Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Curriculum Math topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District committee backs Thinking Math for K–6, recommends pilot for grades 7–8
Summary
After a district pilot, the education committee recommended adopting Thinking Math for K–6 and authorized placing the program (with a suggested 7–8 pilot) on the full board agenda. The recommendation cites teacher support, spiraled curricula, manipulatives and coaching; five‑year costs were discussed.
Mister Pine, who led the district’s math‑selection committee, told the Northern Lehigh School District committee that a months‑long pilot produced strong teacher support for Thinking Math for kindergarten through sixth grade and recommended advancing that program to the full board for consideration.
Pine said Thinking Math emphasizes spiraled review of previous concepts, increased number sense and mathematical reasoning, frequent manipulatives and an extensive professional‑learning package that includes about 44 in‑class coaching visits over the first five years. He said pilot teachers rated the program higher on multiple criteria versus the district’s current program and I‑Ready in at least one grade, though he cautioned pilot results should be taken “with a grain of salt.”
The administration outlined the proposed implementation: adopt Thinking Math K–6 beginning in the 2027–28 school year, continue I‑Ready in seventh and eighth grade for now, and pilot Thinking Math with seventh and eighth graders as the vendor releases K–8 materials. Pine estimated a five‑year cost for Thinking Math (K–6) in the range presented to the committee (district summary: roughly $240,000 over five years); an extrapolated K–8 i‑Ready package was described as more expensive in recurring costs. He also recommended purchasing the program’s manipulatives for a consistent launch and using an assigned curriculum materials fund to smooth renewals over time.
Committee members pressed on assessment alignment and added supports: Thinking Math uses more open‑ended assessments than the state PSSA, so administrators proposed supplementing with locally designed checks and continued use of IXL for practice aligned to state‑style items. Members also asked about pacing, possible grade‑level continuity and whether the district could buy a shorter contract; administrators said a five‑year commitment is preferable to ensure stability and teacher investment.
The committee indicated consensus to place a recommendation to adopt Thinking Math (K–6) and to pursue a seventh‑and‑eighth‑grade pilot on the board agenda for the next full meeting. No formal board vote occurred at the committee meeting; the proposal will go before the full board.
