About This Report
- EdReports reviews are one tool to support curriculum decisions. We do not make recommendations, and our reports are not prescriptive.
- Use this report as part of a comprehensive, teacher-led adoption process that prioritizes local needs and integrates multi-year implementation planning throughout.
- EdReports evaluates materials based on the quality of their design: how well they structure evidence-based teaching and learning to support college and career-readiness. We do not assess their effectiveness in practice.
- Check the top of the page to confirm the review tool version used. Our current tools are version 2.0. Reports based on earlier tools (versions 1.0 or 1.5) offer valuable insights but may not fully align with current instructional priorities.
Report Overview
Summary of Alignment & Usability: Creative Core Curriculum for Mathematics with STEM, Literacy and Art | Math
Product Notes
Print materials reviewed were:
- The teacher and student editions of the textbook (traditional),
- The Understanding Math through Arts Guide,
- The STEM Project Edition and the teacher and parent edition of the Video Arts Guide (Modeling Mathematics).
Digital copies were also made available for review.
Items not reviewed were:
- The Assessment Database,
- Interactive Homework System,
- AVIMBA Families web-based program,
- Reader Books,
- Universal Access Reteach Library,
- Teacher/Parent Guide,
- Focus Tutorial and K-5 Workbooks,
- Archway,
- And Student Facing Materials and AB Curriculum (STEAM).
TPS has informed EdReports.org that it does not agree that the reviewed elements constitute all the core materials for TPS Creative Core.
Math K-2
TPS Creative Core Curriculum's Grades K-2 does not meet the expectations for alignment to the Common Core State Standards and usability. Traditional student textbooks as well as STEM and Art projects are provided; however, materials do not spend the majority of instructional time on major work of the grades. The sequence in which topics are covered follows a successive rollout of individual standards and is not consistent with the logical structure as outlined by the CCSSM. Therefore, materials are lacking important connections between standards, clusters and/or domains where appropriate and required. Overall, the instructional materials included in this series lack mathematical focus and coherence.
Kindergarten
View Full ReportEdReports reviews determine if a program meets, partially meets, or does not meet expectations for alignment to college and career-ready standards. This rating reflects the overall series average.
Alignment (Gateway 1 & 2)
Materials must meet expectations for standards alignment in order to be reviewed for usability. This rating reflects the overall series average.
Usability (Gateway 3)
1st Grade
View Full ReportEdReports reviews determine if a program meets, partially meets, or does not meet expectations for alignment to college and career-ready standards. This rating reflects the overall series average.
Alignment (Gateway 1 & 2)
Materials must meet expectations for standards alignment in order to be reviewed for usability. This rating reflects the overall series average.
Usability (Gateway 3)
2nd Grade
View Full ReportEdReports reviews determine if a program meets, partially meets, or does not meet expectations for alignment to college and career-ready standards. This rating reflects the overall series average.
Alignment (Gateway 1 & 2)
Materials must meet expectations for standards alignment in order to be reviewed for usability. This rating reflects the overall series average.
Usability (Gateway 3)
Math 3-5
TPS Creative Core Curriculum's Grades 3-5 does not meet the expectations for alignment to the Common Core State Standards and usability. Traditional student textbooks as well as STEM and Art projects are provided; however, materials do not spend the majority of instructional time on major work of the grades. The sequence in which topics are covered follows a successive rollout of individual standards and is not consistent with the logical structure as outlined by the CCSSM. Therefore, materials are lacking important connections between standards, clusters and/or domains where appropriate and required. Overall, the instructional materials included in this series lack mathematical focus and coherence.
3rd Grade
View Full ReportEdReports reviews determine if a program meets, partially meets, or does not meet expectations for alignment to college and career-ready standards. This rating reflects the overall series average.
Alignment (Gateway 1 & 2)
Materials must meet expectations for standards alignment in order to be reviewed for usability. This rating reflects the overall series average.
Usability (Gateway 3)
4th Grade
View Full ReportEdReports reviews determine if a program meets, partially meets, or does not meet expectations for alignment to college and career-ready standards. This rating reflects the overall series average.
Alignment (Gateway 1 & 2)
Materials must meet expectations for standards alignment in order to be reviewed for usability. This rating reflects the overall series average.
Usability (Gateway 3)
5th Grade
View Full ReportEdReports reviews determine if a program meets, partially meets, or does not meet expectations for alignment to college and career-ready standards. This rating reflects the overall series average.
Alignment (Gateway 1 & 2)
Materials must meet expectations for standards alignment in order to be reviewed for usability. This rating reflects the overall series average.
Usability (Gateway 3)
Math 6-8
The materials reviewed for the Grades 6-8 do not meet the requirements for alignment to the CCSSM. The materials are explicitly shaped by the CCSSM but many aspects of focus and coherence are lacking. Assessment materials are supplemental and were not reviewed. There is limited connection made between supporting and major work, and there are no explicit connections made to prior knowledge. Even though all of the CCSSM are covered in the textbook, the coverage is minimal, leaving the STEM book to give greater depth to the standards. The STEM book leaves some parts of the standards out, students will not get extensive practice on all of grade-level problems. Overall the materials do not focus on major work or provide materials that are coherent and consistent with the standards.
6th Grade
View Full ReportEdReports reviews determine if a program meets, partially meets, or does not meet expectations for alignment to college and career-ready standards. This rating reflects the overall series average.
Alignment (Gateway 1 & 2)
Materials must meet expectations for standards alignment in order to be reviewed for usability. This rating reflects the overall series average.
Usability (Gateway 3)
7th Grade
View Full ReportEdReports reviews determine if a program meets, partially meets, or does not meet expectations for alignment to college and career-ready standards. This rating reflects the overall series average.
Alignment (Gateway 1 & 2)
Materials must meet expectations for standards alignment in order to be reviewed for usability. This rating reflects the overall series average.
Usability (Gateway 3)
8th Grade
View Full ReportEdReports reviews determine if a program meets, partially meets, or does not meet expectations for alignment to college and career-ready standards. This rating reflects the overall series average.
Alignment (Gateway 1 & 2)
Materials must meet expectations for standards alignment in order to be reviewed for usability. This rating reflects the overall series average.
Usability (Gateway 3)
Report for 8th Grade
Alignment Summary
The materials reviewed for the Grade 8 do not meet the requirements for alignment to the CCSSM. The materials are explicitly shaped by the CCSSM, but many aspects of focus and coherence are lacking. The limited assessments provided sometimes require students to have knowledge of above grade level topics without providing practice for those topics. Additionally, not all of the standards are assessed. There is limited connection made between supporting and major work, and there are no explicit connections made to prior knowledge. Even though all of the CCSSM are covered in the textbook, the coverage is minimal, leaving the STEM book to give greater depth to the standards. The STEM book leaves some parts of the standards out, so students will not get extensive practice on all of grade-level problems. Overall, the materials fail to focus on major work and fail to provide materials that are coherent and consistent with the standards.
8th Grade
Alignment (Gateway 1 & 2)
Usability (Gateway 3)
Overview of Gateway 1
Focus & Coherence
The materials reviewed for the Grade 8 do not meet the requirements for alignment to the CCSSM. The materials are explicitly shaped by the CCSSM, but many aspects of focus and coherence are lacking. The limited assessments provided sometimes require students to have knowledge of above grade-level topics without providing practice for those topics. Additionally, not all of the standards are assessed. There is limited connection made between supporting and major work, and there are no explicit connections made to prior knowledge. Even though all of the CCSSM are covered in the textbook, the coverage is minimal leaving the STEM book to give greater depth to the standards. The STEM book leaves some parts of the standards out, so students will not get extensive practice on all of grade-level problems. Overall, the materials fail to focus on major work and fail to provide materials that are coherent and consistent with the standards.
Gateway 1
v1.0
Criterion 1.1: Focus
The instructional materials for Grade 8 do not meet expectations for focus within assessment. The assessment materials are supplemental and were not available for review with the core student and teacher materials. The STEM project book was used as a primary source of assessment materials. Though the STEM projects might offer great ways for students to apply their math knowledge, they are problematic in using them as a source for assessment.
Several Grade 8 standards are not addressed in the STEM project book. There are several places were students need to have an understanding of above grade-level topics to complete the projects, yet the student textbook does not cover those topics and there are projects repeated from earlier grades. If those projects are eliminated from use, then many standards would not be assessed.
Indicator 1A
The instructional materials for Grade 8 do not meet expectations for focus within assessment.
- These reviews only consider the student/teacher editions, the STEM project books, and the art project book. Digital assessment materials are considered supplemental and not considered; therefore, there are limited summative assessments.
- In the student textbook, at the end of each lesson there are four questions that can be found in the student edition. These questions were not considered for this indicator because they were formative assessments. However, the STEM projects offer the opportunity for some assessment. In the STEM project books, students complete projects, and based on a rubric teachers can assess their students' understanding. The STEM books incorporate both CCSSM and MP. For that reason, the STEM project books were used to compile evidence for indicator 1a.
- In all Grades 6 – 8, the first four chapters are identical. Assuming that students used this series through all of middle school, they could potentially repeat lessons.
The Grade 8 textbook offers practice on the entire Grade 8 CCSSM; no topics from any other grades are included. However, the Grade 8 STEM project book pulls in topics from higher grades. If a student used the textbook as the main part of their math practice they would be unable to complete the projects listed below because they would not have had any exposure to those above grade-level topics. These include:
Project 18, “Patterns in Data 1: Exponential Patterns.” On page 253, the objectives state, “Produce and interpret functions that demonstrate exponential changes.” This is F.LE.A.1.
Project 25, “Matrices II.” On page 315, the objectives state, “Determine the number of ways a task can be completed. Calculate the product of matrices. Interpret matrices.” Matrices are N.VM.C. - The STEM projects do not cover all of the Grade 8 standards. Missing from the STEM project book are 8.EE.A.2, 8.EE.B.6 and 8.EE.C.8.C.
*Evidence updated 10/27/15
Criterion 1.2: Coherence
The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 8 meet the expectations that the majority of the class time is spent on the major work of Grade 8. The textbook materials cover every standard for Grade 8. The amount of time spent on each standard is nearly evenly distributed. As a result 80% of the time is spent on major work and 20% of the time is spent on the supporting and additional clusters.
Indicator 1B
The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 8 meet expectations for time spent on the major work of the grade. Overall, the instructional material spends the majority of the time on the major work of the grade.
- For the major work of the grade there are 41 days for textbook work and 106 days for STEM/Art projects, which account for 80% of the instructional time. For supporting work, 9 days are spent in textbook, 34 days spent on STEM projects, one day is spent on art projects. This accounts for 19% of the instructional time spent on supporting clusters.
- Grade 8 Year Planner consists of a suggested lesson planner with lessons placed into trimesters. The major work lessons account for 15 of the 34 listed, with 15 lessons aligned to the supporting work and four aligned to the additional work of Grade 8. This works out to 44% on the major work, 44% on supporting work and 12% on additional work. Therefore, STEM/Art projects must be purposefully chosen in order to increase time spent on the major work of the grade.
Criterion 1.3: Coherence
The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 8 do not meet the expectations of coherence with the CCSSM. The instructional materials miss opportunities to connect supporting clusters of standards to major clusters and the materials do not develop according to the grade-by-grade progressions. Instead, the lessons develop the mathematics in the standards by domain with very little connection among the domains. Overall, the instructional materials for Grade 8 follow the recommendations of time spent on major work of the grade, but fall short of expectations in providing coherence within the grade level and across grade level. Summative assessments were not part of the core materials and thus were not available for review.
Indicator 1C
The instructional materials for Grade 8 partially meet expectations for focus and coherence in the major work of the grade.
- Lessons in statistics and probability (8.SP) promote minimal connections to 8.F.B when asking students to explain connections between two variables (teacher edition, page 548).
- The two supporting clusters are 8.NS.A and 8.SP.A (pages 1-31 in teacher edition and pages 1-16 in student edition; pages 534-603 in teacher edition and pages 338-370 in student edition). The material could have made the connection to 8.EE.A but missed it on page 11 by including an irrational radical. 8.SP.A supports 8.F.B and the use of scatter plots models the relationship between quantities.
- There is a connection to major work 8.EE.B when the line of best fit of the scatter plot represents a linear relationship, which starts on page 560 in the teacher edition. (pages 534-583).
- In lesson 8.NS.A.2, the material uses work with radicals to introduce the idea of irrational numbers. This helps support the work of 8.EE.A with radical and integer exponents.
Indicator 1D
The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 8 partially meet the expectations that there is viable content designated for one school year in order to foster coherence between grades. The textbook and the materials constitute a total of 187 days of instruction, which meets the expectations for content viable for one year, but not all of the CCSSM are covered in the materials.
- Based on the timeline given by the publishers, there are about 52 days spent on traditional assignments in the textbook. It is then expected that students will gain the experience needed to master the standards by completing the STEM/Art projects. About 135 days are devoted to STEM projects that claim to cover the Grade 8 standards. This is a total of 187 days of instruction, which meets the expectations for content viable for one year.
- However, the STEM projects do not completely cover all of the Grade 8 standards. For example, there is no explicit practice with irrational numbers or decimal expansion as stated in the 8.NS.A. There is no practice with the properties of exponents in the STEM book as stated in 8.EE.1..
Indicator 1E
Instructional materials do not meet the expectations of consistency with the progressions in the standards.
- The textbook does not provide materials for students to practice repetition of skills to become fluent. Teachers would have to find additional resources for extending the lesson.
- In the teacher edition, it clearly states in each section, "What Students Should Know Already." Although the materials offer a statement of what students should already know, and a place in the introduction for connecting to prior knowledge, the connections are not articulated explicitly.
- The lesson in 8.EE.C.7.A has examples of linear equations in one variable with one solution, infinitely many solutions or no solutions. However, there are only eight problems to help students understand this concept.
- The lesson in 8.EE.C.7.B has problems asking students to solve linear equations with rational number coefficients, including equations whose solutions require expanding expressions using the distributive property and collecting like terms. None of the practice problems have rational coefficients.
Indicator 1F
The instructional materials partially meet the expectation to foster coherence through connections at a single grade.
- The learning objectives are clearly shaped by the CCSSM cluster headings. In most cases the objective is an appropriately simplified version of the CCSSM cluster headings. For example, 8.EE.C.7 says to "Analyze and solve pairs of simultaneous linear equations: solve systems of two linear equations in two variables algebraically, and estimate solutions by graphing the equations." The objective says "students will be able to solve systems of linear equations in two variables algebraically."
- The textbook does not present a prescribed order for domains. As a result, it is difficult to connect two or more domains. For example, in the lessons where students are to apply the Pythagorean Theorem to determine unknown side lengths in right triangles in real-world and mathematical problems, students do not gain experience in working with irrational numbers. This is a missed opportunity to connect two domains that have natural connections.