August 26, 2016
We are pleased to share the results of our inaugural grades 3-8 ELA material reviews. 22 grade-level reports will post Tuesday, August 30 on www.EdReports.org. These include Amplify (6-8), Bookworms (3-5), Collections (6-8), Expeditionary Learning (6-8), Reading Street (3-6), and ReadyGen (3-5).
Be on the lookout for detailed information and mark your calendar for our webinar September 14 from 4:00-5:00 PM EST.
August 25, 2016
Two months ago, we released our inaugural high school math reports. After publishing these reports, we conducted our listening tour of educators, district leaders, publishers, and policymakers to identify strenghts and areas for improvement. Refinements to the website and to the review process are informed by these conversations. As Renee Sagaser, Superintendent of Schools in Fair Play, MO shared, “What we really appreciate about EdReports is that it helps us to see the differences between which materials are focused, coherent and rigorous, which ones are close, and which would require significant supplementing and adjusting to be aligned. With these changes, we can better identify the degrees by which materials meet – or do not meet – our needs of high-quality, aligned instructional materials.”
July 20, 2016
We're excited that our first high school math reports are now posted on www.EdReports.org. Five new reports, each covering three courses, are posted and include evidence detailing whether the materials met our expectations for focus, coherence, rigor, mathematical practices, and instructional supports and usability. You can read more about our methodology in this e-alert and on our website.
Of the five reports, one series - Core Connections (CPM) - met criteria for alignment in all three review gateways: 1) focus and coherence; 2) rigor and mathematical practices; and 3) instructional supports and usability. Reviewers noted positive evidence that can benefit teachers and students across all of the series. Highlights from the first round of high school reviews include:
- Core Connections (CPM) (traditional): Met Expectations for Gateway 1, Gateway 2 and Gateway 3
- Carnegie Learning (traditional): Partially Met Expectations for Gateway 1 and Gateway 2
- Houghton Mifflin Harcourt (traditional): Did Not Meet Expectations for Gateway 1
- Pearson (integrated): Did Not Meet Expectations for Gateway 1
- Springboard College Board (traditional): Did Not Meet Expectations for Gateway 1
June 28, 2016
Read guest commentary from Jeff Crawford, Secondary Math Specialist, from the Mead School District in Spokane, WA. Jeff shares how his work as a content reviewer helps him "pay it forward" to support teachers and students in his district and nationwide. As Jeff says: "At this HS math launch milestone, I was reminded that the EdReports.org review process is markedly different. EdReports’ tool is unique, using practitioner wisdom while drawing upon the standards and other seminal documents, e.g., the standards, progression documents, publishers’ criteria, and various tools like the IMET and EQuIP. Our tool is built for and by educators – for and by educators across the range of roles, governances, and localities. We created our tool with the primary intent to support educators so we may do what’s best for kids."
June 28, 2016
DURHAM, N.C. — June 28, 2016 — EdReports.org, the nonprofit whose educator teams review instructional materials to determine alignment to Common Core standards, announced the results of its first round of reviews of high school mathematics textbooks. Five reports examining both three-course traditional (Algebra I, Geometry, Algebra II) and integrated (I, II, III) sequences were published today, along with the review tool and evidence guides educators used in the process.
June 28, 2016
Matt Barnum featured EdReports.org and our new high school math reviews on the74million.org. In the article titled "Several HS Math Textbooks Not Aligned With Common Core, Ratings Group Finds," Executive Director Eric Hirsch was quoted about why our review process and tool prioritize the key concepts of focus, coherence, rigor and the math practices: “Our educators who designed the [evaluation] tool said, ‘If it’s not covering the right math, talking about how usable it is is not constructive.’”