Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Math Curriculum topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Preliminary data: Bridges in Mathematics pilot sites show larger i‑Ready gains than non‑pilot sites, district says
Summary
District staff presented early results from an elementary Bridges in Mathematics pilot and recommended expanding the pilot; preliminary i‑Ready data showed larger gains at Bridges sites than comparison sites, prompting a planned expansion and continued evaluation.
The Temecula Valley Unified School District received a progress report on an elementary math pilot using the Bridges in Mathematics curriculum on May 13 and heard preliminary data that suggests students exposed to Bridges gained more on the district’s I‑Ready assessment than comparison sites.
Miss Alicia Parra, the district’s director of elementary curriculum, told the board Johns Hopkins University and the Math Learning Center are partnering on a three‑year longitudinal study of the third edition of Bridges in Mathematics. The district initially piloted the curriculum in a cohort of schools and will invite additional elementary campuses to join the study in the next year.
Parra reported winter‑to‑winter I‑Ready gains of about 6.2 percentage points for students at pilot Bridges sites versus roughly 0.78 percentage points for non‑Bridges sites in a cohort comparison the district shared at the meeting. The district cited an effect size figure of 0.76 provided by an external reviewer (Steve Ventura, who works with researcher John Hattie) and said that an effect size over 0.4 is commonly considered meaningful in education research.
The presentation emphasized teacher training time, alignment with the California Math Framework, and parent engagement: the district created a one‑page summary of the framework and a Bridges companion page for parents and conducted targeted professional development. Parra said early results supported expanding the pilot to seven additional schools in the coming year and that a longer timeframe (three years) is needed to measure sustained gains.
Trustees thanked teachers and coaches for the work and asked for continued evaluation and regular reporting. Secondary math staff also described related grading and assessment calibration work for high school algebra and geometry during the same agenda period.
No adoption vote for curricular materials was taken; the board’s next steps are to continue the pilot expansion, monitor end‑of‑year diagnostics, and report followup data to the board.
