1st Grade - Gateway 1
Back to 1st Grade Overview
Note on review tool versions
See the series overview page to confirm the review tool version used to create this report.
- Our current review tool version is 2.0. Learn more
- Reports conducted using earlier review tools (v1.0 and v1.5) contain valuable insights but may not fully align with our current instructional priorities. Read our guide to using earlier reports and review tools
Loading navigation...
Focus & Coherence
Gateway 1 - Partially Meets Expectations | 57% |
|---|---|
Criterion 1.1: Focus | 2 / 2 |
Criterion 1.2: Coherence | 4 / 4 |
Criterion 1.3: Coherence | 2 / 8 |
The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 1 enVisions Math 2.0 partially meet the expectations for Gateway 1. The materials meet the expectations for focusing on the major work of the grade, but they do not meet the expectations for coherence. Some strengths were found and noted in the coherence criterion as the instructional materials partially met some of the expectations for coherence. Overall, the instructional materials allocate enough time to the major work of the grade for Grade 1, but the materials do not always meet the full depth of the standards.
Criterion 1.1: Focus
The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 1 meet the expectations for assessing grade-level content. Overall, the instructional materials can be modified without substantially affecting the integrity of the materials so that they do not assess content from future grades within the assessments provided.
Indicator 1a
The assessment materials reviewed for Grade 1 meet expectations for focus within assessment. Content from future grades was found to be introduced; however, above grade-level assessment items, and their accompanying lessons, could be modified or omitted without significantly impacting the underlying structure of the instructional materials.
Probability, statistical distributions, and/or similarity, transformations and congruence do not appear in the Grade 1 materials.
The series is divided into topics, and each topic has a topic assessment and a topic performance assessment. Additional assessments include a placement test found in Topic 1, four cumulative/benchmark assessments, and an End-of-Year Assessment.
The topic assessments have a few items which assess future grade-level standards.
- Topic 1 Assessment, problem 11 assesses a two-step problem using addition and subtraction; this is a Grade 2 standard, 2.OA.1.
- Topics 1-4 cumulative assessment, problem 14 assesses a two-step problem using addition and subtraction; this is a Grade 2 standard, 2.OA.1.
- Topic 7, question number 1, on page 441, asks students to write the number name. This item more closely aligns with 2.NBT.3.
- Topic 13 Performance Assessment, problem 4, assesses elapsed time; this is a Grade 3 standard, 3.MD.1.
The off-grade level items could be removed without affecting the sequence of learning for the students or the mathematical integrity of the materials.
Criterion 1.2: Coherence
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.
The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 1 meet the expectations for focus on the major clusters of each grade. Students and teachers using the materials as designated will devote the majority of class time to major clusters of the grade level standards which includes 1.OA, 1.NBT and 1.MD.A.
Indicator 1b
Instructional material spends the majority of class time on the major cluster of each grade.
The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 1 meet the expectations for focus within major clusters. Overall, the instructional materials spend the majority of class time on the major clusters of each grade which includes 1.OA, 1.NBT and 1.MD.A.
To determine this, three perspectives were evaluated: 1) the number of topics devoted to major work, 2) the number of lessons devoted to major work, and 3) the number of days devoted to major work. The number of days is the same as the number of lessons. A lesson level analysis is more representative of the instructional materials than a topic level analysis because the number of lessons within each topic is inconsistent, and we drew our conclusion based on that data.
Grade 1 enVision Math 2.0 includes 15 Topics with 107 lessons.
At the topic level, 11 of the 15 focus on major work. One topic of the 15 focuses on supporting work and partially supports the major work of the grade, and three of the 15 topics focus on supporting work without supporting the major work. At the topic level approximately 80 percent of the topics are focused on major work (counting the one unit which partially supports major work), and approximately 20 percent are focused on supporting work.
As mentioned above, a lesson level analysis is more representative of the instructional materials than a topic level analysis because the number of lessons within each topic is inconsistent. At the lesson level, 84 lessons focus on major work, five lessons focus on supporting work and continue to support the major work of the grade, and 16 lessons focus on the supporting work without supporting the major work. Additionally, two lessons focus on future grade level work. Approximately 15 percent of the lessons focus on supporting work, and approximately 2 percent of the lessons focus on future grade level work. At the lesson level, approximately 83 percent of the lessons focus on major work of the grade.
The following are the off-grade level lessons:
- Lesson 1-9 focuses on two-step problems, a Grade 2 standard, 2.OA.1.
- Lesson 3-4 focuses on elapsed time, a Grade 3 standard, 3.MD.1
Criterion 1.3: Coherence
Coherence: Each grade's instructional materials are coherent and consistent with the Standards.
The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 1 do not meet the expectations for being coherent and consistent with CCSSM. The instructional materials do not have enough materials to be viable for a school year and do not always meet the depth of the standards. The majority of instructional materials do not have supporting content enhancing focus and coherence simultaneously but do have objectives which are clearly shaped by the CCSSM. Overall, the instructional materials for Grade 1 do not exhibit the characteristics of coherence.
Indicator 1c
Supporting content enhances focus and coherence simultaneously by engaging students in the major work of the grade.
The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 1 do not meet expectations for supporting content enhancing focus and coherence simultaneously by engaging students in the major work of the grade. Supporting content is generally treated separately and does not support the major work of the grade.
The following details supporting work in the instructional materials.
- Topic 6 is focused on representing and interpreting data. The majority of the work is treated separately, with many natural connections missed, and does not fully support the major work of the grade. The lessons each have questions about the graphs; however, most of the questions do not engage students with addition and subtraction.
- Topic 13 is focused on time. This topic could include work on 1.NBT.1.
- Topic 14 is focused on reasoning with shapes and their attributes. This topic is treated separately from major work of the grade. This topic could include work on addition and subtraction in working with groups of differing sizes and attributes.
Indicator 1d
The amount of content designated for one grade level is viable for one school year in order to foster coherence between grades.
The amount of content designated for one grade level is not viable for one school year in order to foster coherence between grades. The pacing guide assumes one lesson per day as stated on page TP-23A. The enVision Math 2.0 Grade 1 program consists of 107 lessons, grouped in 15 topics. Assessments are not included in this count; if the 15 days of assessment are added in this would bring the count to 122 days. This is still below the standard school year of approximately 140-190 days of instruction. Significant modifications by the teacher would need to be made to the program materials to be viable for one school year and for students to master the grade-level content standards.
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.
The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 1 partially meet the expectations for being consistent with the progressions in the Standards. Overall, the materials give students extensive work with grade-level problems and relate grade-level concepts explicitly to prior knowledge from earlier grades, but the materials do not reach the full depth of the standards and do not always clearly identify work that is off grade level.
Material related to future grade-level content is not clearly identified or related to grade-level work. The exception is the topic titled "Step up to 2nd grade" where the materials are clearly identified as Grade 2 materials. The Grade 1 materials have some instances where future grade-level content is present and not identified as such. For example:
- Lesson 1-9 focuses on two-step problems, 2.OA.1.
- Lesson 13-4 includes elapsed time, 3.MD.1.
- There are also individual problems in some lessons which have future grade-level content. For example, Topic 15, lesson 4, problem 4 has students continuing patterns, 4.OA.5.
The content does not always meet the full depth of standards. This occurs due to a lack of lessons addressing the full depth of standards. For example:
- 1.OA.2 has two lessons addressing problems with three addends, lessons 5-4 and 5-5.
- When looking at 1.OA.7, understanding the equal sign and determining if equations are true or false, there are two lessons, 5-3 and 5-3.
- 1.NBT.2. has one lesson, lesson 8-2, focused on the idea that the numbers 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80 and 90 refer to one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight or nine tens (and 0 ones).
- Additionally, according to the Progressions document, students need to be able to mathematize real-world situations. There are very few opportunities for students in Grade 1 to practice this skill.
The materials extensively work with grade-level problems, for example:
- Students engage in guided and independent practice, problem-solving contexts, and performance tasks. The opportunities for practice are balanced between each of the domains of the standards.
- Online resources include extra, on-level and advanced-practice materials.
- Interventions provided with lessons for students most often engage students more deeply in the work of the grade level than the lesson itself. Often, the lessons do not engage students appropriately because students are simply following directions instead of being engaged in problems. The following are some examples of lessons where the interventions would engage students more appropriately than the lesson: lessons 1-2, 2-2, 3-8, 4-2, 5-1 and 6-2.
- The numbers of topics addressing Grade 1 domains are as follows: 5 out of 15 topics address Operations and Algebraic Thinking, 3 out of 15 topics address Measurement and Data, 5 out of 15 topics address Number and Operations in Base Ten, and 2 out of 15 topics address Geometry.
The materials relate grade-level concepts to prior knowledge within the introduction of each topic, for example:
- "Math Background: Coherence" includes "Look Back" and "Look Ahead" commentary, connecting to mathematics that came earlier in Grade 1, explaining connections to the content within the topic, and explaining what will come later in Grade 1 and in Grade 2. An example can be found on pages 541c-541d for Topics 10 and 11.
- Individual lessons also include coherence headings. An example is in lesson 10-6 on page 573A that includes the statement, "Coherence: In the previous three lessons, students used a hundred chart, a number line, place-value blocks, and pictures to add tens and ones. In this lesson, students continue to add a two-digit number and a one-digit number by drawing pictures of blocks as well as determining if they need to make a 10 when they add".
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.
The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 1 partially meet the expectations for fostering coherence through connections at a single grade, where appropriate and required by the standards. Overall, the materials include learning objectives that are visibly shaped by CCSSM cluster headings, but the materials lack problems and activities that connect two or more clusters in a domain or two more domains in the grade.
The materials are designed at the cluster level, and this design feature is represented throughout the material in the form of a color-coded wheel identifying the cluster focus of each unit. The materials include learning objectives which are visibly shaped by CCSSM cluster headings, and the Topic Planner at the beginning of each topic has an example of this.
- The focus of unit 1 is 1.OA.A, Solve Addition and Subtraction Problems. Lesson objectives in topic 1 include: L1 - Solve addition problems involving situations of adding one part to another part; L2 - Solve addition problems involving situations of putting two parts together; and L3 - Solve addition problems by breaking apart a total number of objects.
- A similar example for Topic 12 can be found on pages 661I - 661J.
The materials for Grade 1 enVision Math 2.0 do not foster coherence through grade-level connections. Most lessons in the Grade 1 program focus within a single domain and cluster. Of 107 lessons, 84 lessons focus within a single cluster and domain.
- In Topic 1, lesson 1-8 is identified as addressing standards within two clusters, 1.OA.8 and 1.OA.1.
- In Topic 2, three lessons (2-7, 2-8, 2-10) address standards in two or more clusters (1.OA.B, 1.OA.C, 1.OA.D), all within the same domain.
- One of the 10 lessons in Topic 3 addresses more than one cluster, all within the same domain.
- Although four lessons of the nine lessons in Topic 4 (4-4, 4-5, 4-6, 4-7) address more than one cluster, all clusters are within the same domain.
- Although two of the seven lessons in Topic 5 (5-4, 5-5) address more than one cluster, all clusters are within the same domain.
- Five of the five lessons in Topic 6, focused on supporting work of first grade, address standards within two clusters and domains, 1.MD.4, 1.OA.1, and 1.OA.2.
- Topic 7 includes one lesson (7-1) that addresses more than one cluster, and the clusters are all within the same domain.
- All lessons within Topic 8 are within a single cluster and domain.
- Topic 9 includes one lesson that address two clusters; the remaining lessons focus on one cluster, all within the same domain.
- All lessons within Topic 10 are within a single cluster and domain.
- Topic 11 includes five of seven lessons that address two standards; the remaining two lessons each address one standard, all within a single cluster and domain.
- All lessons within Topic 12 are within a single cluster and domain.
- All lessons within Topic 13 are within a single cluster and domain.
- All lessons within Topic 14 are within a single cluster and domain, with two standards being addressed within the unit.
- All lessons within Topic 15 are within a single cluster and domain.
Further analysis of Topic 6, which addresses supporting work, and Topic 12, which addresses major work of measuring lengths, provided the following examples:
- In Topic 6, as students represent and interpret data, they sometimes connect the use of operations to interpret data. For example, students find out how many more students like one object than another or how many students voted in all. Within the 5-lesson topic, there are 8 opportunities for students to make this connection. There are some comparison word problems (1.OA.1) within the chapter; however, opportunities to connect these problems to operations are missed. For example, on student book page 372, "Jim asks 9 members of his family for their favorite fruit. 6 people say they like oranges. The rest say they like apples. How many people say they like apples? _ people." By connecting operations to this problem, students may notice 9-6=3 or 6+3=9, and they may consider the relationship between addition and subtraction. However, these opportunities are missed.
- In Topic 12, as students work with measuring lengths indirectly and by iterating units (1.MD.2), the lessons focus on the procedure of measuring. There are missed opportunities for students to make connections between the idea of "units" in place value (1.NBT) and "units" in measurement. The idea that smaller units compose larger units within the system is not explored. Other missed opportunities include the use of operations to compare the lengths of objects. Comparison word problems (1.OA.1) and comparing lengths using operations are not explored. For example, as students use pennies to measure objects, using operations to calculate how much longer or shorter one object is than another could address 1.OA and/or 1.NBT, depending on the quantity students are working with.