SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE: EdReports.org will be undergoing system maintenance from February 21-23, 2025. During this time, our website, email, and other related services may be temporarily unavailable. To contact us or stay informed, please follow us on LinkedIn, Facebook, Bluesky, Threads, and YouTube. We apologize for any inconvenience.

2014

Glencoe Math

Publisher
McGraw-Hill Education
Subject
Math
Grades
6-8
Report Release
01/25/2016
Review Tool Version
v1.0
Format
Core: Comprehensive

EdReports 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)
Does Not Meet Expectations

Materials must meet expectations for standards alignment in order to be reviewed for usability. This rating reflects the overall series average.

Usability (Gateway 3)
NE = Not Eligible. Product did not meet the threshold for review.
Not Eligible
Our Review Process

Learn more about EdReports’ educator-led review process

Learn More

Note on review tool version

See the top of the page to confirm the review tool version used for this report:

Report Overview

Summary of Alignment & Usability: Glencoe Math | Math

Math 6-8

The instructional materials reviewed for Grade 6-8 vary in alignment scoring. Grade 6 materials are not found to focus on the major clusters of the grade level. The materials include a few missed opportunities to make connections between mathematical domains; however, the lessons do provide a coherent trajectory of learning. Materials reviewed for grades 7 and 8 are found to appropriately focus on the major clusters of the grade level and the lessons in these grades include numerous connections between mathematical topics. Grades 7 and 8 were reviewed for rigor and MPs. All three aspects of rigor: procedural, conceptual, and application, are present in these lessons; however, they are not found to be balanced. Procedural problems are abundant, but opportunities for conceptual understanding are lacking. Students are often directed to use a given procedure to use on application problems. The MPs are often mislabeled and over-labeled in Grades 7 and 8. The lessons are found to lack a structure allowing students to determine their own solution path, present their arguments, and justify their conclusions.

EdReports 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)
Does Not Meet Expectations

Materials must meet expectations for standards alignment in order to be reviewed for usability. This rating reflects the overall series average.

Usability (Gateway 3)
Not Rated

EdReports 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)
Partially Meets Expectations

Materials must meet expectations for standards alignment in order to be reviewed for usability. This rating reflects the overall series average.

Usability (Gateway 3)
Not Rated

EdReports 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)
Partially Meets Expectations

Materials must meet expectations for standards alignment in order to be reviewed for usability. This rating reflects the overall series average.

Usability (Gateway 3)
Not Rated