Alignment: Overall Summary

The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 8 partially meet the expectations for alignment to CCSSM.

While the Grade 8 materials passed Gateway 1's review of focus and coherence, the instructional materials did not pass Gateway 2's review of rigor and the MP.

On focus and coherence, the instructional materials assess only the material required for Grade 8 and previous grades. More than 65% of the year is focused on the major work for Grade 8 of 8.EE.A, 8.EE.B, 8.EE.C, 8.F.A, 8.F.B, 8.G.A and 8.G.C. In Grade 8 there are a few times that the supporting work enhances the understanding of the major clusters. The program can be taught in 164 days. The program overview guide explicitly shows where the standards are taught and where previous standards are used to enhance new learning. The program has many components to give all students extensive work with grade-level problems. The CCSSM are visibly listed on the student pages and in the teacher's edition. The work in each unit is specific to that unit's topic. There are few connections made between units and concepts.

Concerning rigor and the mathematical practices, conceptual understanding is not attended to by setting explicit expectations for understanding or interpreting. Each lesson is launched with a real-world situation but they often focus on practicing application and not on building conceptual understanding. There isn't enough practice to build fluency. The enrichment project for each unit is the major resource for application with multi-steps. Within the lessons there are many real-world type problems but very few that are multi-step problems. There is an attempt to balance conceptual and procedural work. There are not enough problems to support developing fluency, particularly in solving linear equations in one variable and estimating solutions by graphing the equations. The materials reviewed for Grade 8 do not meet the expectations for practice-content connections. While the MPs are included and labeled in the Launch of each lesson and the focus question, they are not identified in the in-class teaching notes and is missing in other areas of the curriculum. Problems are too simple with too much scaffolding to enrich the mathematics for students. A teacher who is not familiar with the MP standards would not be able to use the information given on the individual lessons to educate the students on how to use the MPs to assist in solving a math problem. The materials suggest that certain mathematical practices are used, when they clearly are not. On other lessons, they are used well. There is too much inconsistency within this series in their use. Materials have students constructing arguments through certain routine problems such as reasoning, reflecting, writing and error analysis. The attempt is there to prompt students to construct viable arguments with some of the questions used in each lesson, but the ability to have true mathematical discourse in the lessons is not strong. This series does not meet the standard for explicitly attending to the specialized language of mathematics. It often uses vocabulary that is not precise and does not allow for the student to be completely immersed in the language of mathematics.

Alignment

|

Partially Meets Expectations

Gateway 1:

Focus & Coherence

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

Gateway 2:

Rigor & Mathematical Practices

0
10
16
18
7
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

Meets Expectations

+
-
Gateway One Details

The materials reviewed for Grade 8 meet the expectations for focusing on major work and coherence. The instructional materials assess only the material required for Grade 8 and previous grades. More than 65% of the year is focused on the major work for Grade 8 of 8.EE.A, 8.EE.B, 8.EE.C, 8.F.A, 8.F.B, 8.G.A and 8.G.C. In Grade 8, there are a few times that the supporting work enhances the understanding of the major clusters. The program can be taught in 164 days. The program overview guide explicitly shows where the standards are taught and where previous standards are used to enhance new learning. The program has many components to give all students extensive work with grade-level problems. The CCSSM are visibly listed on the student pages and in the teacher edition. The work in each unit is specific to that unit's topic. There are few connections made between units and concepts.

Criterion 1a

Materials do not assess topics before the grade level in which the topic should be introduced.
0/2

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

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

Indicator 1b

Instructional material spends the majority of class time on the major cluster of each grade.
0/4

Criterion 1c - 1f

Coherence: Each grade's instructional materials are coherent and consistent with the Standards.
0/8

Indicator 1c

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

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 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 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

Gateway Two

Rigor & Mathematical Practices

Does Not Meet Expectations

+
-
Gateway Two Details

The materials reviewed for Grade 8 do not meet the expectations for rigor and balance. Conceptual understanding is not attended to by setting explicit expectations for understanding or interpreting. Each lesson is launched with a real-world situation but they often focus on practicing application and not on building conceptual understanding. There is not enough practice to build fluency. The enrichment project for each unit is the major resource for application with multi-steps. Within the lessons there are many real-world type problems but very few that are multi-step problems. There is an attempt to balance conceptual and procedural work. There are not enough problems to support developing fluency, particularly in solving linear equations in one variable and estimating solutions by graphing the equations. The materials reviewed for Grade 8 do not meet the expectations for practice-content connections. While the MPs are included and labeled in the launch of each lesson and the focus question, they are not identified anywhere in the in-class teaching notes and are missing in other areas of the curriculum. Problems are too simple with too much scaffolding to enrich the mathematics for students. A teacher who is not familiar with the MPs would not be able to use the information given on the individual lessons to educate the students on how to use the MPs to assist in solving a math problem. The materials suggest that certain MPs are used, when they clearly are not. On other lessons, they are used well. There is too much inconsistency within this series in their use. Materials have students constructing arguments through certain routine problems such as reasoning, reflecting, writing and error analysis. The attempt is there to prompt students to construct viable arguments with some of the questions used in each lesson, but the ability to have true mathematical discourse in the lessons is not strong. The teacher notes do not indicate how they can assist their students in using the mathematical practices. This series does not meet the standard for explicitly attending to the specialized language of mathematics. It often uses vocabulary that is not precise and does not allow for the student to be completely immersed in the language of mathematics.

 

 

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:
Narrative Evidence Only

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

+
-
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 3aa - 3z

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

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

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
abc123

Report Published Date: 2015/02/15

Report Edition: 2014

Title ISBN Edition Publisher Year
9780133314694
9780133315820

Please note: Reports published beginning in 2021 will be using version 1.5 of our review tools. Version 1 of our review tools can be found here. Learn more about this change.

Math K-8 Review Tool

The mathematics review criteria identifies the indicators for high-quality instructional materials. The review criteria 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 review criteria evaluates materials based on:

  • Focus and Coherence

  • Rigor and Mathematical Practices

  • Instructional Supports and Usability

The K-8 Evidence Guides complements the review criteria 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 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.

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.

Math K-8

  • Focus and Coherence - 14 possible points

    • 12-14 points: Meets Expectations

    • 8-11 points: Partially Meets Expectations

    • Below 8 points: Does Not Meet Expectations

  • Rigor and Mathematical Practices - 18 possible points

    • 16-18 points: Meets Expectations

    • 11-15 points: Partially Meets Expectations

    • Below 11 points: Does Not Meet Expectations

  • Instructional Supports and Usability - 38 possible points

    • 31-38 points: Meets Expectations

    • 23-30 points: Partially Meets Expectations

    • Below 23: Does Not Meet Expectations

Math High School

  • Focus and Coherence - 18 possible points

    • 14-18 points: Meets Expectations

    • 10-13 points: Partially Meets Expectations

    • Below 10 points: Does Not Meet Expectations

  • Rigor and Mathematical Practices - 16 possible points

    • 14-16 points: Meets Expectations

    • 10-13 points: Partially Meets Expectations

    • Below 10 points: Does Not Meet Expectations

  • Instructional Supports and Usability - 36 possible points

    • 30-36 points: Meets Expectations

    • 22-29 points: Partially Meets Expectations

    • Below 22: Does Not Meet Expectations

ELA K-2

  • Text Complexity and Quality - 58 possible points

    • 52-58 points: Meets Expectations

    • 28-51 points: Partially Meets Expectations

    • Below 28 points: Does Not Meet Expectations

  • Building Knowledge with Texts, Vocabulary, and Tasks - 32 possible points

    • 28-32 points: Meet Expectations

    • 16-27 points: Partially Meets Expectations

    • Below 16 points: Does Not Meet Expectations

  • Instructional Supports and Usability - 34 possible points

    • 30-34 points: Meets Expectations

    • 24-29 points: Partially Meets Expectations

    • Below 24 points: Does Not Meet Expectations

ELA 3-5

  • Text Complexity and Quality - 42 possible points

    • 37-42 points: Meets Expectations

    • 21-36 points: Partially Meets Expectations

    • Below 21 points: Does Not Meet Expectations

  • Building Knowledge with Texts, Vocabulary, and Tasks - 32 possible points

    • 28-32 points: Meet Expectations

    • 16-27 points: Partially Meets Expectations

    • Below 16 points: Does Not Meet Expectations

  • Instructional Supports and Usability - 34 possible points

    • 30-34 points: Meets Expectations

    • 24-29 points: Partially Meets Expectations

    • Below 24 points: Does Not Meet Expectations

ELA 6-8

  • Text Complexity and Quality - 36 possible points

    • 32-36 points: Meets Expectations

    • 18-31 points: Partially Meets Expectations

    • Below 18 points: Does Not Meet Expectations

  • Building Knowledge with Texts, Vocabulary, and Tasks - 32 possible points

    • 28-32 points: Meet Expectations

    • 16-27 points: Partially Meets Expectations

    • Below 16 points: Does Not Meet Expectations

  • Instructional Supports and Usability - 34 possible points

    • 30-34 points: Meets Expectations

    • 24-29 points: Partially Meets Expectations

    • Below 24 points: Does Not Meet Expectations


ELA High School

  • Text Complexity and Quality - 32 possible points

    • 28-32 points: Meets Expectations

    • 16-27 points: Partially Meets Expectations

    • Below 16 points: Does Not Meet Expectations

  • Building Knowledge with Texts, Vocabulary, and Tasks - 32 possible points

    • 28-32 points: Meet Expectations

    • 16-27 points: Partially Meets Expectations

    • Below 16 points: Does Not Meet Expectations

  • Instructional Supports and Usability - 34 possible points

    • 30-34 points: Meets Expectations

    • 24-29 points: Partially Meets Expectations

    • Below 24 points: Does Not Meet Expectations

Science Middle School

  • Designed for NGSS - 26 possible points

    • 22-26 points: Meets Expectations

    • 13-21 points: Partially Meets Expectations

    • Below 13 points: Does Not Meet Expectations


  • Coherence and Scope - 56 possible points

    • 48-56 points: Meets Expectations

    • 30-47 points: Partially Meets Expectations

    • Below 30 points: Does Not Meet Expectations


  • Instructional Supports and Usability - 54 possible points

    • 46-54 points: Meets Expectations

    • 29-45 points: Partially Meets Expectations

    • Below 29 points: Does Not Meet Expectations