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 Kindergarten
Alignment Summary
The materials reviewed for Kindergarten 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 Kindergarten materials include all three aspects of rigor but conceptual understanding requirements are lacking. The MPs are identified and generally used to enhance the mathematical content, but the materials do not attend to the full meaning of each MP nor do they fully support the teacher and students in mathematical reasoning opportunities. Overall the materials are only partially aligned to the CCSSM.
Kindergarten
Alignment (Gateway 1 & 2)
Usability (Gateway 3)
Overview of Gateway 1
Focus & Coherence
The instructional materials reviewed for Kindergarten meet the expectation for focus and coherence. Assessments were focused on grade level standards. Students are assessed on fluency only up to five. They are assessed on counting to 100, comparing numbers between one and ten and their understanding of addition and subtraction among other topics. The materials spend the majority of the time on the major clusters of the grade. This includes all clusters within the following domains: K.CC, K.OA and K.NBT. The instructional materials reviewed for Kindergarten met the expectation for coherence. 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. Overall, the Kindergarten materials support focus and coherence and therefore, meet the requirements of Gateway 1.
Gateway 1
v1.0
Criterion 1.1: Focus
The instructional materials reviewed for Kindergarten meet the expectation for this criterion. Students are assessed on fluency only up to five. They are assessed on counting to 100, comparing numbers between one and ten and their understanding of addition and subtraction among other topics. In unit 3, students are assessed on their use of the equality and inequality signs. While the meaning of the equal sign is a Grade 1 standard, the way it is used in this assessment is to compare numbers, which falls in K.CC.C.7. Overall, the instructional materials meet the expectations for focus within the assessment.
*Evidence updated 6/24/2015, score unchanged
Indicator 1A
The instructional materials reviewed for Kindergarten meet the expectations for focus within assessment. Topics are assessed that are within the Kindergarten standards.
- Grade level standards are taught and assessed in all 5 units.
- Students are assessed on counting and cardinality, understanding of addition and subtraction and place value.
- Students are assessed on fluency only up to five.
- Students are assessed on counting to 100.
- Students are assessed on their ability to compare numbers between one and 10.
- In unit 3, students assessed on their use of the equality and inequality signs. While the meaning of the equal sign is a Grade 1 standard, the way it is used in this assessment is to compare numbers, which falls in K.CC.C.7.
*Evidence updated 6/24/2015, score unchanged
Criterion 1.2: Coherence
The instructional materials reviewed for Kindergarten meet the expectation for focus by spending the majority of the time on the major clusters of the grade. This includes all clusters within the following domains: K.CC, K.OA and K.NBT.
Indicator 1B
The instructional materials reviewed for Kindergarten meet the expectation for focus by spending the majority of the time on the major clusters of the grade. This includes all clusters within the following domains: K.C, K.OA and K.NBT.
- While some lessons include multiple standards, the large majority of lessons focus on major work.
- More than 80% of the lessons are explicitly focused on major work, with major work often included within supporting work lessons as well.
All five of the units devote more than 80% of the lesson and assessment time to major work.
Criterion 1.3: Coherence
The instructional materials reviewed for Kindergarten meet the expectation for coherence. The materials use supporting content as a way to continue work with the major work of the grade. For example, when studying shapes students are still counting and reasoning about number. 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. For instance, materials make connections between sorting shapes by attributes and reasoning about the size of the groups they are sorted into. Overall, the Kindergarten materials support coherence and are consistent with the progressions in the standards.
Indicator 1C
The instructional materials reviewed for Kindergarten meet the expectations for their use of supporting content as a way to enhance coherence. For Kindergarten, reviewers focused on the use of counting and addition/subtraction within the K.MD and K.G domains.
- In unit 1, students are sorting objects, counting and comparing totals.
- In unit 2, students are asked to count sides and attributes of shapes.
- In units 3 and 4, students are sorting and counting and comparing quantities while responding to data questions.
Indicator 1D
The instructional materials reviewed for Kindergarten grade 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 Kindergarten.
- Some lessons may take longer than indicated.
- Students spend at least the first 50 days focusing on the numbers 1-10 before spending 30 days on the teen numbers.
Indicator 1E
The instructional materials reviewed for Kindergarten are consistent with the mathematical progressions in the standards meeting the expectation for this indicator.
- Learning progressions for CCSSM are described at the beginning of each unit. This includes explicit connections to the mathematics of the unit.
- Students work on their understanding of the number five before moving on to the number 10.
- Students work extensively on the domain of K.CC before working with K.OA and K.NBT.
- Intervention strategies suggest that students stay with grade level content while offering support.
Indicator 1F
The instructional materials reviewed for Kindergarten foster coherence through grade level connections.
- Unit test objectives include language shaped by the cluster headings.
- Lessons also include language from cluster heading including comparing numbers, understanding addition, comparing and describing shapes and understanding that teen numbers are a group of ten ones and further ones.
- K.CC, K.NBT and K.OA are all combined within units 3, 4 and 5.
- As place value is introduced, students are expected to use their K.CC and K.OA understanding.
- K.MD and K.G connected to K.OA.
Overview of Gateway 2
Rigor & Mathematical Practices
The materials reviewed for Kindergarten partially meet the requirements for Gateway 2. All three aspects of rigor are present in the materials, but they are not balanced. There is a prevalence of procedural lessons, problems and assessment items. There are few conceptual understanding lessons, problems or assessment items. 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 math practices 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 do not align with the expectations for rigor and mathematical practice.
Gateway 2
v1.0
Criterion 2.1: Rigor
The materials reviewed for Kindergarten partially meet the requirements for this criterion. All three aspects of rigor are present in the materials, but they are not balanced. Students rarely have the opportunity to demonstrate their understanding of addition and subtraction. Many of the fluency exercises focus on numbers greater than five. There are many opportunities for students to act out stories or create real-world problems that successfully address application.
Indicator 2A
The materials reviewed in Kindergarten for this indicator partially meet the requirements of attending to conceptual understanding within the lessons.
- There is an emphasis on routines to build counting skills and number sense. For example, unit 4, lesson 13 uses the 10 Partner concept to help students identify partners for 10 and "Finger Wiggles" is used to reinforce this concept.
- Few examples were found of students being asked to demonstrate their understanding of addition and subtraction as expected in K.OA.A.1. In unit 2 lesson 2, students are asked to demonstrate their understanding by discussing the relationship between the five-frame, their fingers on one hand and the linking cubes in sets of five.
Indicator 2B
The materials reviewed in Kindergarten for this indicator partially meet the requirements by attending to fluency and procedural work within the lessons. In Kindergarten this includes fluently adding and subtracting within 5 (K.OA.A.5).
- This standard is addressed in 25 lessons. Many of these actually focus on numbers greater than five. For example, in unit 2, lessons 4 and 9 spend more time on numbers six to 10. In unit 5, lessons 1 and 3 are labeled as attending to K.OA.A.5, but they focus on numbers larger than five.
Indicator 2C
The materials reviewed in Kindergarten for this indicator meet the requirements by attending to application within the lessons.
- Students are given ample opportunities to act out stories and to create their own real-world problems. For example, in unit 4 students use the grocery store to solve addition and subtraction problems.
- The problem types are attended to and described for the teacher.
Indicator 2D
The materials reviewed in Kindergarten for this indicator partially meet the requirements of providing a balance of rigor.
- There is a lack of emphasis on conceptual understanding within the Kindergarten materials.
- The lesson sections addressing fluency to five are lacking.
Criterion 2.2: Math Practices
The materials reviewed for Kindergarten partially meet the requirements of this criterion. 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 the math practices 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 components in the materials sufficient.
Indicator 2E
The materials reviewed for Kindergarten meet the requirement of this indicator by identifying the 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 in unit 6, MP6 is identified as students are asked to explain three-digit subtraction using place value words. This is a way to use precise vocabulary to enhance the learning.
Indicator 2F
The materials reviewed for Kindergarten partially meet the requirement of this indicator.
- MP1 is consistently expected as students solve problems throughout the year.
- The full meaning of MP5 is not attended to. Students rarely choose their own mathematical tools.
- The final lesson in each unit uses all 8 MPs as the focus instead of letting the focus be content standards. These lessons do not attend to the full meaning of all 8 MPs.
Indicator 2G
Indicator 2G.i
The materials reviewed for Kindergarten partially meet the requirement of this indicator of attending to the standards' emphasis on mathematical reasoning.
- Students are rarely prompted to construct viable arguments.
- In the differentiation cards students are occasionally prompted to discuss their strategies with the group.
- Students are asked to analyze a response from the "Puzzled Penguin," but this is simply an opportunity for catching errors and not true reasoning.
Indicator 2G.ii
The materials reviewed for Kindergarten 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. In unit 3, lesson 8, students are asked, "What are some ways to show the teen number 16?"
- In several lessons are labeled with "Math Talk in Action" as a way to promote 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 Kindergarten 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 "switch the partners" is listed as a vocabulary word in unit 3. In unit 4 the phrase "tiny tumblers" is listed as vocabulary.