Arizona standards alignment

What we don't claim

A standards page is only worth reading if the omissions are honest too. We looked at these and left them out:

• Mathematics — nothing. This catalog does no mathematics instruction, so it meets no Arizona mathematics standard.
• Science — two partial claims, no more. Arizona is not an NGSS state; we verified that against the 2018 Arizona Science Standards document itself rather than assuming it. There is no laboratory work, no investigation, and no modelling in this catalog, so we claim exactly two Earth-science standards, partially, and explain the limit on each entry.
• HS.C2.5 — the Arizona-rights comparison our Arizona course does not make. HS.C2.5 asks students to compare the rights guaranteed in the Arizona Constitution to those in the U.S. Constitution. Arizona Civics teaches Arizona's structure and direct democracy, not a clause-by-clause rights comparison — so despite being our Arizona flagship, it does not meet this standard and we do not claim it. HS.C2.6 (contributions of individuals and groups, including Arizonans) is likewise not taught.
• Most of the Civics and Economics anchors we checked. HS.C1.1-C1.4 (civic virtues and deliberative processes as named content), HS.C2.2, HS.C3.3 (parties, interest groups, and media's impact on institutions — our media-literacy course is consumer protection, not political media analysis), HS.C3.4 (international order), HS.C4.4-C4.7 (public-policy decision analysis and in-classroom deliberation), HS.E2 (scarcity and incentives as named concepts), HS.E3.1/E3.3/E3.4, HS.E4 (the domestic economy, fiscal and monetary policy), and HS.E5.2/E5.4 — the courses do not genuinely teach these, so we do not claim them. HS.E1 used to be listed here in full and is not any longer; see the entry below.
• HS.E1 (financial literacy) — this rejection has been superseded, in part. Until 2026-08-28 this list said all of HS.E1 was not genuinely taught, and at the time that was the honest answer: the catalog did no personal-finance instruction of any kind. It now carries MONEY-01, on how a consumer credit decision is made, what data feeds it, who is allowed to look, and what recourse exists. Two of the anchor's five standards are claimed above, HS.E1.3 in full and HS.E1.1 in part, each with its limit stated on the entry. The remaining three are still not claimed, and the reasons are specific rather than general. HS.E1.2 asks students to analyze the factors that influence budgeting and saving choices; the course teaches how institutions decide about a borrower and it deliberately gives no financial advice and no planning instruction, so claiming a budgeting standard would misdescribe what a teacher would actually get. HS.E1.4 is a comparison of types of investment and HS.E1.5 is insurance and personal financial risk, and the course enters neither domain. Arizona's own E1 anchor statement names income, spending and investment; the course reaches the spending third and does not pretend to the other two.
• Arizona's Economics anchors have no economic-systems standard. The curriculum contrasts traditional (reciprocity) and market economies directly and at length, but Arizona's high-school Economics anchors (HS.E1-E5) contain no economic-systems standard for it to meet — the closest homes are financial literacy and market mechanics. The gap is in the standards, not the lessons.
• Arizona's 2016 ELA standards have no media-bias standard. Indiana's 9-10.CC.8 and 11-12.CC.8 (analyze bias in media; analyze media's impact on the public) are where our media-literacy work maps. Arizona's 2016 ELA standards contain no comparable standard — we searched the 9-10 and 11-12 documents. The closest, 11-12.SL.2, is about integrating sources, and we claim it for what it is. The gap is in the standards, not the lessons.
• PE Standard 2 — no honest home for the sport-strategy courses. Arizona's high-school Standard 2 outcomes are specific: dance forms (S2.H1.L1, S2.H4), biomechanics vocabulary (S2.H2), practice planning (S2.H3), and the historical role of games in society (S2.H1.L2). None of them is the concepts-strategies-tactics knowledge our golf, tennis, football, pickleball, lacrosse, and croquet courses teach in depth, so — unlike Indiana, whose HSL1.2.1.A names exactly that — Arizona gets no Standard 2 claim. And every outcome that asks a student to DEMONSTRATE motor skill or participate is out of reach of an online course; we claim knowledge-side outcomes only.
• Health strands beyond 1, 3, and 6. Strand 2 (analyzing influences), Strand 4 (interpersonal communication), Strand 5 (decision-making), Strand 7 (practicing health behaviors, as observed practice), and Strand 8 (advocacy) were checked against the Grades 9-12 performance objectives and are not genuinely taught by these courses. Strand 6 Concept 2 PO 3 (a long-term personal health plan) was considered and rejected: the blueprint is a 90-day plan, and we will not stretch '90 days' into 'long-term'.
• The AI-literacy ladder, the language courses, and Learning How to Learn — deferred, not denied. Arizona's closest frameworks (Computer Science, World and Native Languages, Educational Technology) have not been fetched and verified yet. Our rule is fetch-or-don't-cite, so these courses carry no Arizona claims this pass.