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: Japan Math | Math
Math K-2
The instructional materials for Japan Math Grades K-2 do not meet expectations for alignment to the CCSSM. In Gateway 1, the instructional materials do not meet the expectations for focus as they assess grade-level standards. The Kindergarten instructional materials devote approximately 59% of instructional time to the major work of the grade, while the instructional materials for Grades 1-2 both devote more than 65% of instructional time to the major work of the grade. For coherence, the instructional materials have an amount of content designated for one grade level that is partially viable for one school year, and the instructional materials for are not coherent and consistent with the Standards. Since the materials do not meet expectations for alignment to the CCSSM, they were not reviewed for rigor and the Mathematical Practices in Gateway 2 and for usability in Gateway 3.
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)
Report for 2nd Grade
Alignment Summary
The instructional materials for Japan Math Grade 2 do not meet expectations for alignment to the CCSSM. In Gateway 1, the instructional materials do not meet the expectations for focus as they assess above-grade-level standards and devote approximately 66% of instructional time to the major work of the grade. For coherence, the instructional materials are not coherent and consistent with the Standards. The instructional materials have an amount of content designated for one grade level that is partially viable for one school year, and the materials partially engage students in the major work of the grade through supporting content. The materials do not identify content from future grades, do not give students work with extensive grade-level problems, and miss connections between two or more clusters in a domain or two or more domains. Since the materials do not meet the expectations for focus and coherence in Gateway 1, they were not reviewed for rigor and the mathematical practices in Gateway 2 or usability in Gateway 3.
2nd Grade
Alignment (Gateway 1 & 2)
Usability (Gateway 3)
Overview of Gateway 1
Focus & Coherence
The instructional materials for Japan Math Grade 2 do not meet expectations for focus and coherence in Gateway 1. For focus, the instructional materials do not meet the expectations for assessing grade-level standards, although the amount of time devoted to the major work of the grade is approximately 66%. For coherence, the instructional materials are not coherent and consistent with the Standards. The instructional materials have an amount of content designated for one grade level that is partially viable for one school year, and the materials partially engage students in the major work of the grade through supporting content. The materials do not identify content from future grades, do not give students work with extensive grade-level problems, and miss connections between two or more clusters in a domain or two or more domains.
Gateway 1
v1.0
Criterion 1.1: Focus
The instructional materials reviewed for Japan Math Grade 2 do not meet expectations for not assessing topics before the grade level in which the topic should be introduced. The instructional materials include assessment items that align to standards above this grade level.
Indicator 1A
The instructional materials reviewed for Japan Math Grade 2 do not meet the expectations for assessing grade-level content.
The materials include a Readiness Test, 16 Unit Tests, two Midterm Tests, and two Final Tests. The assessments include above-grade level content that would require major modifications and, if removed, would change the underlying structure and intent of the materials. Examples include:
- In Unit Test 1, Skills 1, 2, and 4, there are multiple questions where students write times displayed on an analog clock to the nearest minute, which does not align to 2.MD.7 (tell and write time to the nearest five minutes).
- In Unit Test 7, Skill 5, Question 2, students use symbols to compare two, four-digit numbers, which does not align to 2.NBT.4, compare two three-digit numbers.
- In Unit 12 and Unit 13, Knowledge 1, students multiply to find the answers to each of the expressions, which aligns to Grade 3 standards.
- In Unit Test 11, Skill 2, questions 1-4, students write a multiplication sentence to represent the pictures, which aligns to Grade 3 standards.
- In Unit Tests 12 and 13, Skill 1, students solve multiplication problems, which aligns to Grade 3 standards.
- In Unit Test 12, Skills 2 and 5, and Unit Test 13, Skill 2, students fill in the unknown numbers in multiplication sentences, which aligns to Grade 3 standards.
- In Unit Test 12, Skills 3 and 4, students solve a word problem using multiplication, which aligns to Grade 3 standards.
- In the Midterm Test for Units 10-12, Skills 1 and 2, students solve multiplication sentences and fill in the missing whole number in multiplication sentences, which aligns to Grade 3 standards.
- In the Final Test for Units 13-16, Skill 1, Questions 1-8, students solve multiplication problems, which aligns to Grade 3 standards.
Examples of grade-level assessment items include:
- In Unit Test 3, Questions 2 and 3, students solve simple put-together and compare problems using the data from the line plot that they create (2.MD.9.10).
- In Unit Test 3, Question 4, students create a bar graph based on data from a table that has four categories (2.MD.10).
- In Unit Test 10, Question 1, “Draw a line to match each shape to its name.” Students match the shape to the words pentagon, triangle, quadrilateral, and hexagon. (2.G.1)
- In Unit Test 11, Question 1, “Is the number of oranges an even number or an odd number?” Students determine if a group of objects (up to 20) has an odd or even number of members (2.OA.3).
Criterion 1.2: Coherence
The instructional materials reviewed for Japan Math Grade 2 do not meet expectations for devoting the large majority of class time to the major work of the grade. The instructional materials spend approximately 66% of instructional time on the major work of the grade.
Indicator 1B
The instructional materials reviewed for Japan Math Grade 2 meet the expectation for spending the majority of class time on the major clusters of each grade. For Grade 2, this includes 2.OA.A,B, all clusters within 2.NBT, and 2.MD.A,B.
- The number of units devoted to major work of the grade (including supporting work connected to the major work) is 14 out of 16, which is approximately 88%.
- The number of lessons devoted to major work of the grade (including supporting work connected to the major work) is 86 out of 150, which is approximately 57%.
- The number of days devoted to major work (including assessments supporting work connected to the major work) is 110 lessons out of 166, which is approximately 66%.
The number of days devoted to major work is most representative of the instructional materials because that involves assessments. As a result, approximately 66% of the instructional materials focus on major work of the grade.
Criterion 1.3: Coherence
- The instructional materials for Japan Math Grade 2 do not meet expectations for being coherent and consistent with the Standards. The instructional materials partially engage students in the major work of the grade through supporting content, do not identify content from future grades, do not give students work with extensive grade-level problems, and miss connections between two or more clusters in a domain or two or more domains.
Indicator 1C
The instructional materials reviewed for Japan Math Grade 2 partially meet expectations for supporting content enhancing focus and coherence simultaneously by engaging students in the major work of the grade. Supporting standards appear in lessons with no connections to the major work of the grade, with the exception of one example.
Examples of supporting work not connected to major work of the grade and/or omitted connections include:
- In Unit 1, Lessons 5 and 6, students tell time (2.MD.7), but the materials do not make a connection to counting by 5s (2.NBT.2) on a clock to tell time.
- In Unit 6, Lessons 4 and 9, students work with money (2.MD.8) is not connected to place value or using place value to add and subtract (2.NBT.A,B).
- In Unit 11, students work with arrays of up to five rows and five columns (2.OA.C), but the instructional materials do not make a connection to counting by 5s (2.NBT.2).
An example of supporting work connected to major work of the grade include:
- In Unit 3, Lessons 5 and 6, the instructional materials connect 2.MD.10 with 2.OA.1 as students add and subtract in a variety of contexts based on graphs. In Lesson 5, “Are there more pigeons or more ducks? How many more?” In Lesson 6, “How many fewer values were there for blue vs. green?” and “How many students were surveyed?”
Indicator 1D
The instructional materials reviewed for Japan Math Grade 2 partially meet the expectation for having an amount of content that is viable for one school year.
According to the publisher, the instructional materials can be completed in 166 days as outlined in the teacher manual: one day per lesson and one day for each assessment. However, the content presented is insufficient to the instructional time allotted for each lesson, and teachers would need to make modifications to ensure content is viable for one year.
The Teacher’s Edition includes a scope and sequence of the instructional materials, noting there are 16 units with 150 lessons in total, each designed for 50 minutes. The 50 minutes for each lesson includes workbook pages for students to complete with scripted teacher directions and question prompts. Each prompt is accompanied by a suggested amount of time. In the materials, time was not identified or described for assessments, so one day was allotted per unit for assessments.
Lessons that include suggested prompt activities that take less than the 50 minutes described in the Scope and Sequence include, but are not limited to:
- In Unit 3, Lesson Book page 30 and Workbook page 15 are identified as 20 minutes.
- In Unit 6, Lesson Book page 74 and Workbook page 41 are identified as 30 minutes.
- In Unit 7, Lesson Book pages 90-91 and Workbook page 49 are identified as 30 minutes.
- In Unit 7, Lesson Book page 102 and Workbook page 55 are identified as 30 minutes.
- In Unit 8, Lesson Book page 112 and Workbook page 61 are identified as 30 minutes.
- In Unit 10, Lesson Book page 155 and Workbook page 85 are identified as 30 minutes.
- In Unit 10, Lesson Book page 164 and Workbook page 90 are identified as 30 minutes.
- In Unit 10, Lesson Book page 165 and Workbook page 91 are identified as 40 minutes.
- In Unit 11, Lesson Book page 172 and Workbook page 94 are identified as 30 minutes.
- In Unit 12. Lesson Book page 182 and Workbook page 101 are identified as 30 minutes.
- In Unit 12, Lesson Book page 183 and Workbook page 102 are identified as 20 minutes.
In addition, examples of lesson prompts that would not provide 50 minutes of instructional time include, but are not limited to:
- In Unit 3, Lesson 3, “Complete the line plot”, the publisher identifies 15 minutes of time for the students and teacher to complete the line plot (adding two data points).
- In Unit 7, Lesson 1, “Discuss as a Class”, the publisher identifies 15 minutes for the students to discuss and answer the question, “How many shells are there? How did you keep track?”
- In Unit 4, Lesson 7, the publishers identify 20 minutes for students to discuss how they solved a multiplication problem.
Teachers would need to find additional content for many lessons to meet the time frame of 50 minutes. Optional expansion workbooks can be purchased separately for more questions, however, these were not reviewed as they are not part of the core program.
Indicator 1E
The instructional materials reviewed for Japan Math Grade 2 do not meet expectations for being consistent with the progressions in the Standards. Overall, the materials do not provide all students with extensive work on grade-level problems. The instructional materials do not develop according to the grade-by-grade progressions in the Standards. Content from prior and future grades is not clearly identified nor related to the grade-level work. The instructional materials do not relate grade-level concepts explicitly to prior knowledge from earlier grades. At the beginning of each unit, there is "Explanation of the Unit" which provides a description of connections to concepts that have been taught earlier and is identified as “What Students Have Learned Previously”.
The lessons follow a structure of Try, Understand, Apply, and Master. Most lessons do not provide enough opportunity for students to independently demonstrate mastery. The lessons include teacher-directed problems that the class solves together, but the instructional materials do not include supplemental practice or problems that students complete independently. Whole class instruction is used in the lessons, and all students are expected to do the same work throughout the lesson.
Examples of content from prior or future grades that is not clearly identified include:
- In Unit 2, Lessons 4-7, students measure the length of an object using centimeters and millimeters together to tell the length of objects in between whole numbers of centimeters. This is not identified in the instructional materials as 3.MD.
- In Unit 4, Lessons 7-9, students solve addition problems using the standard algorithm. This is not identified as 4.NBT.4.
- In Unit 5, Lessons 2-4 and Lessons 7-9, students solve subtraction problems using the standard algorithm. This is not identified as 4.NBT.4.
- In Unit 8, Lessons 2-11, students solve addition problems using the standard algorithm. This is not identified as 4.NBT.4.
- In Unit 9, Lessons 1-13, students solve subtraction problems using the standard algorithm. This is not identified as 4.NBT.4.
- In Unit 13, Lesson 6, students solve multiplication problems mentally, which aligns to standards from Grade 3.
Examples of the instructional materials not addressing grade-level standards or giving all students extensive work with grade-level problems include:
- 2.OA.2, fluently adding and subtracting within 20, is not identified as addressed in the materials.
- 2.OA.4 is identified in Unit 12. However, using equal groups as the foundation of multiplication is not explicitly addressed in the lessons. In Lesson 9, Problem 1, students work with an array with four rows and six columns whereas 2.OA.4 includes arrays with up to five rows and up to five columns. In Lesson 2, students write multiplication sentences for arrays with five columns, but students do not write an equation to express the total as a sum of equal addends. In Lesson 14, students write a multiplication sentence for an array with five rows and six columns, which does not align to 2.OA.4.
- 2.NBT.5 is identified as being addressed in Units 4 and 5. Addition and subtraction are addressed separately, and the relationship between the two operations is not addressed. There are no examples in Units 4 or 5 where the relationship is addressed.
Indicator 1F
The instructional materials for Japan Math Grade 2 partially meet expectations for fostering coherence through connections at a single grade, where appropriate and required by the Standards.
The materials include learning objectives that are visibly shaped by CCSSM cluster headings, and examples include:
- In Unit 2, Lesson 5, the objective, “Understand that precision is important when measuring length. Know how to use a ruler and set squares to precisely draw a line of a given length.” is shaped by 2.MD.A, Measure and estimate lengths in standard units.
- In Unit 7, Lesson 2, the objective, “Understand how three-digit numbers represent units of hundreds, tens, and ones.” is shaped by 2.NBT.A, Understand place value.
- In Unit 11, Lesson 1, the objective, “Recognize situations in which items are organized in equal groups and identify the number in each group and the number of groups.” is shaped by 2.OA.C, Work with equal groups of objects to gain foundations for multiplication.
The materials do not include problems and activities that serve to connect two or more clusters in a domain, or two or more domains in a grade, in cases where these connections are natural, and examples include, but are not limited to:
- In Unit 3, Lesson 4, students measure the lengths of different lines and record the lengths (2.MD.A), but there is no connection to adding and subtracting within 20 (2.OA.B).
- In Units 4 and 5, students solve addition and subtraction word problems (2.OA.A) with two-digit numbers using an algorithm, but there is not a connection to using place value understanding and properties of operations to add and subtract (2.NBT.B).
- In Units 8 and 9, students add and subtract within 1000 (2.NBT.B), but this is not connected to representing and solving problems with addition and subtraction (2.OA.A).