Curriculum Provider Index

    NASEF

    Non-profit curriculum network
    Global educator network; curriculum available internationally
    Capability score77/100
    Strong90% of rubric verified

    Scored from 9 of 10 criteria with a public source. Last verified 2026-09-10.

    Best suited to

    Schools and districts wanting free scholastic esports curriculum, educator community and research-backed implementation resources.

    Score breakdown

    Scoring breakdown for NASEF across every rubric criterion
    CriterionWeightLevelWhat the evidence shows
    External accreditationHas an independent body reviewed and rated the curriculum?15%3/4Scored: documented evidence. Fact: NASEF identifies UC-approved grade 9-12 ELA courses with b designation. Interpretation: Named external course approval; no scored pedagogical accreditation established. Confidence: Medium. Source
    Curriculum depthIs there a full scheme of work, or a set of loose activities?15%4/4Scored: documented evidence. Fact: Grade 9-12 ELA, multiyear CTE sequence and age-appropriate middle-school modules map to content standards. Interpretation: Explicit multiyear and age-banded mapping meets 4; detailed ELA/CTE files require free member login. Confidence: Medium. Source
    Student assessmentCan a teacher evidence what a student actually learned?10%2/4Scored: documented evidence. Fact: Public overview supplies learning standards and modules; detailed ELA assessment materials redirect to login. Interpretation: Outcome-linked classroom activities evidenced; public rubrics/certificated student endpoint not verified. Confidence: Low. Source
    Learning platformIs the content delivered through a real platform teachers can run?10%1/4Scored: documented evidence. Fact: Member portal distributes curriculum and community resources. Interpretation: Resource access meets 1; do not infer learner tracking from membership login. Confidence: Medium. Source
    Teacher supplyWho stands in front of the class?10%Not publishedNo public source found. This criterion is excluded from the score rather than marked as zero.
    Teacher trainingIs the school teacher trained to run the program independently?10%4/4Scored: documented evidence. Fact: Fellow, Mentor and Community Leader progression includes recurring learning, mentoring, artifacts and verified badge. Interpretation: Structured educator credential pathway meets 4; not a statutory teaching qualification. Confidence: Medium. Source
    Safeguarding and wellbeingIs student wellbeing built into the program, or bolted on?10%3/4Scored: documented evidence. Fact: Healthy-gaming lessons developed with university/health/education partners; current health certification has named medical expertise. Interpretation: Structured dedicated content; co-development alone does not prove separate external review. Confidence: Medium. Source
    Delivery reachCan they actually deliver where the school is?8%3/4Scored: documented evidence. Fact: Middle/high schools and community organisations globally can join; curriculum and events support local implementation. Interpretation: Global resources/network, not demonstrated global live classroom teaching. Confidence: Medium. Source
    Pricing transparencyCan a school budget without a sales call?7%4/4Scored: documented evidence. Fact: Registration and tournament participation are expressly free; curriculum library offered through membership. Interpretation: Published zero-price core educational/network package meets 4. Equipment, school staffing and optional services are outside this price. Confidence: High. Source
    Evidence of outcomesIs there published evidence the program works?5%4/4Scored: documented evidence. Fact: Peer-reviewed FDG 2019 formative evaluation studied the predecessor NASEF league through observations and interviews. Interpretation: Meets peer-reviewed evaluation anchor. Qualitative learning opportunities and equity issues, not causal attainment/attendance proof. Confidence: High. Source

    Something wrong or out of date?

    Entries change when the evidence changes. If a criterion is published somewhere we missed, send us the link and we will rescore it with a dated note.

    Submit a correctionVisit the NASEF website