Arizona standards alignment

• Strand 3 · Concept 1 · PO 1 (9-12)

  Covered

  Evaluate the validity of health information, products, and services.

  Covered by

  • Dental Health 101: What the Science Actually Says
  • Spotting Misleading Marketing

  • · Dental Health 101, Lesson 3 · Flossing and interdental cleaning: what the evidence actually shows
  • · Dental Health 101, Lesson 10 · Common dental myths, debunked
  • · Spotting Misleading Marketing, Lesson 7 · Health, supplements, and “structure/function” claims
  • · Spotting Misleading Marketing, Lesson 10 · How to verify a claim (and follow the money)

  Note: Taught explicitly on both fronts the PO names: information (evidence hierarchies, Cochrane reviews, myths debunked) and products/services (how health and supplement marketing dodges the legal line, and how to verify a claim yourself).

• S3.H2.L1

  Partially covered

  Evaluates the validity of claims made by commercial products and programs pertaining to fitness and a healthy, active lifestyle.

  Covered by

  • Spotting Misleading Marketing

  • · Spotting Misleading Marketing, Lesson 7 · Health, supplements, and “structure/function” claims
  • · Spotting Misleading Marketing, Lesson 10 · How to verify a claim (and follow the money)

  What we do and don't cover: Partial: evaluating health-product and supplement marketing claims — and verifying a claim yourself — is taught well; fitness PROGRAMS specifically (gym plans, training systems) are not the worked examples.

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), all of HS.E1 (financial literacy), 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.
• 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.