## Alignment: Overall Summary

The instructional materials reviewed for Kindergarten do not meet expectations for alignment. The materials do not spend the majority of time on the major clusters in the grade, but they do assess standards from the grade appropriately. The materials do not foster coherence within the clusters of the grade and do not support the full intent and connections that naturally occur between the standards. In the instances where more than one cluster was identified in a lesson, they were generally addressed separately. Since the materials do not meet the expectations for focus and coherence in gateway 1, they were not reviewed for gateway 2.

|

## Gateway 1:

### Focus & Coherence

0
7
12
14
2
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

|

## Gateway 3:

### Usability

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

## The Report

- Collapsed Version + Full Length Version

## Focus & Coherence

#### Does Not Meet Expectations

+
-
Gateway One Details

After extensive review of the materials for focus and coherence, the review team determined that the program does not devote the majority of the time to the major work of the grade. For example: In the first series of 10 lessons, the first six were saturated with content that is not only not included in the major work but not reflected in this grade level. Handwriting, calendar routines, and manipulative explorations comprised the majority of the first six lessons. Formal work with pictographs was present, yet not required in Kindergarten. AB pattern work was also included but not part of the standards for Kindergarten. Counting to five with one-to-one correspondence was included in lessons 7-9, but represents a small part of the lessons.

• In lesson 59, students pay for items using pennies (identifying and counting coins is part of Grade 2). The enrichment extension, finding numbers that add to 10, is an expectation of the Kindergarten standards and should be instructed to all students.
• In lesson 77, students identify a 1-cup measuring cup and follow a recipe. This also exceeds Kindergarten expectations.
• Identifying spheres in lesson 112 is appropriate to Kindergarten. The enrichment extension called for students to identify shapes as two- or three-dimensional. This is part of the Kindergarten standards and should be instructed to all students.
• Lesson 134 is focused on above grade level content. Sharing a whole by separating it into equal parts and identifying halves and fourths is part of Grade 1 standards.

The materials do not foster coherence within the clusters of the grade and do not support the full intent and connections that naturally occur between the standards. In the instances where more than one cluster was identified in a lesson, they were generally addressed separately. For example:

• In lesson 53, students weigh objects on a pan balance to determine which container is heavier. This concept is taught in isolation.
• In lesson 79, students focus on composing a shape in more than one way, which is consistent with Kindergarten standards. This is taught in isolation, and one of the lesson practice pages attempts to be related to this concept. The practice page also attempts to incorporate K.CC.B.5. It is important to note that the students are not actually asked to determine how to cover the shape in the practice page; it is done for them. The practice page also names trapezoids and parallelograms, not an expectation of this grade. This is a missed opportunity to foster coherence between K.CC and K.G.
• Lesson 110-1 and 110-1 extension activity combined address K.CC.A.3 and K.CC.C.7. Each of the clusters is taught in isolation. Therefore, this lesson is another example of a missed opportunity to foster coherence between clusters.

In conclusion, this series does not capitalize on the natural connections between clusters and domains.

### 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 Kindergarten do meet expectations for assessment. Some of the assessments could have items modified or omitted so as to align to Kindergarten expectations, and in other cases, the inclusion of the above grade-level expectations is Mathematically reasonable. Overall, the number of modifications or omissions needed does not significantly impact the underlying structure of the instructional materials. A list of the topics that align to expectations beyond Kindergarten, the standards or clusters to which they actually align, and the assessments in which the topics appear is provided in the evidence section of the report for this indicator.

### 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 Kindergarten do meet expectations for assessment. For this indicator, the review team examined all oral assessments and determined that they do assess some topics that are beyond the expectations for the grade. Some of the assessments could have items modified or omitted so as to align to Kindergarten expectations, and in other cases, the inclusion of the above grade-level expectations is Mathematically reasonable. Overall, the number of modifications or omissions needed does not significantly impact the underlying structure of the instructional materials. Following is a list of the topics that align to expectations beyond Kindergarten, the standards or clusters to which they actually align, and the assessments in which the topics appear.

• Continuing patterns aligns to 3.OA.D.9, “Identify arithmetic patterns (including patterns in the addition table or multiplication table), and explain them using properties of operations.For example, observe that 4 times a number is always even, and explain why 4 times a number can be decomposed into two equal addends”, and 4.OA.C, “Generate and analyze patterns”, and it appears in oral assessment 7 after lesson 70-2. The teaching of this topic is found in eight lessons before the assessment.
• Representing and interpreting data is a topic that aligns to 1.MD.C, “Represent and interpret data”, and it appears in oral assessment 9 after lesson 90-2. The teaching of this topic is found in three lessons before the assessment.
• Identifying pieces of money is a topic that aligns to MD.C.8, “Solve word problems involving dollar bills, quarters, dimes, nickels, and pennies, using \$ and ¢ symbols appropriately. Example: If you have 2 dimes and 3 pennies, how many cents do you have?”, and it appears in oral assessment 11 after lesson 110-2. The teaching of this topic is found in 16 lessons before the assessment.
• Measuring and comparing the lengths of more than two objects is a topic that aligns to standards in 1.MD.A, “Measure lengths indirectly and by iterating length units,” and this topic appears in oral assessment 12 after lesson 120-2.
• Counting by fives is a topic that aligns to 2.NBT.A.2, “Count within 1000; skip-count by 5s, 10s, and 100s”, and this topic appears in oral assessment 13 after lesson 130-2.

*Evidence updated 10/27/15

### 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 materials do not spend the majority of time on the major work of Kindergarten. Of the lessons in the table of contents, 59 of 135 are aligned to the major work of the grade, however, the review shed light on misalignments which would decrease the alignment. For example:

• Lessons 41, 49, 51, 59, 67, 68 have been aligned to K.CC.A by the publisher. While counting by 1 and 10 is major work of the grade level, using money diverts the focus to identifying the coins and knowing coin values before the counting can take place. The work with money and skip counting is more appropriately aligned with Grade 2.

### 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 Kindergarten do not meet the expectation for focus because the materials do not spend the majority of class time on the major cluster of each grade. A review of the table of contents and the author's CCSSM alignment reveals that 59 of the 135 lessons focus on the major work of the grade level. Upon closer scrutiny of the lessons, the review team found that some of the lessons do not accurately reflect the designated CCSSM. For example:

• Lessons 5 and 22 have been aligned to K.CC.A while they actually involve the creation and interpretation of a graph, which is not a Kindergarten expectation. While counting does occur in the graphing lessons, guiding students into arranging items into a graph before counting, limits the future ability of students to learn to arrange items to count on their own. This is one of the major expectations of Kindergarten students.
• There are numerous lessons involving money (including lessons 41, 49, 51, 59, 67 and 68) which have been aligned to K.CC.A by the publisher. While counting by 1 and 10 is major work of the grade level, using money diverts the focus to identifying the coins and knowing coin values before the counting can take place. Additionally, counting by 5 is not major work, yet nickels are also a focus in some of the lessons. Quarters and dollars are included in lessons towards the end of the series, which also exceeds the Kindergarten level.

These misalignments within the activities in the lessons decreases the amount of time that is actually spent on the major clusters of Kindergarten, therefore the majority of class time is not spent on the major clusters of the grade.

### Criterion 1c - 1f

Coherence: Each grade's instructional materials are coherent and consistent with the Standards.
0/8
+
-
Criterion Rating Details

The instructional materials reviewed for Kindergarten do not meet the expectations for coherence. There is consistent work taught above the grade level that does not meet the progression of the standard and work is taught in isolation with little to no connection made within grade level material.

### Indicator 1c

Supporting content enhances focus and coherence simultaneously by engaging students in the major work of the grade.
0/2
+
-
Indicator Rating Details

The instructional materials reviewed for Kindergarten do not meet the expectations for coherence because the supporting content does not support coherence and focus through the major work of the grade. There were attempts to connect K.NBT.A.1 and work with numbers 11-19 to support the K.OA number work, however it was often displayed in the materials through the use of money. However, the use of money is beyond the scope of Kindergarten and therefore the work does not fully support K.NBT and does not support the K.OA domain.

Further examples of misalignment with supporting and major content include:

• Only four lessons (L65, L80, L110-1 and L132) are correlated with K.NBT.A.1 work with numbers 11-19 to gain foundations for place value. Of these lessons, L65 only provides opportunities to count beyond 10 using money, which is not a Kindergarten expectation. Lessons 80 and 110-1 involve counting objects to 20. Only Lesson 132 provides opportunities to write numbers beyond 10.
• Considering K.MD.B.3, many of the lessons involve only the classifying of objects. Only lesson 11, which involves the counting of the objects in each category, actually supports the major work of K.CC.B.5 (counting objects) and K.OA.A.3 (decomposing numbers).
• There were many missed opportunities to add counting to sorting activities, but instead the activity simply required students to compare amounts by visually looking for the "shortest line," (lesson 22). Using a bar graph as the recording tool for the sorting eliminated the need for any counting in these activities.

### Indicator 1d

The amount of content designated for one grade level is viable for one school year in order to foster coherence between grades.
0/2
+
-
Indicator Rating Details

The instructional materials reviewed for Kindergarten do not meet expectations for viability of content for the scope of one year. The pacing described in the program overview indicates that four lessons should be completed in a week, with either an assessment or review on the fifth day. Once these 19 review days are added in, the actual number of days needed to complete the curriculum is 154. Although this is a manageable number of days for a school year, such a small percentage of the year's lessons actually delve into the major work of the grade level, so the review team determined that the amount of content was not viable for one school year to foster coherence between Kindergarten and Grade 1. The depth of content needed to prepare students for the next grade level is not present, as cited in 1a, 1b and 1c evidence. Teachers would need to identify additional resources and material in order to cover the major work of the grade.

### 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 Kindergarten do not meet expectations for coherence and consistency with the progressions. Kindergarten materials cannot be reviewed for relation to previous grade level concepts. Materials were reviewed, however, for development according to the progressions and for the amount of time spent on grade level problems. The review team did not find evidence that would support content development according to the grade-by-grade progression in the standards. The materials address a great deal of off-grade level content, which is not identified as content from another grade. This is found in lessons 51, 65 and 67.

All of these focus on paying for items and trading coins which is the major work of Grade 2, yet they are labeled as aligned to K.CC.A by the publisher. Quite frequently content beyond the scope of the grade is identified by a MP rather than a Content Standard.

### 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 do not meet expectations for Kindergarten in fostering coherence through connections at a single grade. In seeking out to evaluate whether the lesson objectives are aligned to the major cluster headings, the review team found that each lesson essentially lacked detailed written objectives. Each lesson included a listing of the CCSSM and a simple title to describe the lesson content, which serves as the objective. In order to verify alignment, an individual must read the lesson to be sure the numbers used and content addressed is within grade level expectations. In most cases, the title wasn't specific enough in order to make a determination of alignment. Examples of vague language can be found in lessons 18, 27, 44, 50 and 60.

Additionally, very few connections were made between targeted clusters. For instance, a number of lessons are identified as aligned to K.MD.B.3, but many of the lessons involve only the classifying of objects.

• Lesson 11 is one instance where connections involve the counting of the objects in each category (K.CC.B.5) and decomposing numbers (K.OA.A.3).
• Lesson 22 misses the opportunity to add counting to sorting activities, instead the activity simply requires students to compare amounts by visually looking for the "shortest line." Using a bar graph as the recording tool for the sorting eliminated the need for any counting in these activities.

## 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

## 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

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

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

Report Published Date: 02/13/2015

Report Edition: 2008

Title ISBN Edition Publisher Year
9780547746975
9781600327179

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.

• 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.

The assessment materials were not provided with this series. The lack of the assessment resources for the Grades 3 to 5 band made it difficult to review for focus. Reviewers could only review the assessments as they appeared in the teacher guide. It is important to note that there are two different versions of the third grade curriculum materials, and the team reviewed the version consistent with the Grades 4 and 5 materials. The Grade 3 version that is consistent with the Kindergarten to Grade 2 materials was not reviewed.

The EdReports rubric supports a sequential review process through three gateways. These gateways reflect the importance of alignment to college and career ready standards and considers other attributes of high-quality curriculum, such as usability and design, as recommended by educators.

Materials must meet or partially meet expectations for the first set of indicators (gateway 1) to move to the other gateways.

Gateways 1 and 2 focus on questions of alignment to the standards. 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).

Alignment and usability ratings are assigned based on how materials score on a series of criteria and indicators with reviewers providing supporting evidence to determine and substantiate each point awarded.

For ELA and math, alignment ratings represent the degree to which materials meet expectations, partially meet expectations, or do not meet expectations for alignment to college- and career-ready standards, 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.

For science, alignment ratings represent the degree to which materials meet expectations, partially meet expectations, or do not meet expectations for alignment to the Next Generation Science Standards, 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.

For all content areas, usability ratings represent the degree to which materials meet expectations, partially meet expectations, or do not meet expectations for effective practices (as outlined in the evaluation tool) for use and design, teacher planning and learning, assessment, differentiated instruction, and effective technology use.

X