Citizen Portal
Sign In

Division recommends Mathspace for secondary and a dual elementary math model; board seeks more info on AI and equity

Charlottesville City Schools School Board · January 10, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Staff recommended Mathspace Virginia for secondary and a split elementary adoption — Bridges (K–3) and STEMScopes (4–5) — after a large teacher-driven review and pilots; the five‑year estimated price was presented and the board pressed for data on equity, screen time and the optional AI tutor feature.

Charlottesville City Schools staff presented the division’s recommended high‑quality instructional materials (HQIM) for mathematics and asked the board to approve the recommendation at its Feb. 5 meeting. After a yearlong review and pilots, staff recommended Mathspace Virginia for secondary courses and a dual elementary approach: Bridges for kindergarten through third grade and STEMScopes for fourth and fifth grade.

Math coordinator Melissa Mitcham summarized the adoption process: the division invited educators, families and community members to serve on adoption committees; educators piloted candidates; more than 100 elementary educators completed grade‑level focus reviews; and staff analyzed alignment to the 2023 Virginia Standards of Learning. "Based on our adoption process and feedback from teachers, math specialists, and instructional coaches, we strongly recommend adopting Mathspace Virginia for secondary next year," Mitcham said.

Staff presented a five‑year estimated cost for the combined elementary and secondary implementation of about $489,339.96 to be paid from the division textbook fund, with breakout estimates for Mathspace (secondary online access and tools), Bridges classroom packages and STEMScopes materials for upper elementary. Staff said physical samples are available for community review through Jan. 30.

Board members asked detailed questions about equity, screen time, print options, and the AI tutor component included in some vendor quotes. Mitcham said some AI features were not piloted locally and the division could purchase packages without the optional AI tutor; staff committed to follow up with more information and to review AI functionality against district AI guidelines. Several board members also asked for data about outcomes for Black students in comparator districts; staff cited positive results in other districts and said the division would provide additional context about demographics and implementation research.

Staff recommended the board vote on the recommendation at its Feb. 5 meeting and pledged to continue gathering information and making samples available for review.