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: Math Expressions | Math
Product Notes
Review materials included the teacher and student editions.
Math K-2
The instructional materials reviewed for Kindergarten--Grade 2 do not meet the expectations for alignment and were not reviewed for usability. All grades in this grade band spend the majority of the time on the major work of the grade and align assessments to the standards. These grades also attend to the coherence in the standards. The materials use supporting content as a way to continue work with the major work of the grade. The materials include a full program of study that is viable content for a school year including 150 lesson and assessment days. This set of materials is consistent with the mathematical progression of learning set forth in the standards. All students are given extensive work on grade level problems and this work progresses mathematically. These instructional materials are visibly shaped by the cluster headings in the standards. Connections are made between domains and clusters within the grade level. Kindergarten, Grade 1 and Grade 2 were reviewed for Gateway 2, partially meeting the requirements for the aspects of rigor and the instructional use of the SMP. Overall the K-2 materials do not meet the requirements for alignment and, therefore, were not reviewed for usability.
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
The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 3-Grade 5 do not meet the expectations for alignment and usability. All grades spend the majority of the time on major work of the grade but all grades include assessment items that are above grade level standards. The materials in Grade 4 and Grade 5 provide coherence, but the Grade 3 materials do not attend well to the learning progression in fractions, spending much more time on multiplication and division. The materials include a full program of study that is viable content for a school year including 150 days of lessons and assessments. These instructional materials are visibly shaped by the cluster headings in the standards. Connections are made between domains and clusters within the grade level. Overall the Grade 3-Grade 5 band materials do not meet the requirements for alignment and, therefore, were not reviewed for usability.
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)
Report for 1st Grade
Alignment Summary
The materials reviewed for Grade 1 are partially aligned to the CCSSM. The materials are focused within assessments and spend the majority of time on the major work of the grade. The materials are also coherent, following the progression of the standards and connecting the mathematics within the grade level. The Grade 1 materials include all three aspects of rigor and attend to the balance of the three. The MPs are identified and generally used to enhance the mathematical content, but the materials do not attend to the full meaning of each math practice nor do they fully support the teacher and students in mathematical reasoning opportunities. Overall the materials are only partially aligned to the CCSSM.
1st Grade
Alignment (Gateway 1 & 2)
Usability (Gateway 3)
Overview of Gateway 1
Focus & Coherence
The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 1 meet the expectations for Gateway 1, focus and coherence. The assessments contain grade appropriate items. The instructional materials spend the majority of the time on the major clusters of the grade. This includes all clusters within the following domains: 1.OA, 1.NBT and the first cluster within 1.MD. The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 1 meet the expectations for coherence. The materials use supporting content as a way to continue work with the major work of the grade. For example, the materials use data as a resource for continuing their work on addition and subtraction. The materials include a full program of study that is viable content for a school year including 150 lesson and assessment days. This set of materials is consistent with the mathematical progression of learning set forth in the standards. All students are given extensive work on grade level problems, even struggling students, and this work progresses mathematically. These instructional materials are visibly shaped by the cluster headings in the standards. Connections are made between domains and clusters within the grade level, with a good example of these connections being between iterating length units and collecting data. Overall, the materials reviewed for Grade 1 meet the requirements of Gateway 1 by attending to focus and coherence.
Gateway 1
v1.0
Criterion 1.1: Focus
The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 1 meet the expectations for this criterion. While most of the assessments assess grade level work, there are a few instances where the assessments include concepts above the grade level. There are examples in unit 8 of adding 2-digits to 2-digits that do not include a multiple of 10 as expected by 1.NBT.C.4. This is in the final assessment of the year and it follows a clear and appropriate mathematical progression of learning. Overall, the instructional materials meet the expectations for focus within assessment.
Indicator 1A
The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 1 meet the expectations for this indicator.
- All units include a focus on grade level standards in all assessments.
- There are examples in unit 8 of adding 2-digits to 2-digits that do not include a multiple of 10 as expected by 1.NBT.C.4. This is in the final assessment of the year and it follows a clear and appropriate mathematical progression of learning.
Criterion 1.2: Coherence
The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 1 meet the expectations for focus by spending the majority of the time on the major clusters of the grade. This includes all clusters within 1.OA and 1.NBT and the first cluster within 1.MD.
Indicator 1B
The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 1 meet the expectations for focus by spending the majority of the time on the major clusters of the grade. This includes all clusters within 1.OA and 1.NBT and the first cluster within 1.MD.
- Of the eight units, five of them are focused on major work.
- Of the lessons in unit 6, the majority focuses on major work.
- Unit 7 generally includes supporting or additional work for this grade level.
- Unit 8 contains lessons within the major work and several lessons that go above grade level.
- More than 80% of the program is focused on major work of the grade.
Criterion 1.3: Coherence
The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 1 meet the expectations for coherence. The materials use supporting content as a way to continue work with the major work of the grade. For example, the materials use data as a resource for continuing their work on addition and subtraction. The materials include a full program of study that is viable content for a school year including 150 lesson and assessment days. This set of materials is consistent with the mathematical progression of learning set forth in the standards. All students are given extensive work on grade level problems, even struggling students, and this work progresses mathematically. These instructional materials are visibly shaped by the cluster headings in the standards. Connections are made between domains and clusters within the grade level. For instance, materials make connections between iterating length units and collecting data. Overall, the Grade 1 materials support coherence and are consistent with the progressions in the standards.
Indicator 1C
The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 1 meet the expectations for their use of supporting content as a way to enhance coherence. For Grade 1, reviewers focused on the use of data as a method for supporting addition and subtraction and place value.
- Unit 6 contains lessons on data. These lessons connect data to the addition and subtraction work of the grade level.
- Unit 6 lessons include counting, comparing, organizing, representing and interpreting.
- Some unit 6 lessons include requiring students to write equations in order to answer questions about the data.
- These lessons are reinforced with homework and "remembering" worksheets.
Indicator 1D
The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 1 meet the expectation for this indicator by providing a viable level of content for one school year.
- Materials provide for 150 days of instruction, quizzes, fluency checks, and formal assessment.
- Most lessons are appropriate in length for Grade 1.
- Some lessons may take longer than indicated.
- There are 43 days devoted to place value, an important Grade 1 concept.
Indicator 1E
The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 1 partially meet the expectation for this indicator and are generally consistent with the mathematical progressions in the standards.
- Materials generally follow the progression of learning.
- Learning progressions for CCSSM are described at the beginning of each unit.
- Many materials contain Kindergarten level work without identifying as such.
- Intervention strategies, generally based on reading and writing levels, suggest that students stay with grade level content.
- Materials make connections to previous grade level content in the unit preparation section, not within the lessons.
Indicator 1F
The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 1 foster coherence through grade level connections.
- Test objectives are visibly shaped by the cluster headings of the standards.
- Students are expected to use place value understanding as they work on addition and subtraction.
- Some connections are made between 1.OA and 1.MD.
- Unit 7 focuses on 1.G and 1.MD only and does not connect to other domains.
Overview of Gateway 2
Rigor & Mathematical Practices
The materials reviewed for Grade 1 partially meet the requirements for Gateway 2. All three aspects of rigor are present in the materials and they are balanced. The MPs are listed in the specifics of the lessons and the way they are listed enhances the learning. Attention is not paid to the full meaning of each MP and one lesson in each unit focuses on MP, and not content standards. The materials are not strong in their expectation for mathematical reasoning. The students and teachers are not given enough support nor is the vocabulary development sufficient. The materials reviewed for Gateway 2 meet the expectation for rigor and partially meet expectations for mathematical practices.
Gateway 2
v1.0
Criterion 2.1: Rigor
The materials reviewed for Grade 1 meet the requirements for this criterion. All three aspects of rigor are addressed individually and all three are used to deepen the understanding of the others. Conceptual understanding, fluency and application are balanced within the Grade 1 materials.
Indicator 2A
The materials reviewed in Grade 1 for this indicator meet the requirements of attending to conceptual understanding within the lessons.
- In unit 4, attention is given to understanding place value and to using that understanding in addition and subtraction.
- Students work on their understanding of place value with teen numbers in a variety of ways including visualizing, modeling, classroom routines and classroom discussion.
- In unit 4, lesson 4, students are asked to make a drawing to prove that 10+3 is the same as 9+4.
- The "Formative Assessment: Check Understanding" boxes attend to conceptual understanding. These could be used for classroom discussions instead of individual assessment checks.
Indicator 2B
The materials reviewed in Grade 1 for this indicator meet the requirements by attending to fluency and procedural work within the lessons. In Grade 1 this includes the ability to add and subtract within 10 (1.OA.C.6).
- Lessons include a variety of daily routines for fluency including number partners, partner houses, and add and subtract within 10.
- Lessons attend to the use of a variety of addition and subtraction strategies including the relationship between addition and subtraction, counting on, making ten and decomposing to create equivalent sums.
Indicator 2C
The materials reviewed in Grade 1 for this indicator meet the requirements by attending to application within the lessons.
- Each unit ends with a real world problem to solve.
- Word problems are interspersed throughout the lessons in all units.
- Students are given opportunities to generate their own word problems.
- Multiple problem types are attended to and described for the teacher.
Indicator 2D
The materials reviewed in Grade 1 for this indicator meet the requirements of providing a balance of rigor. The three aspects are not always treated together nor are they always treated separately.
- The lessons and activities within provide ample opportunity to practice all three aspects of rigor.
- The daily routines address fluency expectations, and these expectations are also embedded throughout the lessons.
- The application problems are used to develop fluency and to deepen understanding of the mathematics at hand.
- Conceptual understanding portions of the lessons address the need for fluency and use real-world situations to further explore understanding.
Criterion 2.2: Math Practices
The materials reviewed for Grade 1 partially meet the requirements for Gateway 2. All three aspects of rigor are present in the materials and they are balanced. The MPs are listed in the specifics of the lessons and the way they are listed enhances the learning. Attention is not paid to the full meaning of each MP and one lesson in each unit focuses on MP, and not content standards. The materials are not strong in their expectation for mathematical reasoning. The students and teachers are not given enough support nor is the vocabulary development sufficient. The materials reviewed for Gateway 2 meet the expectation for rigor and partially meet expectations for mathematical practices.
Indicator 2E
The materials reviewed for Grade 1 meet the requirement of this indicator by identifying the Standards for Mathematical Practice (MPs) and using this identification to enhance the learning.
- MPs are identified in the "Getting Ready to Teach" sections in every unit.
- MPs are identified within the lessons in a way that supports the learning. For example, MP1 is identified and used in unit 2 as students act out a scenario in order to make sense of the problem.
- MP8 is identified and used to examine fluency practice cards in unit 4. Students discuss ways to use the number 10 to subtract with teen numbers attending to repeated reasoning.
Indicator 2F
The materials reviewed for Grade 1 partially meet the requirement of this indicator.
- MP1 is consistently expected as students solve problems throughout the year.
- Within unit 4 the materials identify MPs 2, 5, 6, 7, and 8 frequently.
- The full meaning of MP5 is not attended to. MP5 is noted 22 times in unit 4, but none of these offer students the opportunity to choose their own tool.
- The final lesson in each unit focuses on all 8 MPs rather than the content standards. These lessons do not attend to the full meaning of all 8 MPs.
Indicator 2G
The materials reviewed for Grade 1 partially meet the requirement of this indicator of attending to the standards' emphasis on mathematical reasoning.
- There are vocabulary terms listed for most lessons, however this often includes strategies specific to the curriculum instead of mathematical language. For example, the phrase "partner train" is listed as a vocabulary word in unit 1. In unit 2 the phrase "circle drawing" is listed as vocabulary.
- In unit 4 lesson 8 students are asked to explain how the numbers 2, 12, and 20 are the same and how they are different. Explanations are expected to include the number word differences and also what the digit "2" represents in each number attending to precision in mathematical language.
Indicator 2G.i
The materials reviewed for Grade 1 partially meet the requirement of this indicator of attending to the standards' emphasis on mathematical reasoning.
- Students are occasionally prompted to construct viable arguments.
- In differentiation cards, students are occasionally prompted to discuss their strategies with the group.
- Most of the student pages include numbers, symbols, and spaces for answers, but they do not include spaces for students to explain their thinking or opportunities to share these explanations.
- Students are asked to analyze a response from the "Puzzled Penguin," but this analysis is an opportunity for catching errors and not an opportunity for student reasoning.
Indicator 2G.ii
The materials reviewed for Grade 1 partially meet the requirement of this indicator of attending to the standards' emphasis on mathematical reasoning.
- The teacher's manual provides questions to promote MP3.
- Several lessons are labeled with "Math Talk in Action" as a way to promote to high quality classroom discussions.
- Teacher questions often simply ask for the answer and not the reasoning nor the opportunity to analyze arguments of other students.
Indicator 2G.iii
The materials reviewed for Grade 1 partially meet the requirement of this indicator of attending to the standards' emphasis on mathematical reasoning.
- There are vocabulary terms listed for most lessons, however this often includes strategies specific to the curriculum instead of mathematical language. For example, the phrase "partner train" is listed as a vocabulary word in unit 1. In unit 2 the phrase "circle drawing" is listed as vocabulary.
- In unit 4 lesson 8 students are asked to explain how the numbers 2, 12, and 20 are the same and how they are different. Explanations are expected to include the number word differences and also what the digit "2" represents in each number attending to precision in mathematical language.