Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Math Curriculum Selection topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board authorizes negotiations to pursue new K–12 math curriculum after committee review
Summary
After a multi-stage review of vendor proposals, the board approved a motion to enter good-faith negotiations with recommended math vendors; staff described the selection process that reduced 15 proposals to six finalists and then produced top recommendations.
The Orange County Schools Board of Education authorized staff to enter negotiations with recommended math curriculum vendors after a district committee’s multi-stage review of proposals. The recommendation follows a two-phase review that narrowed 15 proposals to six finalists and then to top choices for K–8 and 9–12 instruction.
District staff described the review process and the final committee voting. The nut graf: the committee—comprised of district staff, K–12 administrators, math coaches, teachers and representatives for student subgroups—used a published rubric to evaluate 15 vendor proposals, invited six finalists for demonstrations and then held a final vote in which Savvas/Envision Math rose to the top for K–8 and Coherent Math (the 9–12 resource) received the highest support at the high-school level. The board approved staff moving into negotiations and directed that final contract terms return to the board for approval.
Staff said the initial phase produced 15 proposals; a smaller scoring team reduced those to six finalists: Savvas/Envision Math (K–12), McGraw Hill Reveal Math (K–12), HMH Into Math (K–8), Great Minds/Eureka Math (K–8), Curriculum Associates/I-Ready (K–8), and Coherent Math (9–12). Committee members tested demo accounts, reviewed instructional materials and allowed public viewing of materials at the district welcome center. In final voting the K–8 band heavily favored Savvas/Envision (about 70.8% of committee votes in that band), while Coherent Math led in the 9–12 band (64.3%).
Board members asked for clearer cost information, reference checks and implementation details. Several board members said they wanted the final contract returned for formal vote after negotiations. District staff said the current request to the board was for authorization to negotiate in good faith; the final contract, including cost and funding sources, would come back to the board later. The board approved the motion to proceed with negotiations by voice vote.
Staff emphasized plans to pair curriculum selection with professional development focused on explicit instruction in mathematics and to align materials with district schedules (including block scheduling at the high-school level). No final dollar amounts were presented at the meeting; staff said some planned at-risk funds were set aside for curriculum adoption and that trade-offs among existing resources would be evaluated during contract negotiations.
