(1989, 2000, 2009, 2011). As such, the new school administrators and classroom teachers need immediate guidance to Common Core State Standards for (CCSSM) will stimulate determine the extent to which the revised Mathematics significant and immediate revisions in state curriculum materials support mathematics assessments and classroom implementation of the CCSSM. Given the curriculum materials. significant changes represented in the Predictably, some publishers already CCSSM, it is unrealistic to expect that that their existing curriculum materials educators in school districts and schools and textbooks align with CCSSM (Gerertz, have the time, resources, and background to 2010); however, as stated by Michael devise independent review processes for Cohen, president of Achieve, Inc., these new standards and would require an “Almost no one thinks there are solid processes in inefficient use of local resources. To provide place to examine the alignment of this guidance, the CCSS Mathematics instructional materials to state standards.” Curriculum Analysis Project provides a set (p. 20) Over the coming years, as textbook of tools to assist textbook selection companies revise their materials in committees, school administrators, and accordance with the CCSSM, many K-12 teachers in the selection of curriculum teachers and administrators will find materials that support implementation of the themselves in the position of selecting new new CCSSM. mathematics curriculum materials. It is With funding from the Brookhill critical that educators have quality resources Foundation and Texas Instruments and and tools to determine if the revised support from the Council of Chief State curriculum materials and textbooks truly School Officers and National Council of align with the scope and intent of the new Supervisors of Mathematics, a national team Standards. of educators with expertise in mathematics, To increase the likelihood that these mathematics education, and school Standards, including the both the Content administration developed a set of Standards and Standards for Mathematical mathematics curriculum materials analysis Practice, are fully implemented in tools. The team included the educators mathematics classrooms across the country, listed on the next page: William S. Bush (chair), Mathematics Educator, University of Louisville, Kentucky J. Briars, Mathematics Education Consultant, Past President, National Council of Supervisors of Mathematics, Pennsylvania Jere Confrey, Mathematics Educator, North Carolina State University Kathleen Cramer, Mathematics Educator, University of Minnesota Carl Lee, Mathematician, University of Kentucky W. Gary Martin, Mathematics Educator, Auburn University, Alabama Michael Mays, Mathematician, West Virginia University Valerie Mills, Supervisor, Mathematics Education, Oakland Schools, Michigan Milner, Mathematician, Arizona State University
(1989, 2000, 2009, 2011). As such, the new Common Core State Standards for Mathematics (CCSSM) will stimulate significant and immediate revisions in state mathematics assessments and classroom curriculum materials. Predictably, some publishers already that their existing curriculum materials and textbooks align with CCSSM (Gerertz, 2010); however, as stated by Michael Cohen, president of Achieve, Inc., “Almost no one thinks there are solid processes in place to examine the alignment of instructional materials to state standards.” (p. 20) Over the coming years, as textbook companies revise their materials in accordance with the CCSSM, many K-12 teachers and administrators will find themselves in the position of selecting new mathematics curriculum materials. It is critical that educators have quality resources and tools to determine if the revised curriculum materials and textbooks truly align with the scope and intent of the new Standards. To increase the likelihood that these Standards, including the both the Content Standards and Standards for Mathematical Practice, are fully implemented in mathematics classrooms across the country, school administrators and classroom teachers need immediate guidance to determine the extent to which the revised curriculum materials support implementation of the CCSSM. Given the significant changes represented in the CCSSM, it is unrealistic to expect that educators in school districts and schools have the time, resources, and background to devise independent review processes for these new standards and would require an inefficient use of local resources. To provide this guidance, the CCSS Mathematics Curriculum Analysis Project provides a set of tools to assist textbook selection committees, school administrators, and teachers in the selection of curriculum materials that support implementation of the new CCSSM. With funding from the Brookhill Foundation and Texas Instruments and support from the Council of Chief State School Officers and National Council of Supervisors of Mathematics, a national team of educators with expertise in mathematics, mathematics education, and school administration developed a set of mathematics curriculum materials analysis tools. The team included the educators listed on the next page: William S. Bush (chair), Mathematics Educator, University of Louisville, Kentucky J. Briars, Mathematics Education Consultant, Past President, National Council of Supervisors of Mathematics, Pennsylvania Jere Confrey, Mathematics Educator, North Carolina State University Kathleen Cramer, Mathematics Educator, University of Minnesota Carl Lee, Mathematician, University of Kentucky W. Gary Martin, Mathematics Educator, Auburn University, Alabama Michael Mays, Mathematician, West Virginia University Valerie Mills, Supervisor, Mathematics Education, Oakland Schools, Michigan Milner, Mathematician, Arizona State University