Alignment to College and Career Ready Standards: Overall Summary

The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 8 do not meet the expectations for alignment to the CCSSM. The instructional materials partially meet the expectations for gateway 1 as they appropriately focus on the major work of the grade but do not demonstrate coherence within the grade and across other grades. The instructional materials do not meet the expectations for gateway 2 as they do not appropriately address rigor within the grade-level standards and miss opportunities in the materials when it comes to attending to the full meaning of the standards for Mathematical practice. Overall, the instructional materials address focus very well, but they do not meet expectations for coherence, rigor, and the MP.

See Rating Scale
Understanding Gateways

Alignment

|

Does Not Meet Expectations

Gateway 1:

Focus & Coherence

0
7
12
14
10
12-14
Meets Expectations
8-11
Partially Meets Expectations
0-7
Does Not Meet Expectations

Gateway 2:

Rigor & Mathematical Practices

0
10
16
18
8
16-18
Meets Expectations
11-15
Partially Meets Expectations
0-10
Does Not Meet Expectations

Usability

|

Not Rated

Not Rated

Gateway 3:

Usability

0
22
31
38
0
31-38
Meets Expectations
23-30
Partially Meets Expectations
0-22
Does Not Meet Expectations

Gateway One

Focus & Coherence

Partially Meets Expectations

+
-
Gateway One Details

The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 8 partially meet the expectations for alignment to focusing on major work of the grade and coherence. The instructional materials meet expectations for both of the two focus criteria by not assessing above Grade 8 standards and allocating a large percentage of instructional materials to major standards of the grade. Some strengths are found and noted in the coherence criterion, but too many areas of weakness lead to the instructional materials not meeting quality expectations for coherence. Overall, the instructional materials lack consistency with the grade-by-grade progressions in the CCSSM and do not foster coherence within Grade 8.

Criterion 1a

Materials do not assess topics before the grade level in which the topic should be introduced.
2/2
+
-
Criterion Rating Details

The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 8 meet the expectations for assessing grade-level content. The text includes grade-level content and only lesson 9.1 is "preparation" for grade-level content. There are no Grade 9 or higher standards assessed in these instructional materials. Overall, the instructional materials do not assess content from future grades within the summative assessments provided for each chapter.

Indicator 1a

The instructional material assesses the grade-level content and, if applicable, content from earlier grades. Content from future grades may be introduced but students should not be held accountable on assessments for future expectations.
2/2
+
-
Indicator Rating Details

The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 8 meet the expectations for assessing grade-level content. Overall, the instructional materials do not assess content from future grades within the summative assessments provided for each chapter.

  • The text includes grade-level content and only lesson 9.1 is "preparation" for grade-level content.

Criterion 1b

Students and teachers using the materials as designed devote the large majority of class time in each grade K-8 to the major work of the grade.
4/4
+
-
Criterion Rating Details

The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 8 meet the expectations for spending the large majority of class time on the major clusters of the grade. More than 75% of the lessons are aligned with the major standards of Grade 8, and almost 80% of the instructional time is allocated for major work of the grade. Overall, the instructional materials allocate a large percentage of instructional time to clusters of standards that are major work of Grade 8.

Indicator 1b

Instructional material spends the majority of class time on the major cluster of each grade.
4/4
+
-
Indicator Rating Details

The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 8 meet the expectations for spending the large majority of class time on the major clusters of the grade. Overall, the instructional materials allocate a large percentage of instructional time to clusters of standards that are the major work of Grade 8.

  • More than 75% of the lessons are aligned with the major standards of Grade 8.
  • Almost 80% of the instructional time is allocated for major work of the grade.

Criterion 1c - 1f

Coherence: Each grade's instructional materials are coherent and consistent with the Standards.
4/8
+
-
Criterion Rating Details

The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 8 do not meet the expectations for being coherent and consistent with the CCSSM. The instructional materials have an amount of content designated for Grade 8 that is viable for one school year, and that is the strength for this criterion. The instructional materials partially enhance focus and coherence with the supporting, but they do not have materials foster coherence through connections at a single grade. Overall, the instructional materials for Grade 8 strongly exhibit some characteristics of coherence as noted in indicator 1d, but for the entire criterion there are too many weaknesses for the materials to partially meet the expectations.

Indicator 1c

Supporting content enhances focus and coherence simultaneously by engaging students in the major work of the grade.
1/2
+
-
Indicator Rating Details

The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 8 partially meet the expectations for having the supporting content enhancing focus and coherence simultaneously. Overall, the instructional materials miss opportunities to connect non-major clusters of standards to major clusters, and as a result, the supporting content does not always engage students in the major work of Grade 8.

  • Although supporting content 8.NS.A (approximating irrational numbers) is found in the same chapter as major work 8.G.B (Pythagorean Theorem) and is connected to 8.EE.2 in the text via identified content standards, each standard is isolated in an individual lesson with no connections with problems or vocabulary.
  • In some cases, the ordering of lessons seems to detract from the major work of the grade. For example, the text begins with 8.NS.A, which is supporting content, and then proceeds to 8.G.B (major). For this indicator, 8.G.B should start the text, and 8.NS.A should follow, supporting the major work with the content and exercises.

Indicator 1d

The amount of content designated for one grade level is viable for one school year in order to foster coherence between grades.
2/2
+
-
Indicator Rating Details

The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 8 meet the expectations for having an amount of content designated for one grade level as viable for one school year. Overall, the amount of time needed to complete the lessons is appropriate for a school year of approximately 170-190.

  • As noted in the pacing on page T42-T45, the book totals 150 days of instruction, leaving time for review and enrichment, additional activity labs, assessments, and projects.
  • Days beyond the 150 suggested by the materials can be used for assessment purposes or utilizing some of the guided problem-solving items.

Indicator 1e

Materials are consistent with the progressions in the Standards i. Materials develop according to the grade-by-grade progressions in the Standards. If there is content from prior or future grades, that content is clearly identified and related to grade-level work ii. Materials give all students extensive work with grade-level problems iii. Materials relate grade level concepts explicitly to prior knowledge from earlier grades.
1/2
+
-
Indicator Rating Details

The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 8 partially meet the expectations for having materials that are consistent with the progressions in the CCSSM. Overall, grade-level concepts are not always explicitly related to prior knowledge from earlier grades, and the materials partially develop according to the grade-by-grade progressions, with non-grade-level content clearly identified. Also, the materials partially give students extensive work with grade-level problems.

  • 8.EE.A is about work with radicals and integer exponents, yet it is mostly found in chapter 6, and the Pythagorean Theorem, which requires work with radicals, is chapter 1.
  • The progression of the standards is laid out in a logical sequence, but there is no clear explanation for teachers on the development of Grade 8 standards from prior or to future years.
  • Two lessons are marked linking the work of Grade 8 to mastery of standards from a previous grade level, but neither of these lessons review work from the major work of previous grades in the grade-by-grade progressions.
  • There is often only one challenge problem per section, giving little opportunity for learning grade-level content in greater depth.
  • After providing examples, each lesson only provides five to 10 problems.
  • Problems in lessons 2.2 and 2.3 do provide opportunities to expand expressions with the distributive property and collect like terms with some instances of rational (fraction and decimal, not just integer) coefficients (8.EE.C.7.B).
  • At the beginning of each chapter there is a narrative about "What You've Learned." In chapters 1, 2 and 6, it includes what students have learned in a previous course and also lists "What You'll Learn Next." Chapters 3-5 and 7-10 do not mention knowledge or skills from a previous course.

Indicator 1f

Materials foster coherence through connections at a single grade, where appropriate and required by the Standards i. Materials include learning objectives that are visibly shaped by CCSSM cluster headings. ii. Materials include problems and activities that serve to connect two or more clusters in a domain, or two or more domains in a grade, in cases where these connections are natural and important.
0/2
+
-
Indicator Rating Details

The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 8 do not meet the expectations for having materials foster coherence through connections at a single grade. Overall, the materials do not include learning objectives that are visibly shaped by the CCSSM cluster headings, and the materials do not always connect two or more clusters in a domain or two or more domains in a grade when appropriate.

  • Many standards in the same cluster are not in the same chapter. For example, 8.EE.B.6 is in the middle of chapter 7 on geometry and 8.EE.B.5 is in an activity lab at the beginning of chapter 4 on graphing functions.
  • 8.EE.C is partially covered since all objectives in lessons 5.1 to 5.4 are focused on solving systems of equations with different methods, but students never have to analyze.
  • There is one opportunity identified as connecting 8.NS with 8.EE, but there are no other identified connections between two or more domains in a grade.
  • In chapter 1, 8.NS, 8.EE and 8.G standards all connect to the Pythagorean Theorem. However, in lesson 1.2 (8.NS.A.1, 8.NS.A.2, 8.EE.A.2), the only mention of equations is in the teacher manual under "Math Background" and students see the word "expression" in 1 out of 42 problems. This is the only lesson where two or more domains are addressed, and all other domains are taught in isolated lessons.

Gateway Two

Rigor & Mathematical Practices

Does Not Meet Expectations

+
-
Gateway Two Details

The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 8 do not meet expectations for rigor and MP. Overall, the instructional materials do not reflect the balances in the CCSSM, which help students in meeting rigorous expectations by developing conceptual understanding, procedural skill and fluency, and application, and they do not meaningfully connect the Standards for Mathematical Content and the MP.

*Evidence updated 10/27/15

Criterion 2a - 2d

Rigor and Balance: Each grade's instructional materials reflect the balances in the Standards and help students meet the Standards' rigorous expectations, by helping students develop conceptual understanding, procedural skill and fluency, and application.
4/8
+
-
Criterion Rating Details

The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 8 do not meet expectations for rigor and balance. The instructional materials partially give appropriate attention to conceptual understanding, and they partially address procedural skill and fluency and application. The materials partially address these three aspects with balance, by not always treating them separately and not always together. Overall, the instructional materials do not reflect the balances in the CCSSM, which help students in meeting rigorous expectations by developing conceptual understanding, procedural skill and fluency, and application.

Indicator 2a

Attention to conceptual understanding: Materials develop conceptual understanding of key mathematical concepts, especially where called for in specific content standards or cluster headings.
1/2
+
-
Indicator Rating Details

The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 8 partially meet the expectations for giving attention to conceptual understanding. Overall, the materials miss opportunities for students to make connections among standards and develop conceptual understanding of key mathematical concepts, especially where specific content standards or cluster headings call for it.

  • Attention is given to conceptual understanding by developing concepts using prior knowledge of previous grades and combining that knowledge to understand functions by graphs, rate tables, equations and proportions found in chapter 3.
  • Cluster heading 8.EE.B requires students to make connections between proportional relationships, lines, and linear equations. The text does not present content in a way that develops conceptual understanding because students learn about these in isolation with the exception of Activity 3-3b, questions 2 – 4. The two standards 8.EE.B.5 and 8.EE.B.6 are covered in this text four chapters apart.
  • F.A.1, which states students should understand that a function is a rule that assigns to each input exactly one output and that these are ordered pairs, is taught in two different chapters (in lesson 3-2 on tables, and lesson 4-2 on graphs). Separating these lessons weakens the potential for conceptual understanding.
  • For 8.G.A, the activity lab in chapter 6 on angle sums is minimal. There are attempts at conceptual understanding, but they should be revised with the MPs at the core of how students are learning mathematics.

Chapter 4 gives attention to conceptual understanding by building on prior knowledge of unit rate connecting it to slope and the use of slope to graph a proportional relationship, but drawings that show similar triangles formed by the slope are not defined or discussed.

Indicator 2b

Attention to Procedural Skill and Fluency: Materials give attention throughout the year to individual standards that set an expectation of procedural skill and fluency.
1/2
+
-
Indicator Rating Details

The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 8 partially meet the expectations for giving attention to procedural skill and fluency. Overall, the materials give opportunities to practice with procedural skills when those skills are first introduced, but the materials do not give opportunities with different procedural skills throughout the year so that fluency is completely addressed and developed.

  • In chapter 2, algebra tiles are introduced to solve multi-step equations. The tiles support the algorithm to solve multi-step algebra problems. Although there are examples using algebra tiles, the lessons are mostly procedural based with problems to develop the skills and fluency.
  • Each lesson has a test prep and mixed review section, but many of these items (between 40 to 50 percent) are multiple choice, which doesn’t ensure fluency or knowledge of procedural skills.
  • In Lesson 5-4, students are required to solve systems of equations and explain why they chose a specific method, which would enhance fluency since students are selecting the most efficient strategy and explaining.
  • Solving systems of equations (8.EE.C.8.B) has practice in chapter 5, but the author does not seize the opportunity to emphasize it again in chapter 7.

For 8.EE.C.7, chapter 2 has practice for procedural skill and fluency, but the author does not seize the opportunity to emphasize it again in chapter 7.

Indicator 2c

Attention to Applications: Materials are designed so that teachers and students spend sufficient time working with engaging applications of the mathematics, without losing focus on the major work of each grade
1/2
+
-
Indicator Rating Details

The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 8 partially meet the expectations for giving attention to applications. Overall, the materials are designed so that teachers and students spend limited time working with engaging applications of the mathematics, without losing focus on the major work of each grade, and there are very few opportunities for students to engage in non-routine problems.

  • The materials provide single and multi-step contextual problems, but there is a lack of non-routine problems.
  • Each lesson has a challenge and real-world problems in the homework. The application problems do stress the major work of the grade.
  • A large portion of this text is devoted to solving problems procedurally or making calculations to find a correct value with no real connection to any contextual situation. Most of the lessons have either four or five problems set in a real world context, and most of these are low level requiring nothing more than the standard algorithm.
  • Only five problems out of 43 in lesson 2-2 ask students to define variables and simplify expressions for given contextual situations.
  • In the beginning of the book there is a problem solving handbook, which has students explore different methods of solving problems. Many of these involve applications to the real world; however, they do not require students to apply their own Mathematical reasoning to each situation.
  • For 8.F.B.4, only two out of 14 exercises in 4-1, six out of 26 in 4-2, nine out of 13 in 4-3, and three out of 22 on the chapter 4 assessment are application problems.

For 8.EE.C.8.C, only three out of 21 in 5-1, six out of 17 in 5-2, two out of 13 in 5-3, four out of 18 in 5-4, and five out of 20 on the chapter 5 assessment are application problems.

Indicator 2d

Balance: The three aspects of rigor are not always treated together and are not always treated separately. There is a balance of the 3 aspects of rigor within the grade.
1/2
+
-
Indicator Rating Details

The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 8 partially meet the expectations for balance. Overall, the three aspects of rigor are not always treated together nor are they always treated separately within the materials, but there is not a balance of the three aspects of rigor within the grade.

  • The materials have an emphasis on procedural skill and fluency providing numerous skill-driven problems.
  • Examples of models to develop conceptual understanding are provided, and there are real-world problems provided in the homework sections. However, the materials do not create a balance between the three aspects of rigor by neglecting the development of conceptual understanding and by not providing enough non-routine problems.
  • While the three aspects of rigor are not always treated together, the text lacks enough attention to conceptual understanding which creates an imbalance between all three aspects.

Examples and problems set in real-world contexts are too scaffolded to require students to apply the mathematics learned in the lesson.

Criterion 2e - 2g.iii

Practice-Content Connections: Materials meaningfully connect the Standards for Mathematical Content and the Standards for Mathematical Practice
4/10
+
-
Criterion Rating Details

The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 8 do not meet expectations for practice-content connections. The instructional materials meet the expectations for attending to the specialized language of Mathematics, but they only partially meet the expectations to identify and use the MP to enrich the mathematics content throughout the grade and to prompt students to construct viable arguments and analyze the arguments of others. The instructional materials do not meet expectations for carefully attending to the full meaning of each practice standard and assisting teachers in engaging students in constructing viable arguments and analyzing the arguments of others. Overall, the instructional materials do not meaningfully connect the Standards for Mathematical Content and the MP.

Indicator 2e

The Standards for Mathematical Practice are identified and used to enrich mathematics content within and throughout each applicable grade.
1/2
+
-
Indicator Rating Details

The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 8 partially meet the expectations for identifying and using the MPs to enrich the mathematics content throughout the grade. Overall, the MPs are identified in different places in the materials, but the places where they are identified do not provide enough explanation as to how the practices enrich the mathematics content.

  • The MP are identified on pages T26-T31.
  • Each practice is defined and explained how it is used throughout the materials, such as: MP1 found in the Guided Problem Solving exercise within the homework problems; MP3 and Error Analysis; and MP5 found in the Activity Labs and Choose a Method exercises.
  • The pages are provided as to where to find the use of the MP; however, when viewing the pages, there is no additional guidance provided on the use of the MP.
  • There is reference to MP1 in the student edition found on pages xxxii -- xlix, but the practice itself is not identified or referenced.
  • MP2 is noted in the teacher edition to be located on pages xx – xxii in the student edition, but the pages are an index of “Connect Your Learning” activities.

The MP are found in the student edition on page viii, but there is no explanation of their meaning or importance.

Indicator 2f

Materials carefully attend to the full meaning of each practice standard
0/2
+
-
Indicator Rating Details

The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 8 do not meet the expectations for carefully attending to the full meaning of each practice standard. Overall, the materials partially attend to the full meaning of some of the MP, but for others, the materials do not even partially attend to the full meaning.

  • The teacher edition provides an explanation as to how the program supports each MP, but the indicated pages with the problems do not provide any other guidance and support for the MP.
  • The student edition provides problems that support some of the MP, such as the “Reasoning exercises, “More than One Way” problems, and “Error Analysis” problems.
  • Under MP4 on page T29, the claim is made that students have an application example in many lessons.  When students “model” mathematics, they should have opportunities to model on their own and not simply replicate a given example.  Many times there is an example shown fully explained, and then, students are given a similar problem. Instead of being asked to specifically model how they arrived at the work with equations, diagrams, or graphic representations, students are only required to calculate a value.
  • The chapter projects are also listed as times students will engage with MP4. Projects for chapters 1 and 6 do not have a mathematical connection to MP4. Projects for chapters 7, 8, 9, and 10 are not explicit enough about what kinds of details will be needed to fully attend to MP4. Projects for chapters 2, 3, 4, and 5 are centered in specific problems that require students to model Mathematically, not just make a model.
  • Students have very few opportunities to look for and express regularity in repeated reasoning or look for and make use of structure.

Students are not given enough opportunities to attend to the full meaning of MP1.

Indicator 2g

Emphasis on Mathematical Reasoning: Materials support the Standards' emphasis on mathematical reasoning by:
0/0

Indicator 2g.i

Materials prompt students to construct viable arguments and analyze the arguments of others concerning key grade-level mathematics detailed in the content standards.
1/2
+
-
Indicator Rating Details

The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 8 partially meet the expectations for prompting students to construct viable arguments and analyze the arguments of others. Overall, the materials provide opportunities for students to construct viable arguments and analyze the arguments of others, but the instructions for those opportunities do not always prompt students to give explanations for their answers.

  • There are opportunities for students to construct viable arguments and analyze the arguments of others in the content standards through check your understanding and homework exercises titled “Error Analysis” and “Writing in Math.”
  • On page 51, students are asked to determine which work is correct and explain, but it misses the opportunity to explain the mistake.
  • Under the section for MP3 on page T28, pages 17, 30, 51, 66, 120, 181, 198, 224, 225, 242 and 316 are listed and contain an “Error Analysis” problem. While students must analyze the problems to find mistakes, most of these problems require only procedural corrections.
  • One exception is on page 267, in which students are asked to think about another student’s reasoning about rotation of a square and symmetry. Another exception is on page 312, in which students must provide a counterexample to prove the given student reasoning is not sound.
  • Page 225 is also listed as having examples of the practice. Problem 23 is labeled Reasoning and asks the student if they can draw two triangles and prove them congruent with angle-angle-angle. They are to use their drawing to support their answer (of no, you can’t prove that) with no written explanation.
  • In More Than One Way, students are supposed to “analyze and critique the solution plans of two students.” On pages 61, 124, 155, 196, 283 and 303, two different methods are explained step by step.  Students are asked to choose a method to use in a given problem. They are never asked why they chose a specific method or which would be more efficient in certain contexts or situations.
  • Some sections have an “Error Analysis” exercise so that students can find and correct an error; however, they are told that there is an error to correct.

There are several times throughout the text (such as on page 155) that the materials present “more than one way” to solve a problem; however, they are given as examples. So, students only have to read through them instead of developing more than one way themselves and/or think through why both ways work.

Indicator 2g.ii

Materials assist teachers in engaging students in constructing viable arguments and analyzing the arguments of others concerning key grade-level mathematics detailed in the content standards.
0/2
+
-
Indicator Rating Details

The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 8 do not meet the expectations for assisting teachers in engaging students in constructing viable arguments and analyzing the arguments of others. Overall, the materials provide opportunities for students to construct viable arguments and analyze the arguments of others, but the support provided for teachers is insufficient for more deeply developing students’ arguments and analysis of others’ arguments.

  • Opportunities for students to construct viable arguments and analyze arguments of others are provided in the “Error Analysis” and “Writing in Math” problems. However, there is no specific assistance for teachers in engaging students in constructing viable arguments and analyzing the arguments of others.
  • Without providing labels on the lesson problems identifying specific MP, it is difficult for teachers to determine which problems require students to use them.
  • This text provides two to three problems per chapter labeled Reasoning for teachers to engage students in constructing arguments themselves, but these do not require students to critique the arguments of others.  On page 93, students are asked to explain why two ratios are not proportional, but the answer in the book is only a superficial explanation and does not provide the teacher any underlying multiplicative reason the ratios are not the same.
  • Many of these problems say, “answers may vary” and list one sample. In order to support the teacher in getting to essential understandings and connections between the reasoning of multiple students, a more in-depth answer key with more than one explanation would be helpful.

There is some opportunity for the text to assist teachers in the solutions for “error analysis” and “writing in math;” however, the solutions are listed briefly with no detail for pushing and probing student thinking.

Indicator 2g.iii

Materials explicitly attend to the specialized language of mathematics.
2/2
+
-
Indicator Rating Details

The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 8 meet the expectations for explicitly attending to the specialized language of Mathematics. Overall, the materials typically address Mathematical language appropriately, but there could be more opportunities for students to demonstrate using the language correctly.

  • Materials provide vocabulary with definitions throughout the lessons when key terms are being introduced. Key terms are highlighted when used within the lessons (Key Concepts).
  • Vocabulary Builder is provided as an opportunity for students to explore key terms and concepts in some chapters (2, 3, 5, 7, and 8).
  • Students assess their knowledge of the word infinite, look up the word, and use it in a sentence in chapter 2. In chapter 3, students make word cards that include non-examples.
  • In chapter 5, students make a concept map with the differing methods and terms in systems of equations. Another concept map is created in chapter 7 with types of solutions to linear equations. The focus of chapter 7 is, however, on Geometry.
  • Other than the “Vocabulary Builder,” academic vocabulary is taught within each lesson by using the term in a sentence and identifying it with bold type. New vocabulary can be found in the beginning of the lesson under the objective and also listed at the beginning of the chapter.
  • Each lesson has a vocabulary review in the “Check Skills You’ll Need Box.”
  • While students are exposed to key terms during the lesson, they are not asked to explain their Mathematical reasoning in enough problems to thoroughly practice using these words.

On page 121, the materials refer to perpendicular lines having slopes with a product of -1.

Gateway Three

Usability

Not Rated

Criterion 3a - 3e

Use and design facilitate student learning: Materials are well designed and take into account effective lesson structure and pacing.
0/8

Indicator 3a

The underlying design of the materials distinguishes between problems and exercises. In essence, the difference is that in solving problems, students learn new mathematics, whereas in working exercises, students apply what they have already learned to build mastery. Each problem or exercise has a purpose.
0/2

Indicator 3b

Design of assignments is not haphazard: exercises are given in intentional sequences.
0/2

Indicator 3c

There is variety in what students are asked to produce. For example, students are asked to produce answers and solutions, but also, in a grade-appropriate way, arguments and explanations, diagrams, mathematical models, etc.
0/2

Indicator 3d

Manipulatives are faithful representations of the mathematical objects they represent and when appropriate are connected to written methods.
0/2

Indicator 3e

The visual design (whether in print or online) is not distracting or chaotic, but supports students in engaging thoughtfully with the subject.
0/0

Criterion 3f - 3l

Teacher Planning and Learning for Success with CCSS: Materials support teacher learning and understanding of the Standards.
0/8

Indicator 3f

Materials support teachers in planning and providing effective learning experiences by providing quality questions to help guide students' mathematical development.
0/2

Indicator 3g

Materials contain a teacher's edition with ample and useful annotations and suggestions on how to present the content in the student edition and in the ancillary materials. Where applicable, materials include teacher guidance for the use of embedded technology to support and enhance student learning.
0/2

Indicator 3h

Materials contain a teacher's edition (in print or clearly distinguished/accessible as a teacher's edition in digital materials) that contains full, adult-level explanations and examples of the more advanced mathematics concepts in the lessons so that teachers can improve their own knowledge of the subject, as necessary.
0/2

Indicator 3i

Materials contain a teacher's edition (in print or clearly distinguished/accessible as a teacher's edition in digital materials) that explains the role of the specific grade-level mathematics in the context of the overall mathematics curriculum for kindergarten through grade twelve.
0/2

Indicator 3j

Materials provide a list of lessons in the teacher's edition (in print or clearly distinguished/accessible as a teacher's edition in digital materials), cross-referencing the standards covered and providing an estimated instructional time for each lesson, chapter and unit (i.e., pacing guide).
0/0

Indicator 3k

Materials contain strategies for informing parents or caregivers about the mathematics program and suggestions for how they can help support student progress and achievement.
0/0

Indicator 3l

Materials contain explanations of the instructional approaches of the program and identification of the research-based strategies.
0/0

Criterion 3m - 3q

Assessment: Materials offer teachers resources and tools to collect ongoing data about student progress on the Standards.
0/10

Indicator 3m

Materials provide strategies for gathering information about students' prior knowledge within and across grade levels.
0/2

Indicator 3n

Materials provide strategies for teachers to identify and address common student errors and misconceptions.
0/2

Indicator 3o

Materials provide opportunities for ongoing review and practice, with feedback, for students in learning both concepts and skills.
0/2

Indicator 3p

Materials offer ongoing formative and summative assessments:
0/0

Indicator 3p.i

Assessments clearly denote which standards are being emphasized.
0/2

Indicator 3p.ii

Assessments include aligned rubrics and scoring guidelines that provide sufficient guidance to teachers for interpreting student performance and suggestions for follow-up.
0/2

Indicator 3q

Materials encourage students to monitor their own progress.
0/0

Criterion 3r - 3y

Differentiated instruction: Materials support teachers in differentiating instruction for diverse learners within and across grades.
0/12

Indicator 3r

Materials provide strategies to help teachers sequence or scaffold lessons so that the content is accessible to all learners.
0/2

Indicator 3s

Materials provide teachers with strategies for meeting the needs of a range of learners.
0/2

Indicator 3t

Materials embed tasks with multiple entry-points that can be solved using a variety of solution strategies or representations.
0/2

Indicator 3u

Materials suggest support, accommodations, and modifications for English Language Learners and other special populations that will support their regular and active participation in learning mathematics (e.g., modifying vocabulary words within word problems).
0/2

Indicator 3v

Materials provide opportunities for advanced students to investigate mathematics content at greater depth.
0/2

Indicator 3w

Materials provide a balanced portrayal of various demographic and personal characteristics.
0/2

Indicator 3x

Materials provide opportunities for teachers to use a variety of grouping strategies.
0/0

Indicator 3y

Materials encourage teachers to draw upon home language and culture to facilitate learning.
0/0

Criterion 3aa - 3z

Effective technology use: Materials support effective use of technology to enhance student learning. Digital materials are accessible and available in multiple platforms.
0/0

Indicator 3aa

Digital materials (either included as supplementary to a textbook or as part of a digital curriculum) are web-based and compatible with multiple internet browsers (e.g., Internet Explorer, Firefox, Google Chrome, etc.). In addition, materials are "platform neutral" (i.e., are compatible with multiple operating systems such as Windows and Apple and are not proprietary to any single platform) and allow the use of tablets and mobile devices.
0/0

Indicator 3ab

Materials include opportunities to assess student mathematical understandings and knowledge of procedural skills using technology.
0/0

Indicator 3ac

Materials can be easily customized for individual learners. i. Digital materials include opportunities for teachers to personalize learning for all students, using adaptive or other technological innovations. ii. Materials can be easily customized for local use. For example, materials may provide a range of lessons to draw from on a topic.
0/0

Indicator 3ad

Materials include or reference technology that provides opportunities for teachers and/or students to collaborate with each other (e.g. websites, discussion groups, webinars, etc.).
0/0

Indicator 3z

Materials integrate technology such as interactive tools, virtual manipulatives/objects, and/or dynamic mathematics software in ways that engage students in the Mathematical Practices.
0/0

Additional Publication Details

Report Published Date: Fri Feb 13 00:00:00 UTC 2015

Report Edition: 2013

Title ISBN Edition Publisher Year
null 9781256737223 null null null
null 9781256737247 null null null

About Publishers Responses

All publishers are invited to provide an orientation to the educator-led team that will be reviewing their materials. The review teams also can ask publishers clarifying questions about their programs throughout the review process.

Once a review is complete, publishers have the opportunity to post a 1,500-word response to the educator report and a 1,500-word document that includes any background information or research on the instructional materials.

Educator-Led Review Teams

Each report found on EdReports.org represents hundreds of hours of work by educator reviewers. Working in teams of 4-5, reviewers use educator-developed review tools, evidence guides, and key documents to thoroughly examine their sets of materials.

After receiving over 25 hours of training on the EdReports.org review tool and process, teams meet weekly over the course of several months to share evidence, come to consensus on scoring, and write the evidence that ultimately is shared on the website.

All team members look at every grade and indicator, ensuring that the entire team considers the program in full. The team lead and calibrator also meet in cross-team PLCs to ensure that the tool is being applied consistently among review teams. Final reports are the result of multiple educators analyzing every page, calibrating all findings, and reaching a unified conclusion.

Math K-8 Rubric and Evidence Guides

The K-8 review rubric identifies the criteria and indicators for high quality instructional materials. The rubric supports a sequential review process that reflect the importance of alignment to the standards then consider other high-quality attributes of curriculum as recommended by educators.

For math, our rubrics evaluate materials based on:

  • Focus and Coherence

  • Rigor and Mathematical Practices

  • Instructional Supports and Usability

The K-8 Evidence Guides complement the rubric by elaborating details for each indicator including the purpose of the indicator, information on how to collect evidence, guiding questions and discussion prompts, and scoring criteria.

X