determine the

specific, teachable concepts and skills (what students need to know and be

able to do) within those standards.

2. Complete the Graphic Organizer. Using the template provided in the

Unit Planning Organizer, complete the graphic organizer to serve as a visual

display of the “unwrapped” concepts and skills. The graphic organizer includes

two parts: one that lists related concepts and the other that lists each skill,

related concept, and approximate level of Bloom’s Taxonomy and Webb’s

Depth of Knowledge (DOK). Matching each skill and related concept with a

thinking-skill level identifies the skill’s degree of rigor.

3. Decide on the Big Ideas and Essential Questions. Decide on the Big

Ideas (key understandings, student “aha’s”) derived from the “unwrapped”

concepts and skills for that unit of study. Write Essential Questions that will

engage students to discover for themselves the related Big Ideas and state

them in their own words by the end of the unit.

In Visible Learning for Teachers (2012), John Hattie states that expert teachers

create classroom climates: “in which error is welcomed, in which student

questioning is high, in which engagement is the norm” (p. 26). He cites a study

by Brualdi (1998), who counted between 200 and 300 questions asked by each

teacher per day, but the majority of those were low-level cognitive questions:

60 percent recall of facts, 20 percent procedural.

Hattie concludes: “More effort needs to be given to framing questions

that are worth asking—ones that open the dialogue in the

classroom so that teachers can ‘hear’ students’ suggested

strategies” (p. 75).

Hattie also cites the research of Rich Mayer and

his colleagues (Mayer, 2004 and 2009; Mayer,

et al., 2009). They are studying educators “using

questioning in classes to promote active learning [so]

Creating an entire

unit of study will help

teacher design teams

deeply understand the

standards in the unit, as

well as tightly connect the

Priority Standards to the

assessments in the unit.

that students attend to relevant material, mentally organize the selected

material, and integrate the material with prior knowledge so that they

advance in their knowing and understanding” (Hattie, 2012, p. 75)

The high-level Essential Questions that educators pose to their students

promote just this kind of active learning, questions “worth asking” that enable

students to “advance in their knowing and understanding” by discovering and

expressing the Big Ideas in their own words.

4. Create the End-of-Unit Assessment. Design the end-of-unit assessment

(either individual classroom or common formative post-assessment) directly

aligned to the “unwrapped” Priority Standards. Align the concepts, skills,

and format of the end-of-unit assessment questions with district benchmark

assessments (K–8) or midterms and finals/end-of-course exams (9–12).

The one true purpose of educational assessment is to correctly determine

student understanding of the standards in focus and then to use those

assessment results to inform, modify, adjust, enrich, and differentiate

instruction to meet the learning needs of all students.

W. James Popham has perfectly expressed the core purpose of assessment in

the following statement:

“Teachers use test [results] in order to make inferences about their students’

cognitive status. Once those score-based inferences have been made,

the teacher then reaches instructional decisions based (at least in part)

on those inferences. Educational assessment revolves around inference

making” (emphasis added, 2003b, p. 60).

5. Create the Unit Pre-Assessment. Create the start-of-unit pre-assessment

aligned or “mirrored” to the post-assessment. Aligned means that the

questions are directly matched to those on the post-assessment but may

be fewer in number. Mirrored means that the pre-assessment will include the

exact number and type of questions that will appear on the post-assessment.

6. Identify Vocabulary Terms and Interdisciplinary Connections. In

addition to the vocabulary of the “unwrapped” Priority Standards concepts,

identify other specific academic or technical vocabulary from the supporting

standards that students will need to learn during the unit. Identify any

interdisciplinary connections to emphasize when planning authentic

performance tasks and related instruction.

7. Plan Authentic Performance Tasks. Plan authentic performance

tasks directly based on the “unwrapped” concepts and skills with

real-world applications that challenge students to utilize

deep thought, investigation, and communication. Create

accompanying success criteria (scoring guides) as the

means for obtaining objective, credible evidence of

student learning relative to the tasks and standards

in focus. Confirm that the planned performance

tasks will give students the conceptual and

procedural understanding of the “unwrapped” concepts and skills represented

on the end-of-unit post-assessment.

Stanford University professor and distinguished author Linda Darling-

Hammond emphasized the use of authentic performance as a powerful

means for students to demonstrate what they know and can do. Connecting

her long-standing endorsement of authentic performance to the educational

reform initiatives taking place throughout the world, she cited the following

commonalities in all these initiatives. We have added parenthetically and in

italics the direct connections to the RCD process:

8. Gather Resource Materials. Gather resources and materials, including

technology, that support the planned instruction and related learning

activities for the unit. Select the most appropriate instructional resources

and materials available that will assist students in learning and applying the

“unwrapped” concepts and skills and discovering the Big Ideas.

9. Select High-Effect-Size Instructional Strategies. Select high-effect-size

instructional strategies to use during instruction and related learning activities

with the whole class, with small groups, and with individual students.

Hattie (2009) reports that the “aspects of teaching associated with student

learning include the following:

• Paying deliberate attention to learning intentions and success criteria

• Setting challenging tasks

• Providing multiple opportunities for deliberate practice

• Knowing when both the teacher and the student are successful in

attaining these goals

• Understanding the critical role of teaching appropriate

learning strategies

• Planning and talking about teaching

• Ensuring that the teacher constantly seeks

feedback information as to the success of his

or her teaching” (p. 36).

Stanford University

professor and distinguished

author Linda Darling-

Hammond emphasized

the use of authentic

performance as a powerful

means for students to

demonstrate what they

know and can do.

. . . step-by-step building

blocks students are

presumed to need in order

to successfully attain a

more distant, designated

instructional outcome. The

more ‘distant’ instructional

outcome, known as the

target curricular aim, is

typically a skill . . . and

usually a significant skill at

that—the kind of learning

outcome requiring a number

of lessons for students to

achieve it” (p. 24).

10. Detail the Unit Planning Organizer. Determine the additional details

needed to supplement the information on the Unit Planning Organizer. Think

of these as “teaching notes” to assist educators when preparing to teach the

unit of study. These include, for example, learning progressions—the building

blocks of unit instruction.

Popham defines a learning progression as being composed of the “step-by-

step building blocks students are presumed to need in order to successfully

attain a more distant, designated instructional outcome. The more ‘distant’

instructional outcome, known as the target curricular aim, is typically a skill . . .

and usually a significant skill at that—the kind of learning outcome requiring a

number of lessons for students to achieve it” (p. 24).

These building blocks are ultimately arranged in “an instructionally defensible

sequence” (p. 47).

Detailing the unit planning organizer also includes a recommended

instructional sequence along with an approximate pacing of the “unwrapped”

concepts and skills that students need to know and be able to do first,

second, and so on. Also needed is a suggested list of specific instructional

strategies for individual students based on their learning needs (advanced

students, at-risk students, special education students, English language

learners) with ways educators can use those strategies, and any other helpful

preplanning notes.

In our experience, we have found that teachers who add the unit planning

details themselves will be better able to administer the unit effectively rather

than interpreting the details added by curriculum design teams. Why?

Because they will fully understand the details they provide and have greater

clarity in how to uniquely apply those details in their own classroom situations.

The need for cooperative authorship of the curricular units by teachers is

validated by the research of John Hattie:

“The common themes of what makes various strategies successful are

. . . in particular, teachers talking with other teachers about teaching

and planning, deliberate attention to learning intentions and success

criteria, and a constant effort to ensure teachers are seeking feedback

information as to the success of their teaching on their students. This can

be enabled when teachers critically reflect on their own teaching

using classroom-based evidence, and it can be maximized

when teachers are in a safe and caring environment among

colleagues and talking about their teaching” (2009, p. 36).

These building blocks are

ultimately arranged in

“an instructionally

defensible sequence” (p. 47).

11. Create Informal Progress Monitoring Checks (developed by teacher

teams, not curriculum design teams). As grade-level and course-specific

educators administer each unit of study, together they will find or create quick

progress checks to assess ongoing student understanding of the “unwrapped”

Priority Standards. These can be exit slips—short-answer questions that are

aligned to the unit post-assessment and administered in conjunction with

learning progressions. Informally assessing student understanding throughout

the unit of study, educators will be able to adjust instruction where needed so

that students “close their learning gaps” and become prepared for success on

the post-assessment.

In Transformative Assessment (2008), Popham makes explicit the vital

connection between learning progressions and formative assessment (i.e.,

progress monitoring checks):

• Learning progressions are “the backdrop against which teachers and

students can determine when to collect . . . evidence regarding students’

current status. They provide a framework that helps teachers identify

appropriate adjustment-decision points as well as the kinds of en route

assessment evidence they need” (p. 27).

• Formative assessment “is not the occasional administration of classroom

tests; it’s an integral dimension of ongoing instruction whereby teachers

and students adjust what they’re doing” (p. 29). Teachers should assess

students “before proceeding to the next building block in the [learning]

progression, the mastery of which is believed to be dependent on

mastery of its predecessors” (p. 30).

In Visible Learning (2009), John Hattie has pointed out the impact

of correctly using formative assessment results as credible

feedback of student learning:

“Feedback, when used purposefully and in a timely

manner—and when shared with students—can

approximate a 0.75 effect size, meaning that

students can nearly double their speed of learning

within one academic school year.”

Students also benefit greatly from these formative “assessments as learning.”

By responding to a teacher’s short, frequent checks for understanding and then

getting immediate verbal or written feedback from the teacher that confirms a

correct answer or clarifies an incorrect answer, a student can better reflect upon

what he or she already knows and still needs to learn.

12. Intentionally Plan and Administer the Unit. Referring to the provided

template, “Details to Accompany the Unit Planning Organizer”, the final step in

the unit design process is to “backward-plan” the entire unit of study. Include

suggested pacing, an instructional sequence of “unwrapped” concepts and

skills, and the various instructional strategies that will be used to meet the

learning needs of all students.

Buy It or Build ItDesigning or redesigning curricula is a major undertaking. In preparing to embark

on this journey, school systems may investigate commercially produced “turnkey”

curricular programs that promise to save school systems the time, effort, and in-

school resources required to create their own. But such component-rich programs

are expensive to buy and require in-depth professional development for educators

to thoroughly understand the program and use it effectively.

For school systems that lack the necessary resources to purchase a costly

program and/or that strongly believe that the educators and leaders within

their own system should have an active voice and be active participants in the

custom design of their own rigorous curricula, this book is meant to provide a

straightforward, do-it-yourself guide for doing so. We feel confident that as your

design teams proceed through the RCD process, everyone involved will ultimately

come to the realization that you could not buy anywhere what you are building

together.

Establishing the Why FIRSTOne question we hear regularly from educators and leaders attending our

professional learning sessions to learn how to construct a rigorous curriculum is,

“How do we interest and involve colleagues who are resistant to adding anything

more to their plate?”

In our experience introducing this project to educators and school leaders, we

have found it critical to focus first on the why, the purpose of the work, and

how it will benefit students with clear learning outcomes and the means to

achieve them. We then emphasize how it will benefit teachers with the

clarity and focus on what to teach, when to teach it, and how to

assess student achievement.

We can do much to ease the burden educators often feel,

by helping them understand why we are committing

to this new project and how it fits in with what they

are already doing. This comprehensive set of steps for

Feedback, when used

purposefully and in a

timely manner—and when

shared with students—can

approximate a 0.75 effect

size, meaning that students

can nearly double their

speed of learning within one

academic school year.

designing rigorous and relevant curricular units of study represents a “big picture”

vision, one that cannot be accomplished overnight or even in a year. It is extremely

important to emphasize—repeatedly—that this carefully constructed road map

with designated milestones to reach over time: “a marathon, not a sprint.”

Our advice to those who engage in this challenging, yet immensely rewarding

process, is this: “Stay the course—you will surely find that it was more than worth it!”

We can confidently make this declaration after a decade of assisting educators

and leaders in creating RCD curricular units of study in school systems across the

U.S. You too will be able to add your own testimonial that it was indeed more than

worth it!

Praise for Rigorous Curriculum Design, Second Edition (2019)“In the second edition of Rigorous Curriculum Design, Larry Ainsworth and Kyra

Donovan address the core issue of enhancing students’ learning—ensuring that the

taught curriculum emphasizes critical content that is embedded in well-structured

units and lessons.”—Robert J. Marzano, Chief Academic Officer, Marzano Research

“This second edition of RCD reminds educators that although standards will

continue to change, understanding of how to collaboratively design meaningful

and coherent standards-based curriculum is where our focus must be. The

multiyear approach frames the big picture of curriculum design with strategies

to support teacher teams in deepening their own learning and professional

practice.”–Karin Hess, author, A Local Assessment Toolkit to Promote Deeper

Learning; President, Educational Research in Action, Underhill, Vermont

“The authors have brought clarity galore to a curricular terrain more often

slathered with murk than lucidity. The book’s chapters offer practical

guidance about the underpinnings of curricular units, the design of

such units, and how to implement the insightful strategy called

rigorous curricular design.”–W. James Popham, Emeritus

Professor, University of California, Los Angeles.

In our experience

introducing this project

to educators and school

leaders, we have found it

critical to focus first on the

why, the purpose of the

work, and how it will benefit

students with clear learning

outcomes and the means to

achieve them.

About the AuthorsLarry Ainsworth is the author or coauthor of numerous books, including Rigorous Curriculum Design and Common Formative

Assessments 2.0. Currently an independent education consultant, he assists school systems across the US in implementing

best practices related to standards, assessment, curriculum, and instruction across all grades and content areas.

Kyra Donovan is currently an Associate Partner for the International Center for Leadership in Education (ICLE), a division

of Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. With thirty years of experience in public education as teacher, principal, and central office

administrator, Kyra brings a practitioner’s point of view to teaching and learning. She was awarded the Oregon Central

Office Administrators’ “Achievement of Excellence” for her commitment to excellence in education and her leadership in the

McMinnville School District.

Connect with LarryFollow him on Twitter: @AinsworthLarry

Website: www.larryainsworth.com

Email: larry@larryainsworth.com

Learn more about the RCD process from videos with Larry and Kyra:

https://www.larryainsworth.com/books/rigorous-curriculum-design-getting-started-with-rcd/

Connect with Kyra:Follow her on Twitter: @DonovanKyraWebsite: https://leadered.com/ Email: KDonovan@leadered.com

#RCD #LeaderEd

References: Darling-Hammond, L. (2009, November). “Lessons from abroad: International standards and assessments.” Webinar from www.edutopia.org

Hattie, J. A. (2012). Visible learning for teachers: Maximizing impact on learning. New York, NY: Routledge.

Hattie, J. A. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. New York, NY: Routledge.

Marzano, R. J. (2003). What works in schools: Translating research into action. Alexandria, VA: ASCD

Popham, W. J. (2003b). Test better, teach better: The instructional role of assessment. Alexandria, : ASCD.

Popham, W. J. (2004, November). Curriculum matters. American School Board Journal, 191(11), 30–33.

Popham, W. J. (2007, April). The lowdown on learning progressions. Educational Leadership, 64(7), 83–84.

Popham, W. J. (2008). Transformative assessment. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Scherer, M. (2001). How and why standards can improve student achievement: A

conversation with Robert J. Marzano. Educational Leadership, 59(1), 14–15.

For more information, visit leadered.com

leadered.com

International Center for Leadership in Education®, HMH®, and Houghton Mifflin Harcourt® are registered trademarks of Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. © Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. All rights reserved. 07/20 WF1200180