Alignment: Overall Summary

The instructional materials for Japan Math Grade 2 do not meet expectations for alignment to the CCSSM. In Gateway 1, the instructional materials do not meet the expectations for focus as they assess above-grade-level standards and devote approximately 66% of instructional time to the major work of the grade. For coherence, the instructional materials are not coherent and consistent with the Standards. The instructional materials have an amount of content designated for one grade level that is partially viable for one school year, and the materials partially engage students in the major work of the grade through supporting content. The materials do not identify content from future grades, do not give students work with extensive grade-level problems, and miss connections between two or more clusters in a domain or two or more domains. Since the materials do not meet the expectations for focus and coherence in Gateway 1, they were not reviewed for rigor and the mathematical practices in Gateway 2 or usability in Gateway 3.

See Rating Scale
Understanding Gateways

Alignment

|

Does Not Meet Expectations

Gateway 1:

Focus & Coherence

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

Gateway 2:

Rigor & Mathematical Practices

0
10
16
18
N/A
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
N/A
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 for Japan Math Grade 2 do not meet expectations for focus and coherence in Gateway 1. For focus, the instructional materials do not meet the expectations for assessing grade-level standards, although the amount of time devoted to the major work of the grade is approximately 66%. For coherence, the instructional materials are not coherent and consistent with the Standards. The instructional materials have an amount of content designated for one grade level that is partially viable for one school year, and the materials partially engage students in the major work of the grade through supporting content. The materials do not identify content from future grades, do not give students work with extensive grade-level problems, and miss connections between two or more clusters in a domain or two or more domains.

Criterion 1a

Materials do not assess topics before the grade level in which the topic should be introduced.
0/2
+
-
Criterion Rating Details

The instructional materials reviewed for Japan Math Grade 2 do not meet expectations for not assessing topics before the grade level in which the topic should be introduced. The instructional materials include assessment items that align to standards above this grade level.

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.
0/2
+
-
Indicator Rating Details

The instructional materials reviewed for Japan Math Grade 2 do not meet the expectations for assessing grade-level content.

The materials include a Readiness Test, 16 Unit Tests, two Midterm Tests, and two Final Tests. The assessments include above-grade level content that would require major modifications and, if removed, would change the underlying structure and intent of the materials. Examples include:

  • In Unit Test 1, Skills 1, 2, and 4, there are multiple questions where students write times displayed on an analog clock to the nearest minute, which does not align to 2.MD.7 (tell and write time to the nearest five minutes).
  • In Unit Test 7, Skill 5, Question 2, students use symbols to compare two, four-digit numbers, which does not align to 2.NBT.4, compare two three-digit numbers.
  • In Unit 12 and Unit 13, Knowledge 1, students multiply to find the answers to each of the expressions, which aligns to Grade 3 standards.
  • In Unit Test 11, Skill 2, questions 1-4, students write a multiplication sentence to represent the pictures, which aligns to Grade 3 standards.
  • In Unit Tests 12 and 13, Skill 1, students solve multiplication problems, which aligns to Grade 3 standards.
  • In Unit Test 12, Skills 2 and 5, and Unit Test 13, Skill 2, students fill in the unknown numbers in multiplication sentences, which aligns to Grade 3 standards.
  • In Unit Test 12, Skills 3 and 4, students solve a word problem using multiplication, which aligns to Grade 3 standards.
  • In the Midterm Test for Units 10-12, Skills 1 and 2, students solve multiplication sentences and fill in the missing whole number in multiplication sentences, which aligns to Grade 3 standards.
  • In the Final Test for Units 13-16, Skill 1, Questions 1-8, students solve multiplication problems, which aligns to Grade 3 standards.

Examples of grade-level assessment items include:

  • In Unit Test 3, Questions 2 and 3, students solve simple put-together and compare problems using the data from the line plot that they create (2.MD.9.10).
  • In Unit Test 3, Question 4, students create a bar graph based on data from a table that has four categories (2.MD.10).
  • In Unit Test 10, Question 1, “Draw a line to match each shape to its name.” Students match the shape to the words pentagon, triangle, quadrilateral, and hexagon. (2.G.1)
  • In Unit Test 11, Question 1, “Is the number of oranges an even number or an odd number?” Students determine if a group of objects (up to 20) has an odd or even number of members (2.OA.3).

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 Japan Math Grade 2 do not meet expectations for devoting the large majority of class time to the major work of the grade. The instructional materials spend approximately 66% of instructional time on the major work of the grade.

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 Japan Math Grade 2 meet the expectation for spending the majority of class time on the major clusters of each grade. For Grade 2, this includes 2.OA.A,B, all clusters within 2.NBT, and 2.MD.A,B.

  • The number of units devoted to major work of the grade (including supporting work connected to the major work) is 14 out of 16, which is approximately 88%.
  • The number of lessons devoted to major work of the grade (including supporting work connected to the major work) is 86 out of 150, which is approximately 57%.
  • The number of days devoted to major work (including assessments supporting work connected to the major work) is 110 lessons out of 166, which is approximately 66%.

The number of days devoted to major work is most representative of the instructional materials because that involves assessments. As a result, approximately 66% of the instructional materials focus on major work of the grade.

Criterion 1c - 1f

Coherence: Each grade's instructional materials are coherent and consistent with the Standards.
3/8
+
-
Criterion Rating Details
  • The instructional materials for Japan Math Grade 2 do not meet expectations for being coherent and consistent with the Standards. The instructional materials partially engage students in the major work of the grade through supporting content, do not identify content from future grades, do not give students work with extensive grade-level problems, and miss connections between two or more clusters in a domain or two or more domains.

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 Japan Math Grade 2 partially meet expectations for supporting content enhancing focus and coherence simultaneously by engaging students in the major work of the grade. Supporting standards appear in lessons with no connections to the major work of the grade, with the exception of one example.

 Examples of supporting work not connected to major work of the grade and/or omitted connections include:

  • In Unit 1, Lessons 5 and 6, students tell time (2.MD.7), but the materials do not make a connection to counting by 5s (2.NBT.2) on a clock to tell time.
  • In Unit 6, Lessons 4 and 9, students work with money (2.MD.8) is not connected to place value or using place value to add and subtract (2.NBT.A,B).
  • In Unit 11, students work with arrays of up to five rows and five columns (2.OA.C), but the instructional materials do not make a connection to counting by 5s (2.NBT.2).

 An example of supporting work connected to major work of the grade include:

  • In Unit 3, Lessons 5 and 6, the instructional materials connect 2.MD.10 with 2.OA.1 as students add and subtract in a variety of contexts based on graphs. In Lesson 5, “Are there more pigeons or more ducks? How many more?” In Lesson 6, “How many fewer values were there for blue vs. green?” and “How many students were surveyed?”

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 Japan Math Grade 2 partially meet the expectation for having an amount of content that is viable for one school year. 

According to the publisher, the instructional materials can be completed in 166 days as outlined in the teacher manual: one day per lesson and one day for each assessment. However, the content presented is insufficient to the instructional time allotted for each lesson, and teachers would need to make modifications to ensure content is viable for one year.

The Teacher’s Edition includes a scope and sequence of the instructional materials, noting there are 16 units with 150 lessons in total, each designed for 50 minutes. The 50 minutes for each lesson includes workbook pages for students to complete with scripted teacher directions and question prompts. Each prompt is accompanied by a suggested amount of time. In the materials, time was not identified or described for assessments, so one day was allotted per unit for assessments.

Lessons that include suggested prompt activities that take less than the 50 minutes described in the Scope and Sequence include, but are not limited to:

  • In Unit 3, Lesson Book page 30 and Workbook page 15 are identified as 20 minutes.
  • In Unit 6, Lesson Book page 74 and Workbook page 41 are identified as 30 minutes.
  • In Unit 7, Lesson Book pages 90-91 and Workbook page 49 are identified as 30 minutes.
  • In Unit 7, Lesson Book page 102 and Workbook page 55 are identified as 30 minutes.
  • In Unit 8, Lesson Book page 112 and Workbook page 61 are identified as 30 minutes.
  • In Unit 10, Lesson Book page 155 and Workbook page 85 are identified as 30 minutes.
  • In Unit 10, Lesson Book page 164 and Workbook page 90 are identified as 30 minutes.
  • In Unit 10, Lesson Book page 165 and Workbook page 91 are identified as 40 minutes.
  • In Unit 11, Lesson Book page 172 and Workbook page 94 are identified as 30 minutes. 
  • In Unit 12. Lesson Book page 182 and Workbook page 101 are identified as 30 minutes.
  • In Unit 12, Lesson Book page 183 and Workbook page 102 are identified as 20 minutes.

In addition, examples of lesson prompts that would not provide 50 minutes of instructional time include, but are not limited to:

  • In Unit 3, Lesson 3, “Complete the line plot”, the publisher identifies 15 minutes of time for the students and teacher to complete the line plot (adding two data points).
  • In Unit 7, Lesson 1, “Discuss as a Class”, the publisher identifies 15 minutes for the students to discuss and answer the question, “How many shells are there? How did you keep track?”
  • In Unit 4, Lesson 7, the publishers identify 20 minutes for students to discuss how they solved a multiplication problem. 

Teachers would need to find additional content for many lessons to meet the time frame of 50 minutes. Optional expansion workbooks can be purchased separately for more questions, however, these were not reviewed as they are not part of the core program.

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.
0/2
+
-
Indicator Rating Details

The instructional materials reviewed for Japan Math Grade 2 do not meet expectations for being consistent with the progressions in the Standards. Overall, the materials do not provide all students with extensive work on grade-level problems. The instructional materials do not develop according to the grade-by-grade progressions in the Standards. Content from prior and future grades is not clearly identified nor related to the grade-level work. The instructional materials do not relate grade-level concepts explicitly to prior knowledge from earlier grades. At the beginning of each unit, there is "Explanation of the Unit" which provides a description of connections to concepts that have been taught earlier and is identified as “What Students Have Learned Previously”.

The lessons follow a structure of Try, Understand, Apply, and Master. Most lessons do not provide enough opportunity for students to independently demonstrate mastery. The lessons include teacher-directed problems that the class solves together, but the instructional materials do not include supplemental practice or problems that students complete independently. Whole class instruction is used in the lessons, and all students are expected to do the same work throughout the lesson.

Examples of content from prior or future grades that is not clearly identified include:

  • In Unit 2, Lessons 4-7, students measure the length of an object using centimeters and millimeters together to tell the length of objects in between whole numbers of centimeters. This is not identified in the instructional materials as 3.MD. 
  • In Unit 4, Lessons 7-9, students solve addition problems using the standard algorithm. This is not identified as 4.NBT.4. 
  • In Unit 5, Lessons 2-4 and Lessons 7-9, students solve subtraction problems using the standard algorithm. This is not identified as 4.NBT.4. 
  • In Unit 8, Lessons 2-11, students solve addition problems using the standard algorithm. This is not identified as 4.NBT.4.
  • In Unit 9, Lessons 1-13, students solve subtraction problems using the standard algorithm. This is not identified as 4.NBT.4.
  • In Unit 13, Lesson 6, students solve multiplication problems mentally, which aligns to standards from Grade 3.

Examples of the instructional materials not addressing grade-level standards or giving all students extensive work with grade-level problems include:

  • 2.OA.2, fluently adding and subtracting within 20, is not identified as addressed in the materials.
  • 2.OA.4 is identified in Unit 12. However, using equal groups as the foundation of multiplication is not explicitly addressed in the lessons. In Lesson 9, Problem 1, students work with an array with four rows and six columns whereas 2.OA.4 includes arrays with up to five rows and up to five columns. In Lesson 2, students write multiplication sentences for arrays with five columns, but students do not write an equation to express the total as a sum of equal addends. In Lesson 14, students write a multiplication sentence for an array with five rows and six columns, which does not align to 2.OA.4.
  • 2.NBT.5 is identified as being addressed in Units 4 and 5. Addition and subtraction are addressed separately, and the relationship between the two operations is not addressed. There are no examples in Units 4 or 5 where the relationship is addressed.

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 for Japan Math Grade 2 partially meet expectations for fostering coherence through connections at a single grade, where appropriate and required by the Standards.

The materials include learning objectives that are visibly shaped by CCSSM cluster headings, and examples include:

  • In Unit 2, Lesson 5, the objective, “Understand that precision is important when measuring length. Know how to use a ruler and set squares to precisely draw a line of a given length.” is shaped by 2.MD.A, Measure and estimate lengths in standard units.
  • In Unit 7, Lesson 2, the objective, “Understand how three-digit numbers represent units of hundreds, tens, and ones.” is shaped by 2.NBT.A, Understand place value.
  • In Unit 11, Lesson 1, the objective, “Recognize situations in which items are organized in equal groups and identify the number in each group and the number of groups.” is shaped by 2.OA.C, Work with equal groups of objects to gain foundations for multiplication.

The materials do not 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 examples include, but are not limited to:

  • In Unit 3, Lesson 4, students measure the lengths of different lines and record the lengths (2.MD.A), but there is no connection to adding and subtracting within 20 (2.OA.B).
  • In Units 4 and 5, students solve addition and subtraction word problems (2.OA.A) with two-digit numbers using an algorithm, but there is not a connection to using place value understanding and properties of operations to add and subtract (2.NBT.B).
  • In Units 8 and 9, students add and subtract within 1000 (2.NBT.B), but this is not connected to representing and solving problems with addition and subtraction (2.OA.A).

Gateway Two

Rigor & Mathematical Practices

Not Rated

+
-
Gateway Two Details
Materials were not reviewed for Gateway Two because materials did not meet or partially meet expectations for Gateway One

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.

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.
N/A

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.
N/A

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
N/A

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.
N/A

Criterion 2e - 2g.iii

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

Indicator 2e

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

Indicator 2f

Materials carefully attend to the full meaning of each practice standard
N/A

Indicator 2g

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

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.
N/A

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.
N/A

Indicator 2g.iii

Materials explicitly attend to the specialized language of mathematics.
N/A

Gateway Three

Usability

Not Rated

+
-
Gateway Three Details
This material was not reviewed for Gateway Three because it did not meet expectations for Gateways One and Two

Criterion 3a - 3e

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

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.
N/A

Indicator 3b

Design of assignments is not haphazard: exercises are given in intentional sequences.
N/A

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.
N/A

Indicator 3d

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

Indicator 3e

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

Criterion 3f - 3l

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

Indicator 3f

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

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.
N/A

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.
N/A

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.
N/A

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).
N/A

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.
N/A

Indicator 3l

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

Criterion 3m - 3q

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

Indicator 3m

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

Indicator 3n

Materials provide strategies for teachers to identify and address common student errors and misconceptions.
N/A

Indicator 3o

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

Indicator 3p

Materials offer ongoing formative and summative assessments:
N/A

Indicator 3p.i

Assessments clearly denote which standards are being emphasized.
N/A

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.
N/A

Indicator 3q

Materials encourage students to monitor their own progress.
N/A

Criterion 3r - 3y

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

Indicator 3r

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

Indicator 3s

Materials provide teachers with strategies for meeting the needs of a range of learners.
N/A

Indicator 3t

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

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).
N/A

Indicator 3v

Materials provide opportunities for advanced students to investigate mathematics content at greater depth.
N/A

Indicator 3w

Materials provide a balanced portrayal of various demographic and personal characteristics.
N/A

Indicator 3x

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

Indicator 3y

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

Criterion 3z - 3ad

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

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.
N/A

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.
N/A

Indicator 3ab

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

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.
N/A

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.).
N/A
abc123

Additional Publication Details

Report Published Date: 09/19/2019

Report Edition: 2017

Title ISBN Edition Publisher Year
Primary Math International Lesson Book 978-1-7321366-4-9 Japan Math Corp 2018
Primary Math International Workbook 978-1-7321366-5-6 Japan Math Corp 2018

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.

Rubric Design

The EdReports.org’s rubric supports a sequential review process through three gateways. These gateways reflect the importance of standards alignment to the fundamental design elements of the materials and considers other attributes of high-quality curriculum as recommended by educators.

Advancing Through Gateways

  • Materials must meet or partially meet expectations for the first set of indicators to move along the process. Gateways 1 and 2 focus on questions of alignment. Are the instructional materials aligned to the standards? Are all standards present and treated with appropriate depth and quality required to support student learning?
  • Gateway 3 focuses on the question of usability. Are the instructional materials user-friendly for students and educators? Materials must be well designed to facilitate student learning and enhance a teacher’s ability to differentiate and build knowledge within the classroom. In order to be reviewed and attain a rating for usability (Gateway 3), the instructional materials must first meet expectations for alignment (Gateways 1 and 2).

Key Terms Used throughout Review Rubric and Reports

  • Indicator Specific item that reviewers look for in materials.
  • Criterion Combination of all of the individual indicators for a single focus area.
  • Gateway Organizing feature of the evaluation rubric that combines criteria and prioritizes order for sequential review.
  • Alignment Rating Degree to which materials meet expectations for alignment, including that all standards are present and treated with the appropriate depth to support students in learning the skills and knowledge that they need to be ready for college and career.
  • Usability Degree to which materials are consistent with effective practices for use and design, teacher planning and learning, assessment, and differentiated instruction.

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