The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 2 do not meet the expectations for spending the large majority of class time on the major clusters of the grade. Overall, the instructional materials allocate too much instructional time to clusters of standards that are not major work of Grade 2 or on standards that are above Grade 2.

• A large amount of time, 33%, is devoted to off grade-level expectations both above and below Grade 2. The amount of instructional time devoted to Grade 2 standards is 67%, not high enough to meet expectations for this indicator.
• There are a few instances, in units 7 and 8 for example, where the major work of Grade 2 is addressed, but there is not enough to be a large majority of the instructional materials.

The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 2 do not meet the expectations for having the supporting content enhancing focus and coherence simultaneously. Overall, the instructional materials miss opportunities to connect non-major clusters of standards to major clusters. As a result, the supporting content does not engage students in the major work of Grade 2.

• In only two lessons does the supporting content enhance the major work of the grade (lesson 2, unit 2, and lesson 5, unit 4).
• The rest of the supporting work is handled separate from the major work of the grade level.
• Unit 2, lessons 3, 4 and 5, work with different types of grouping and objects for addition and subtraction, but there is not a direct link to multiplication.
• The supporting content is present, but it is treated separately from and not used to enhance the major work of the grade.

The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 2 do not meet the expectations for having an amount of content designated for one grade level as viable for one school year. Overall, the amount of time needed to complete the lessons is not appropriate for a school year of approximately 170-190 days.

• The instructional materials are allocated to last 223 days.
• The Grade 2 materials have 111 lessons that contain up to five activities per lesson.

The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 2 do not meet the expectations for having materials that are consistent with the progressions in the CCSSM. Overall, the materials do not give students extensive work with grade-level problems, and grade-level concepts are not always explicitly related to prior knowledge from earlier grades. Also, the materials do not develop according to the grade-by-grade progressions, with non-grade-level content not being clearly identified.

• The content which includes future grade-level materials is not clearly related to grade-level work as evidenced by lesson 2, unit 5; lesson 4, unit 6; lessons 1, 4 and 6, unit 8; and lessons 1 and 5, unit 10.
• Content does not develop appropriately within the major work of each grade as evidenced in indicators 1a, 1b and 1c. No mention of work in preparation for future grades is identified.
• Due to the amount of time spent on off grade-level work, students are not getting extensive work with grade-level problems. Units 6-13 contain content from future grade levels that limits the amount of time spent on grade level work.
• Units 7 and 9 deal with adding and subtracting within 10 when the work should be within 20.
• Unit 5, lesson 5, explores place value within 100, but students should be working within 1,000.
• There is no evidence of differentiation for below- or above-level students. All students and all learning levels are not accounted for.
• There are no explanations provided for the teacher or student linking prior knowledge from prior grades.
• In unit 1, lessons 4 and 7 cover material that should be in the Grade 1 scope and sequence, and there is not an explicit connection made in the teacher's guide.

The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 2 do not meet the expectations for having materials foster coherence through connections at a single grade. Overall, the materials do not include learning objectives that are visibly shaped by the CCSSM cluster headings, and the materials do not always connect two or more clusters in a domain or two or more domains in a grade when appropriate.

• It is not clear the learning objectives have been shaped by the cluster headings due to the amount of off grade-level objectives.
• Learning objectives attempt to align to cluster headings, but the amount of off grade-level content and objectives make it difficult to align to grade level learning standards.
• The student guides and "at home practice" are not labeled with objectives.
• Units are compartmentalized and lack connections between different units.
• In instances where there are connections, they involve content from future grade levels.
• Lesson 5, unit 4, is the only lesson that connects two clusters together appropriately, but there are many other connections within the grade level that could be made.