Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Curriculum Adoption topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District committee recommends I‑Ready for middle‑grades math, citing teacher supports and diagnostic alignment
Summary
After a year‑long review of three programs (Illustrative Math, I‑Ready, Envision), the district recommended adopting I‑Ready Classroom Math for middle grades, noting its balance of conceptual and procedural work and compatibility with diagnostic data; the board heard the recommendation but did not vote on adoption tonight.
Instructional leaders told the Board of Education that a multi‑stakeholder committee unanimously recommended I‑Ready Classroom Math as the district’s middle‑grades core curriculum after reviewing Illustrative Math, I‑Ready and Envision.
Jennifer Bauer, instructional leader (speaker 10), summarized the committee’s findings: Illustrative Math offered the deepest conceptual rigor and strongest discourse but would require large instructional shifts and more teacher expertise; Envision scored well on accessibility but lacked depth and was reported as harder for teachers to navigate online. Bauer said I‑Ready struck a practical balance.
“We have selected I‑Ready mainly for the things I’ve already said. It’s really got a nice balance of conceptual understanding and procedural fluency,” Bauer said, adding that the program’s compatibility with the district’s diagnostic testing and built‑in teacher supports were major advantages.
Presenters said the committee used publisher presentations, pilot work (including district sixth‑grade pilots), EdReports/achieve rubrics and teacher feedback that included ESL and special‑education instructors. They noted that while I‑Ready may require supplemental tasks to reach the highest rigors of Illustrative Math, the program’s routines and reporting can help teachers plan interventions and align instruction to diagnostics.
Next steps described by staff include developing a walkthrough rubric, providing professional development on lesson routines and cognitive demand, planning common assessments, and using walk‑through tools to monitor implementation. Board members asked clarifying questions about enrichment for high‑performing students and how additional rigor would be added; staff pointed to Illustrative Math materials and open resources as possible enrichment supplements.
No formal adoption vote was recorded in this portion of the meeting; staff framed this as a recommendation and implementation planning conversation.
