Evolving Signals of Quality in K–12 Math Curriculum: A Decade of Field-Based Learning

• In Event: What Does it Take to Maximize HQIM's Potential to Support Math Instruction and Student Flourishing?

Abstract

ORGANIZATION is an independent nonprofit working with educators from across the country to provide free, evidence-based curriculum quality reports. Before ORGANIZATION launched in 2015, districts lacked an independent source of information about curriculum informed by the expertise of practicing educators. We democratized the process by offering transparent, educator-led reviews that empower schools to choose materials aligned to their students’ needs. We began with reviews in K–8 math and have expanded to K–12 Math, Science, and ELA with inaugural reviews dedicated to Multilingual Learner supports this year. In 2026, we will grow to include pre-K. In this session, we will share trends we’ve seen in math programs over the last decade, where we believe the field is moving, and how we are evolving our signals of quality in response.

Our math review tools have evolved over time to reflect shifts in standards, policy, and research. We actively listen to the field to help us understand how to provide more clarity around the criteria for high quality materials. Most recently, we added more research-based information about multilingual learner supports and strengthened our ability to surface how assessment functions within a curriculum. In the future, we hope to build on that learning to revisit our K–12 math criteria and meet the need for a stronger signal of quality, including:

-Indicators that place greater emphasis on early math learning
-Criteria that elevate teacher-facing supports to support deep content knowledge
-Signals of program efficacy and implementation conditions
-Guidance around in-program technology and emergent innovative features, such as AI or adaptive learning pathways
-Information to help districts evaluate how supplementary materials can either support or compromise coherence

Despite the availability of more and better-reviewed core programs, we see that students continue to fall behind. Recent NAEP data show that fewer than half of 4th and 8th grade students are proficient in math. From our work with educators and school system leaders, we’ve learned that while many newer materials better reflect the standards, their potential is often undercut by the inconsistent or fragmented ways in which they are used. A recent survey confirms that teachers routinely combine materials from multiple sources, including an average of two core programs and five supplements, regardless of district or state expectations (Doan et al., 2024). This kind of improvisation can make it harder to build a coherent instructional system and undermines the trajectory strong materials are designed to support.

Identifying excellence in math curriculum is a foundational step in advancing our mission. But naming strong programs alone cannot transform outcomes. When districts have credible information about what makes for quality materials, they’re more equipped to demand better from the market.
We recognize that more must be done to ensure those materials are understood and used effectively. Our session is a call to action for organizations across the ecosystem to better support districts in identifying and addressing the practical barriers that inhibit meaningful, high-quality use of instructional materials, and to develop tools, training, and strategies that promote coherent, grade-level, equitable math instruction.

Authors

• Courtney Allison, EdReports

• Jake Boesch, EdReports