Alignment to College and Career Ready Standards: Overall Summary

The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 6 do not meet the expectations for alignment to the CCSSM. In gateway 1, the instructional materials do not meet the expectations for focus on major work because they devote an insufficient amount of time to the major work of the grade, and the materials do not meet the expectations for coherence because they do not make sufficient connections between the standards. Since the materials do not meet expectations for focus and coherence in gateway 1, they were not reviewed for evidence of rigor and the mathematical practices in gateway 2.

See Rating Scale
Understanding Gateways

Alignment

|

Does Not Meet Expectations

Gateway 1:

Focus & Coherence

0
7
12
14
6
12-14
Meets Expectations
8-11
Partially Meets Expectations
0-7
Does Not Meet Expectations

Gateway 2:

Rigor & Mathematical Practices

0
10
16
18
0
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

Does Not Meet Expectations

+
-
Gateway One Details

The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 6 do not meet the expectation for focus and coherence in the CCSSM. For focus, the instructional materials do not meet the criteria for the time devoted to the major work of the grade. Fewer than 60 percent of the days allocated in the timeline align to the major work of this grade. For coherence, supporting work is rarely connected to the focus of the grade due to the extensive time spent on review. Coherence is evident in the instructional materials including problems and activities that serve to connect two or more clusters in a domain and that connect two or more domains in a grade. However, overall, the Grade 6 materials do not exhibit the coherence and consistency of the standards.

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 material reviewed for Grade 6 meets the expectations for focus within assessment. The material does not assess any content from future grades in the summative assessment of each packet with one exception, Test 9, problem 7. On the other hand, the instructional materials do not meet the expectations for focus within major clusters. Only 59 percent of the days are suggested for major work of the grade, primarily due the amount of review. In addition, the non-major clusters do not provide reinforcement of major work. Overall, the instructional materials do not meet expectations for focus.

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 material reviewed for Grade 6 meets the expectations for focus within assessment. Overall, the instructional material does not assess any content from future grades within the summative assessment sections of each packet with one exception, Test 9, problem 7.

For this indicator, we considered the summative Test for each packet.

  • All assessments and topics relate to Grade 6 standards or below except for problem 7 on Test 9.
    • Problem 7 is written in a way that makes it fall into Grade 7, specifically 7.EE.A.1 - Use properties of operations to generate equivalent expressions. The lessons and practice that students do related to that assessment item all fall within 6.EE.A.3 - Apply properties of operations to generate equivalent expressions because they are concrete and solved with substitution. However the assessment item is very abstract and would be solved by manipulating variables from opposite sides of the equation and combining like terms.
    • It would be very easy to skip the question without any detriment. It would also be very easy to fix by making it match the way it was taught with concrete substitution. Therefore, it does not impact the Score of 2 for this indicator.

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.
0/4
+
-
Criterion Rating Details

The instructional material reviewed for Grade 6 meets the expectations for focus within assessment. The material does not assess any content from future grades in the summative assessment of each packet with one exception, Test 9, problem 7. On the other hand, the instructional materials do not meet the expectations for focus within major clusters. Only 59 percent of the days are suggested for major work of the grade, primarily due the amount of review. In addition, the non-major clusters do not provide reinforcement of major work. Overall, the instructional materials do not meet expectations for focus.

Indicator 1b

Instructional material spends the majority of class time on the major cluster of each grade.
0/4
+
-
Indicator Rating Details

The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 6 do not meet the expectations for focus within major clusters. Overall, the instructional material does not spend the majority of class time in the major clusters of each grade.

To determine this, three perspectives were evaluated: 1) the number of units/packets devoted to major work, 2) the number of lessons devoted to major work, and 3) the number of days devoted to major work. We decided that the number of days devoted to major work is the most reflective for this indicator because it specifically addresses the amount of class time spent on concepts, and we drew our conclusion based on that data.

We determined our evidence from the number of days suggested by the publisher for the “enriched” pacing option since it is the one most dedicated to grade-level work with the least review.

  • Units/Packets – percentage of time spent on major work is 56 percent.
  • Lessons – percentage of time spent on major work is 64 percent.
  • Days – the percentage of time spent on major work is 59 percent.
  • It is a significant concern that the first 8 of 16 packets are review of Grades 4 and 5 rather than grade-level material (with the exception of the lesson 2.3 on order of operations and lessons 7.2 and 7.3 on fractions divided by fractions).
  • In the pacing guide, there are many days that address standards from previous grade levels.
  • In particular, there is limited evidence of two major work clusters: dividing fractions by fractions (6.NS.A) and relationships between dependent and independent variables (6.EE.C).
  • We also reviewed the non-major clusters to determine if they could be factored in due to how strongly they support major work of the grade; however, we did not find evidence strong enough to support this.
  • At 59 percent, it does not meet the 65 percent - 85 percent standard, Grade 6 does not spend the majority of time on major work.

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 6 partially meet the expectations for coherence and consistency with the CCSSM. There is limited evidence of supporting content enhancing coherence by reinforcing the major work of the grade because so much of the content is review.

The Grade 6 materials provide a list of previous skills/knowledge that is foundational for the current work, but they don’t explicitly tie it to lessons. The materials include lessons that serve to connect two or more clusters in a domain, or two or more domains in a grade. The materials also develop by the grade-by-grade progressions in the standards. However, most of the lessons take a surface approach to standards – they meet the standard, but without developing the depth of understanding that allows students to apply and transfer the learning.

Overall, the Grade 6 materials partially address the key aspects of coherence and consistency with the standards.

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 6 partially meet the expectations for the supporting content enhancing focus and coherence simultaneously by engaging students in the major work of the grade. To determine this, we considered the connections that the Teacher Guide stated and looked at the student lessons to validate those as well as determine if there were missed opportunities to make strong connections.

Some examples include:

· The strongest support comes from geometry and statistics supporting the major work of Expressions and Equations. Units 13 (Statistics), 15 (Circumference and Area), and 16 (Surface Area) support 6.EE.A and 6.EE.B. All of these require the students to use formulas/equations to solve problems.

· Unit 16 (Surface Area) also requires students to understand ratio concepts (6.RP.A).

  • There were several instances where the supporting work missed opportunities to connect to major work. Two examples that could have easily been connected to distribution include: in Unit 1 where they use the area model and in Unit 2 where they use GCF to rewrite expressions.
  • Most of the connections made with supporting work were 6.NS.B, which is computing with multi-digit numbers; this was a weak connection to the major clusters for the grade.

Indicator 1d

The amount of content designated for one grade level is viable for one school year in order to foster coherence between grades.
1/2
+
-
Indicator Rating Details

The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 6 partially meet the expectations for the amount of content designated for one grade level being viable for one school year in order to foster coherence between grades.

The Teacher’s Guide offers six different pacing plans, three for traditional schedule and three for block schedules.

  • Each has the Modified Plan for students who require extensive review.
  • Option 2 is the Basic Plan for students who require some review.
  • Last is the Enriched Plan where students only need minimal review.
  • All of them plan for 32 weeks of instruction.

We used the Traditional Enriched Plan for our review since it best represented a focus on grade-level work.

The pacing provided by the publisher is reasonable for lessons to be completed in the time suggested.

  • Lessons plus a catch-up day (built into each unit) and the assessment day equal 156 days.
  • Viable for one school year.
  • Falls within the 140-190 range suggested.
  • According to the Scope and Sequence, all Grade 6 standards are included.

However, there are several concerns:

  • Due to the extensive time spent on reviewing concepts from Grades 4 and 5, there is significant concern that the depth of learning would not adequately prepare students for the next grade level.
  • Due to the amount of the materials that address standards from previous grades, students could move more quickly through the materials than the time allotted, which would lead to a need to provide supplemental materials.
  • The packets take a surface approach to standards – they meet the standard, but without developing the depth of understanding that allows students to apply and transfer the learning.
  • In addition, there is concern about the three pacing suggestions.
    • Students needing more review early in the year spend equal or less time on Units later in the year, which is new material.
    • It does not seem reasonable that students who need Modified Plan A could finish all packets in the same amount of time as students on Enriched Plan C, though there are suggestions about items that could be omitted.

Overall, the number of days suggested is viable, but the depth and pacing creates cause for concern.

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 6 partially meet the expectations for the material to be consistent with the progressions in the standards. Content from prior grades is clearly identified, although materials do not always relate grade-level concepts explicitly to prior knowledge from earlier grades within each lesson. More often, it is used as a review rather than a building block for grade-level work. Connections are not made to content in future grades. Overall, though, the materials in Grade 6 identify the progressions from prior grades in the standards.

  • The teacher guide includes a page delineating how the major work standards for Grade 6 intersect with major clusters in Grades 4-8.
  • Each packet lists an overview of standards being addressed including foundational standards that have been taught and learned previously.
  • Connections to lessons and/or topics from previous grade levels that will be helpful in upcoming lessons are frequently reviewed in the “warm-up” at the beginning of a given topic, though no explicit connections are made for the students.
  • In general, lessons are taught as a series of three, where each builds or connects to the one before.
  • Teachers are provided with sufficient information to help see the connections in the standards, tasks, packets and lessons.
  • There are standards where the materials are only partially representative of the progressions. For example: 6.EE is in seven units (Units 1, 2, 9, 10, 13, 14 and 16), but the depth is very limited because students are not developing equations. Students do spend a great deal of guided time writing and solving expressions and equations. However, not much time is spent with application of these skills with real-world problems, except in Unit 16.

The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 6 partially meet the expectation of giving all students extensive work with grade-level problems. Overall, the materials do not consistently give students of varying abilities extensive work with grade-level problems.

  • The materials do not provide students with extensive work with grade-level problems; Not all students have the opportunity to engage deeply with problems related to grade-level standards as the material is not as rigorous as needed and doesn't have depth that is needed to truly master the standards.
  • Each packet primarily contains problem sets designed to help develop students' procedural skill/fluency.
  • Some of the performance tasks and proficiency assessments do allow for more application and rigorous engagement with the standards.
  • It is recommended in the teacher's guide that struggling students spend the majority of time on basic lessons, skill builders, and review and to avoid extensions and more challenging questions. This is limiting their interaction and mastery of grade-level standards.

The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 6 partially meet the expectation of relating grade-level concepts explicitly to prior knowledge from earlier grades. Overall, materials only generally relate grade-level concepts explicitly to prior knowledge from earlier grades.

  • Each module lists the foundational standards at the beginning of the module to connect prior learning to current learning.
  • Educators find it beneficial to see these connections listed in the lessons as they occur.
  • Connections to lessons and/or topics from previous grade levels that will be helpful in upcoming lessons are frequently reviewed in the “warm-up” at the beginning of a given topic, though no explicit connections are made for the students.

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.
1/2
+
-
Indicator Rating Details

The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 6 partially meet the expectations for fostering coherence through connections at a single grade, where appropriate and required by the standards. Overall, materials include learning objectives that are visibly shaped by CCSSM cluster headings.

  • Each packet lists the lessons with the student outcomes clearly stated, which are easily aligned to CCSSM standards and cluster headings.
  • In general, about half of the lessons and tasks require students to demonstrate grade-level standards. However, they rarely connect these concepts beyond what naturally occurs with lessons following one another. In addition, they are very introductory, surface level of depth.
  • The teacher guide provides a page of content emphasis by cluster.
  • Each packet identifies the standards addressed and bolds the major cluster.

The instructional materials include problems and activities that serve to connect two or more clusters in a domain. They include problems and activities that connect two or more domains in a grade, in cases where these connections are natural and important. Overall, the materials only partially foster coherence through connections at Grade 6.

  • In packets 9, 10 and 14, students have opportunities to work with expressions and equations using fractions and decimals. (6.NS, 6.EE). In general, however, there is limited focus on writing expressions and equations.
  • There are other natural connections evident such as using formulas to solve problems (6.EE.B, 6.G.A) and students solve problems on ratio and rate using the understanding of writing and solving equations. (6.RP.A, 6.EE.C)
  • In Grade 6 students should have the opportunity to begin developing proportional reasoning and doing that in connection with graphing. They should be able to connect proportional reasoning to representing quantitative relationships between dependent and independent variables, and they should be provided opportunities to plot rational numbers in the coordinate plane as they analyze proportional relationships. Only in Unit 16 are they provided these opportunities. Because there is such heavy emphasis on review from prior grade levels, there is not enough time in the program to make these deep connections.

Gateway Two

Rigor & Mathematical Practices

Not Rated

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.
0/8

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.
0/2

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.
0/2

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
0/2

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.
0/2

Criterion 2e - 2g.iii

Practice-Content Connections: Materials meaningfully connect the Standards for Mathematical Content and the Standards for Mathematical Practice
0/10

Indicator 2e

The Standards for Mathematical Practice are identified and used to enrich mathematics content within and throughout each applicable grade.
0/2

Indicator 2f

Materials carefully attend to the full meaning of each practice standard
0/2

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.
0/2

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 2g.iii

Materials explicitly attend to the specialized language of mathematics.
0/2

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 Jan 22 00:00:00 UTC 2016

Report Edition: 2015

Title ISBN Edition Publisher Year
null 978-1-61445-006-1 null null null
null 978-1-61445-007-8 null null null
null 978-1-61445-008-5 null null null
null 978-1-61445-009-2 null null null
null 978-1-61445-010-8 null null null
null 978-1-61445-011-5 null null null
null 978-1-61445-012-2 null null null
null 978-1-61445-013-9 null null null
null 978-1-61445-014-6 null null null
null 978-1-61445-015-3 null null null
null 978-1-61445-016-0 null null null
null 978-1-61445-017-7 null null null
null 978-1-61445-018-4 null null null
null 978-1-61445-019-1 null null null
null 978-1-61445-021-4 null null null
null 978-1-61445-022-1 null null null
null 978-1-61445-280-5 null null null
null ISBN 978-1-61445-020-7 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