Imagine+ Math ™ Texas, Grade 6

Evaluation for 1.1a
Materials include an alignment guide outlining the TEKS, ELPS, and concepts covered, with a rationale for learning paths across grade levels (vertical alignment) and within the same grade level (horizontal alignment) as designed in the materials.

The materials include the Alignment Guide, which outlines the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS), English Language Proficiency Standards (ELPS), and mathematical concepts covered at every grade level. For each module, the guide identifies the specific TEKS and ELPS standards addressed alongside the concepts covered, such as decomposing numbers, building fluency with operations, and working with fractions and proportional reasoning. This structure repeats across every module at every grade level, helping educators clearly see which standards and concepts are addressed within each learning experience.

The “Imagine+ Math K–6 Rationale for Learning Paths” document provides a rationale for learning paths across and within grade levels. For vertical alignment, the document describes how foundational concepts introduced in earlier grades are intentionally extended and applied in later grades, moving from concrete understanding of numbers and quantities to more abstract reasoning with operations, fractions, measurement, and data. For horizontal alignment within a grade level, it describes how the Math Builder pathway supports students who are two or more grade levels below expected through targeted foundational remediation, while the Math Mastery pathway supports grade-level-ready students in deepening conceptual understanding of the same grade-level TEKS concepts.

Evaluation for 1.1b
Materials include an implementation guide with usage recommendations and strategies for effective educator use, such as just-in-time supports, advanced learning, or as a course.

The Implementation Guide identifies two distinct models for how educators can deploy the program across various classroom structures and learning environments. The Scheduled Class Time model describes structured learning periods during which all students work on their individual learning paths, with options for a Rotation model or a Whole-Class model. The Flexible Learning Time model provides four contexts for student engagement outside of structured class periods—Homework/At-Home Practice, Independent Study, After-School Programs, and Tutoring or 1:1 Instruction—allowing students to apply and extend what they are learning in core instruction beyond the scheduled class period.

The Teacher Guide includes the “Usage Recommendations” table, which frames consistent usage as the standard for ensuring steady progress and skill development throughout the school year. The table provides grade-differentiated time allotments—a minimum of 45 minutes per week for grades K–2 and a minimum of 60 minutes per week for grades 3+—reflecting the program’s recognition that instructional needs differ across grade bands. Across all grades, the lesson completion expectation is one or two lessons per week, with a school-year goal of 30 lessons passed. These recommendations apply regardless of which implementation model the educator selects, establishing a consistent usage floor across both structured class time and flexible learning contexts.

Evaluation for 1.1c
Materials include a TEKS correlation guide with recommended skill entry points based on diagnostic assessment results.

The “Assessment and Placement Options in Imagine+ Math” document describes how embedded Mastery Checks generate diagnostic data that the program uses to determine each student’s skill entry point. Based on Mastery Check performance, students are placed in either the Math Mastery or Math Builder pathway, with entry points determined by demonstrated readiness within TEKS-aligned instructional domains. This data-driven placement ensures that students begin instruction at the point most appropriate to their current level of understanding rather than by grade level alone. Educators retain the ability to manually review and adjust placement at any time.

The materials include a TEKS correlation guide Crosswalk: NWEA Diagnostic Domains with Imagine+ Math Lesson Domains maps each NWEA MAP® Growth™ assessment domain to the corresponding TEKS-aligned lesson domains in Imagine+ Math, establishing the connection between diagnostic results and recommended skill entry points. When NWEA MAP® Growth™ data is integrated, the program uses domain-level Rasch unit (RIT) scores to determine an appropriate starting point within each TEKS-aligned instructional domain. The accompanying RIT score range table specifies the score ranges associated with each grade level, supporting instructional placement decisions. Students begin at an entry level matched to their performance in each domain and progress through increasingly complex TEKS-aligned content as mastery is demonstrated.

The materials include an Alignment Guide that correlates digital lessons in both the Math Mastery and Math Builder pathways to specific TEKS, including content and mathematical process standards. This guide functions as a TEKS correlation guide by identifying which standards are addressed within each lesson, allowing educators to connect diagnostic assessment results to targeted skill entry points within the program’s instructional sequence. Together with the NWEA Crosswalk and the embedded Mastery Check system, the Alignment Guide supports educators in identifying where individual students should enter the instructional pathway based on their demonstrated performance.

Evaluation for 1.1d
Materials include protocols with corresponding guidance for unit and lesson internalization.

The Teacher Guide clearly explains the unit and lesson internalization protocols. These protocols provide logistical support and guidance for successful program implementation while also supporting educators in making instructional plans and informed decisions related to student pathways, learning needs, and instructional adjustments.

The materials include two instructional protocols that guide educators through unit and lesson internalization. For unit internalization, both protocols direct educators to review unit overviews to internalize the TEKS-aligned concepts, mathematical vocabulary, and suggested instructional activities. For lesson internalization, educators preview lesson objectives and alignment to the TEKS in the Assignment Builder and use its “Teacher Supports” section to prepare individualized support and anticipate student misconceptions.

Evaluation for 1.1e
Materials include resources and guidance for instructional leaders to support educators with implementing the materials as designed.

The Imagine+ Math Instructional Leader Guide provides instructional leaders with a clear road map for launching and sustaining a digital supplemental math program. The guide outlines practical steps for building educator capacity, establishing school-wide systems, monitoring usage and effectiveness, and ensuring strong student outcomes. It is organized by implementation phases and offers action items and tips that leaders can use as a checklist. The guide also supports distributed leadership by identifying how math campus coordinators, specialists, coaches, and grade-level leaders can assist with implementation. Together, these features equip instructional leaders to plan, monitor, and sustain the program across a campus.

The “First 30/60/90 Days for Administrators” document provides instructional leaders with sequenced resources and guidance for supporting educators throughout implementation. The learning path organizes administrator actions across three phases, with each phase building on the previous one to sustain program fidelity over time. In the 90-day phase, administrators access step-by-step Help Center articles to monitor progress and track student growth. Resources include guides for viewing the Student Progress Report, the Mastery Report, and the Benchmark Report, as well as directions for exporting student data and managing benchmark assessments. Together, these tools support instructional leaders in using data to guide educator practice and ensure the program is implemented as designed.

Evaluation for 1.2a
If designed to be static, materials include detailed lesson plans with learning objectives, teacher and student materials, lesson components with suggested timeframes, and assessment resources aligned with the TEKS and ELPS.

This guidance is not applicable because the program is not designed to be static.

This guidance is not applicable to the program.

Evaluation for 1.2b
If designed to be adaptive, materials include detailed lesson overviews with learning objectives, lesson components with suggested timeframes, and assessment resources aligned with the TEKS and ELPS.

Each lesson preview page includes a detailed overview with the lesson objective, aligned domain, and the relevant TEKS. For example, a lesson preview lists the objective “Compute quotients of fractions within and without context” under the “Overview” heading, identifies a “Number and Operations” unit under the “Domain” heading, and displays the aligned TEKS standard under the “Standards” heading. The “English Language Support” section within the “Teacher Supports” section identifies aligned ELPS for each lesson and provides educators with language support guidance alongside the TEKS-aligned content objectives.

The Teacher Guide provides unit overviews, suggested lesson time frames, and additional lesson component information to support implementation. The TEKS and ELPS are embedded within the lessons and Mastery Checks, which serve as the program’s assessments throughout the instructional materials.

Evaluation for 1.2c
Materials contain support for families in Spanish and English for each unit, with suggestions on supporting the progress of their student(s).

The Teacher Guide includes a home support checklist in English and Spanish, organized by grade level and broken down by unit. For each unit, families receive activity suggestions designed to reinforce classroom learning using everyday materials at home. Activities connect grade-level math skills to everyday life, and families use the checklist to track completed activities with their child. Together, the English and Spanish versions ensure all families can access unit-level guidance to support their student’s progress.

The materials provide families with unit-by-unit activity suggestions in English and Spanish that are explicitly aligned to the TEKS. Each activity reinforces classroom learning using everyday materials, and the materials equip families with practical tips for supporting their child, such as keeping practice sessions to 10–15 minutes and connecting math to real-life situations.

Evaluation for 2.1a
Materials include the definition and intended purpose for the types of instructional assessments.

The Implementation Guide defines Mastery Checks as instructional assessments designed to provide timely feedback and determine next steps for students rather than serve as summative assessments for grading. In the grades 3–6 Mastery pathway, each lesson includes two seven-item Mastery Checks, one at the start and one at the end, that adapt pacing based on student performance. Students who score 85 percent or higher on the first Mastery Check move to the next lesson, while students who score below 85 percent receive Guided Learning and Practice before completing the second Mastery Check. Educators review Mastery Check results in reports to monitor student progress and identify when students may need additional support.

The Teacher Guide defines Mastery Checks as instructional assessments designed to function as diagnostic and formative measures, explicitly noting they are not used for summative evaluation or grading. Educators use Mastery Check data to monitor student progress in the “Reports” section, determine student readiness to move forward, and guide targeted reteaching, intervention, or enrichment. Furthermore, educators preview Mastery Checks in the Assignment Builder to align instruction with assessment expectations and review answer rationales to understand the reasoning behind correct and incorrect student responses. This guidance supports educators with lesson planning, delivering instruction, and making data-driven instructional decisions throughout the school year.

The Teacher Guide defines diagnostic assessments and describes their purpose as identifying students’ prior knowledge, misconceptions, and areas needing additional support before instruction or independent practice begins. When administered at the start of a lesson, Mastery Checks serve this diagnostic function by establishing baseline data on a student’s foundational knowledge and proficiency. Educators use this diagnostic data to preview content in advance, anticipate potential misconceptions, and adjust instruction before introducing new material.

Evaluation for 2.1b
Materials include guidance to ensure consistent and accurate administration of instructional assessments.

The Teacher Guide includes a “Monitoring Progress with Mastery Checks” section that provides clear guidance for consistent and accurate administration of instructional assessments. The section outlines how educators preview Mastery Checks in the Assignment Builder before students complete them, review key skills and concepts in advance, and anticipate potential misconceptions to adjust instruction before the assessment begins. Educators also review answer rationales for each Mastery Check item to understand the reasoning behind correct and incorrect responses, supporting consistent interpretation of results across classrooms.

The materials include an “Assessment and Placement Options in Imagine+ Math” document that supports consistent administration of instructional assessments across both the Mastery and Builder pathways. The Implementation Guide explains how the program uses student data to adjust lesson sequencing, pacing, and skill progression and outlines clear expectations for how educators monitor and review student results in the “Reports” section to ensure instruction remains aligned with student needs.

Evaluation for 2.1c
Digital assessments include printable versions and accommodations, including text-to-speech, content and language supports, and calculators, that educators can enable or disable to support individual students.

In the grades 3–6 Math Mastery pathway, digital assessments include printable versions that educators can access to support individual students, including Mastery Checks printed from the Assignment Builder. The materials provide text-to-speech in Mastery Check assessments; however, they do not provide embedded calculators or language supports that educators can enable or disable.

Through student profile settings, educators can enable and disable text-to-speech for individual students needing the accommodation. However, the materials do not include content and language supporst that educators can enable or disable, nor do they include an embedded calculator accommodation.

Evaluation for 2.1d
Materials include diagnostic assessments with TEKS-aligned tasks or questions, including interactive item types with varying complexity levels.

Diagnostic assessments include more than two unique interactive item types, including drag-and-drop, multiple-choice, text entry, and matching tasks, that are aligned with the TEKS. In a grade 6 Mastery Check, students select the correct ordering of rational numbers using a number line.

The materials include diagnostic assessments with TEKS-aligned tasks and questions designed with more than two levels of complexity. Questions range from basic recall to application of skills and concepts and extend to higher-order thinking such as analysis, synthesis, and strategic thinking.

Evaluation for 2.1e
Materials include a variety of formative assessments with TEKS-aligned tasks or questions, including interactive item types with varying complexity levels.

The materials include formative assessments with TEKS-aligned tasks and questions designed with more than two varying levels of complexity. Questions range from basic recall to application of skills and concepts and extend to higher-order thinking such as analysis, synthesis, and strategic thinking.

Formative assessments include more than two unique interactive item types, including drag-and-drop, multiple-choice, text-entry, and multi-select tasks, that are aligned to the TEKS. Students engage with these item types across varying levels of complexity, from conceptual understanding and procedural fluency to application and higher-order thinking.

Evaluation for 2.2a
Instructional assessments include scoring information and guidance for interpreting student performance, including rationale for each correct and incorrect response.

The Implementation Guide provides scoring information and guidance for interpreting student performance through lesson score and standards proficiency status categories. Educators use the Class Summary Report and Cumulative Standards Proficiency Report to monitor achievement and identify students who may need support. The guide defines three performance levels—meeting the goal, approaching the goal, and below the goal—and provides suggested instructional actions for each level to guide targeted follow-up instruction and practice.

The Implementation Guide includes an “Answer Rationales” section that explains the reasoning behind correct and incorrect Mastery Check responses. For correct responses, rationales describe the reasoning used to reach the solution. For incorrect responses, rationales describe likely student thinking, identify associated misconceptions, and explain how to solve the problem correctly. Educators access answer rationales through the Student Progress Report or by previewing Mastery Check items in the Assignment Builder.

Evaluation for 2.2b
Materials provide guidance for the use of included tasks and activities to respond to student trends in performance on assessments.

The Implementation Guide provides guidance for using included tasks and activities to respond to student trends in performance on assessments. Educators use Mastery Check results to determine next instructional moves, such as implementing a Teacher Support for students who do not consistently demonstrate mastery, selecting an Enrichment and Extension activity for students who consistently perform well, or reviewing answer rationales to identify misconceptions for students who demonstrate low performance on a Mastery Check.

The Teacher Guide includes Instructional Decision-Making Protocols that provide cadence-based guidance for reviewing assessment data and making instructional decisions about student placement, support needs, and pathway adjustments. On a weekly basis, educators review the Usage Report and Class Summary Report to identify students who may need support or reteaching. On a biweekly basis, educators use the Student Progress Report and Class Progress Report to check performance patterns across Mastery Checks and identify clusters of students struggling with similar skills. On a monthly basis, educators use the Cumulative Standards Proficiency Report to analyze the TEKS-level evidence and plan short- and long-term instruction to support coherence between the TEKS concepts and skills.

Evaluation for 2.2c
Materials include tools for teachers to track student progress and growth, and tools for students to track their own progress and growth.

The Implementation Guide includes reporting tools that allow educators to monitor student progress and growth across domains and learning pathways. Educators use the Class Summary Report to identify students who need support and lessons to reteach, the Class Progress Report to monitor progress across lessons and domains and pinpoint class-wide trends, the Student Progress Report to view individual student lesson activity and performance, and the Cumulative Standards Proficiency Report to monitor TEKS proficiency at the class and student levels and plan reteaching and practice.

The Implementation Guide includes progress-monitoring tools that allow students to track their own learning path progress and growth over time. The “My Progress” page shows students their active time and lesson progress for the current week and provides a printable school-year view of lessons completed, including completion dates and scores. Additionally, printable Lesson Trackers help students set weekly usage goals, reflect on their effort, and notice growth over time, while progress charts provide a visual way for students to recognize milestones and maintain momentum across weeks.

Evaluation for 2.2d
If designed to be static, materials provide prompts and guidance to support educators in conducting frequent checks for understanding at key points throughout each lesson or activity.

This guidance is not applicable because the program is not designed to be static.

This guidance is not applicable to the program.

Evaluation for 2.2e
If designed to be adaptive, materials provide frequent checks for understanding at key points throughout each lesson or activity.

The materials include adaptive, frequent Mastery Checks embedded at key points throughout lessons in the Mastery and Builder pathways to monitor student understanding. Mastery Check results provide immediate feedback and automatically adjust lesson progression, supports, and next steps based on student performance.

In the Mastery pathway, students complete two seven-item Mastery Checks at the beginning and end of each lesson. Students who meet the mastery threshold on the first Mastery Check advance to the next lesson, while students who score below the threshold receive Guided Learning and Practice before completing the second Mastery Check. In the Builder pathway, students encounter up to three Mastery Checks within each lesson at the start, mid-lesson, and end. Students who do not pass receive Instruction, Supported Practice, or Independent Practice activities tailored to their needs before moving forward.

Evaluation for 3.1a
Materials include explicit educator guidance for lessons or activities scaffolded for students who have not yet reached proficiency in prerequisite or grade-level concepts and skills.

The materials include explicit educator guidance for scaffolded support through the “Support for Struggling Students” component in each lesson. The materials direct educators to use pre-teaching activities to strengthen prerequisite understanding before grade-level tasks. Reteaching supports include step-by-step educator directions and worked examples that help educators address misconceptions and build the conceptual understanding students need for more complex concepts. These scaffolded supports are embedded within lesson guidance to move students toward grade-level proficiency.

The program includes explicit educator guidance for lessons and activities scaffolded for students who have not yet reached proficiency in prerequisite or grade-level concepts and skills. For example, educators assign graphic organizers based on students’ specific math needs. Students who need additional support use the graphic organizer and reference it as a guide during practice, while more advanced students use a similar organizer to analyze and solve complex problems.

Evaluation for 3.1b
Materials include explicit educator guidance for language supports, including pre-teaching and embedded supports for developing academic vocabulary and unfamiliar references in text.

The materials include explicit educator guidance for language supports within the “Support for Struggling Students” component in each lesson. The materials direct educators to pre-teach academic vocabulary related to concepts using representations and educator-guided examples to build understanding before grade-level instruction. Embedded supports within reteaching activities provide educator directions and worked examples that reinforce mathematical language, help educators address misconceptions, and strengthen conceptual understanding.

The program includes explicit educator guidance for embedded language supports for developing academic vocabulary and addressing unfamiliar references in text. For example, the materials guide educators to introduce mathematical vocabulary using student-friendly definitions, visual representations, real-world examples, and sentence frames that help students connect new terms to mathematical concepts. These embedded supports develop academic language and increase students’ abilities to engage in mathematical discussions and problem-solving activities.

Evaluation for 3.1c
Materials include explicit educator guidance for enrichment and extension activities for students who have demonstrated proficiency in grade-level and above grade-level content and skills.

In the “Enrichment and Extension” section of the Teacher Guide, the materials provide multiple opportunities to deepen mathematical understanding and challenge students who have demonstrated proficiency in grade-level and above-grade-level concepts and skills. The section includes enrichment and extension activities that increase rigor and complexity while encouraging students to extend their mathematical thinking beyond initial mastery. Additionally, the Assignment Builder allows educators to assign above-grade-level mathematical content and skills to students who have demonstrated proficiency. Together, these resources support educators in providing differentiated learning experiences that promote continued mathematical growth and challenge students at both grade-level and above-grade-level proficiency.

The program provides explicit educator guidance for extending learning opportunities for students who have demonstrated mastery of grade-level content and skills. Educators use student performance data to identify learners ready for more advanced work and access activities that deepen understanding and promote higher-level thinking. Additionally, the Assignment Builder allows educators to customize and assign enrichment tasks that encourage students to apply mathematical concepts in more complex and meaningful ways.

Evaluation for 3.1d
Digital materials include accommodations, including text-to-speech, content and language supports, and calculators that educators can enable or disable to support individual students.

The “Assistive Technology” section of the Implementation Guide provides guidance for enabling and disabling text-to-speech as an accessibility feature for students. The guide provides specific educator instructions for using text-to-speech to support language accessibility during instruction. The materials also note that calculators are only available when intentionally embedded in an activity and state that students who need a calculator as an accommodation must receive a physical calculator. Moreover, the materials do not include educator guidance for enabling or disabling calculator accommodations for individual students within the digital platform. Furthermore, available supports such as interactive hints, visual supports, and clickable vocabulary definitions are accessible to all students and cannot be toggled for individuals, and the materials reference language translation rather than content and language supports as defined by the indicator.

The program includes text-to-speech that educators can enable or disable to support individual students. The materials also include interactive hints; visual supports such as diagrams, models, and manipulatives; simplified language options; and clickable definitions for key math vocabulary. However, these content and language supports are available to all students, and educators cannot enable or disable them for individual students.

Evaluation for 3.1e
Materials include educator guidance on offering options and supports for students to demonstrate understanding of mathematical concepts in various ways, such as perform, express, and represent.

The materials include educator guidance within the Teacher Guide and Implementation Guide for supporting students in demonstrating understanding of mathematical concepts in multiple ways. The Teacher Guide provides guidance for using the “Problem-Solving Graphic Organizer,” which supports students in making sense of mathematical concepts through a structured problem-solving process, encouraging students to explain their thinking, persevere through challenges, and represent understanding in an organized format. Additionally, “Universal Design for Learning” in the Implementation Guide explains how students engage with mathematical concepts through multiple means of representation, action and expression, and engagement, allowing students to perform, express, and represent mathematical thinking in varied ways to deepen their understanding and support access to learning.

The program includes educator guidance for offering options and supports for students to demonstrate understanding of mathematical concepts through performing, expressing, and representing their thinking. Math Journaling resources provide educators with reflection prompts, graphic organizers, problem-solving reflections, and end-of-lesson organizers that support students in explaining strategies, justifying solutions, and reflecting on their learning. Furthermore, the “Demonstrating Understanding” section offers alternative methods for students to show mastery, such as using movement to model concepts on a number line, creating visual representations, and participating in mathematical discussions with peers.

Evaluation for 3.2a
Materials include explicit (direct) prompts and guidance for educators to build knowledge by activating prior knowledge, anchoring big ideas, and highlighting and connecting key patterns, features, and relationships through multiple means of representation.

The “Building the Foundation” section includes educator guidance for activating prior knowledge and anchoring big ideas through connections to prerequisite skills and educator-directed instructional strategies. This section supports educators in helping students build foundational understanding before new learning.

In unit 2, “Proportionality,” the materials anchor the big idea that ratios, rates, and unit rates connect to proportional relationships in real-world contexts such as recipes, maps, and speed, framing this understanding as foundational for later work with slope and linear functions. The Ratio Match-Up fluency activity highlights and connects this key relationship through multiple means of representation: Students match ratio cards showing equivalent ratios, organize their findings into a ratio table, and then create a graph of the table to identify the resulting straight-line relationship, discussing as a class how the table and graph both demonstrate the same proportional reasoning. This progression from symbolic ratio cards to a tabular representation to a graphical model gives students multiple ways of seeing how the same relationship can be represented.

The Imagine+ Math supplemental program includes explicit prompts and guidance for educators to build knowledge by activating prior learning, anchoring big mathematical ideas, and highlighting key patterns, features, and relationships through multiple means of representation. Grade 6 Unit Overviews provide an instructional framework that intentionally connects prerequisite understanding to new mathematical concepts through vocabulary development, fluency routines, problem-solving activities, interleaved practice, and Practice for Long-Term Learning. Within each lesson, “Developing Vocabulary” prompts educators to connect mathematical language to visual representations, real-world contexts, and sentence frames, while “Support for Struggling Students” provides explicit guidance for using manipulatives, models, symbols, drawings, and questioning techniques to help students identify patterns, examine mathematical features, and connect relationships among concepts. These recurring instructional supports provide educators with explicit guidance for representing and connecting mathematical ideas through concrete, visual, verbal, and symbolic representations across the learning progression.

Evaluation for 3.2b
If designed to be static, materials include educator guidance for effective lesson delivery and facilitation using various instructional approaches.

This guidance is not applicable because the program is not designed to be static.

This guidance is not applicable to the program.

Evaluation for 3.2c
Materials include multi-tiered intervention methods for various types of practice and structures and educator guidance to support effective implementation.

The materials provide multiple types of practice opportunities, including Guided Practice through educator questioning, intervention supports, and scaffolded instruction, as well as Independent Practice through lesson activities and problem-solving tasks. The materials also include multiple instructional structures, including whole-group instruction, small-group intervention, and individualized support for students who need additional assistance. Additionally, the materials provide explicit educator guidance for implementation through educator tips, intervention recommendations, “Support for Struggling Students” sections, “Common Misconception” Teacher Supports, and monitoring suggestions, supporting educators in effectively implementing multitiered intervention methods.

The materials also include collaborative practice opportunities through structured partner and small-group activities, such as fluency and problem-solving activities, in which students work together to solve problems, compare strategies, and justify their reasoning with peers.

Evaluation for 3.2d
Materials include enrichment and extension methods that support various forms of engagement, and guidance to support educators in effective implementation.

The materials include enrichment and extension methods that support multiple forms of engagement, including independent work, collaborative learning, choice boards, creative problem-solving, reflection, discussion, and peer sharing. Additionally, the Teacher Guide provides explicit educator guidance for implementation through sequenced steps that explain how to select activities, prepare materials, establish expectations, determine instructional settings, facilitate participation, and provide feedback throughout the enrichment process.

The program includes educator-facing enrichment and extension methods that support various forms of engagement and guidance. For example, educators access Enrichment and Extension activities through the “Teacher Supports” section of the Assignment Builder to deepen student understanding and increase engagement. These methods support differentiated instruction, allowing educators to foster critical thinking, encourage curiosity, and challenge students through deeper learning experiences.

Evaluation for 3.2e
Materials include prompts and guidance to support educators in providing timely feedback during lesson delivery.

“Justifying Solution Strategies” in the Teacher Guide provides educator guidance to support timely feedback during instruction. This section provides question stems that prompt educators to check for understanding, gauge student thinking, and provide immediate feedback during lesson delivery. These formative prompts support educators in monitoring student understanding, identifying misconceptions or areas for improvement, and adjusting instruction or reteaching when necessary to support student progress.

The program includes educator prompts and guidance for providing timely feedback during lesson delivery. For example, the STEM-Focused Applications Task Guide provides introductory questions and prompts that encourage students to explain and justify their thinking. During instruction, educators use Class Summary, Student Progress, and Assignment Summary Reports to monitor student responses, scores, and lesson progress. The materials also prompt educators to provide immediate support through guided questions, clarification, small-group instruction, and reteaching opportunities using the “Teacher Supports” section within the Assignment Builder.

Evaluation for 3.3a
If designed to be static, materials include educator guidance on providing and incorporating linguistic accommodations for all levels of language proficiency [as defined by the English Language Proficiency Standards (ELPS)], which are designed to engage students in using increasingly more academic language.

This guidance is not applicable because the program is not designed to be static.

This guidance is not applicable to the program.

Evaluation for 3.3b
If designed to be adaptive, materials include embedded linguistic accommodations for all levels of language proficiency [as defined by the English Language Proficiency Standards (ELPS)], which are designed to engage students in using increasingly more academic language.

The “Instructional Tools and Strategies” section supports linguistic accommodations by providing word walls, math language journals, the Frayer model, visual representations, cross-linguistic connections, and collaborative discourse routines. These recurring supports help students build, practice, and extend academic mathematical vocabulary, moving from foundational understanding, such as defining a term with visuals and real-life examples, toward more complex application, such as justifying strategies and comparing vocabulary words in discussion. Together, these tools give educators explicit guidance for engaging students in increasingly sophisticated mathematical language use across instruction.

The materials also provide differentiated linguistic accommodations based on a student’s bilingual program model and language proficiency trajectory. The Teacher Guide outlines distinct guidance for Transitional Bilingual Early Exit, Transitional Bilingual Late Exit, Dual-Language One-Way, and Dual-Language Two-Way programs, specifying how to adjust the use of Spanish- and English-language lessons, sentence frames, and written response expectations as a student’s English proficiency increases. This progression from primarily Spanish-language support with structured scaffolds toward increasing English-language production engages students in using increasingly complex academic mathematical language as their proficiency develops.

The Imagine+ Math program includes embedded linguistic accommodations designed to support students at varying levels of English language proficiency, aligned with the ELPS. Each lesson includes embedded English language supports used during instruction to scaffold understanding. Additionally, the materials support use of academic language through sentence frames such as “The number ______ represents ______ objects,” as well as modeled responses that help students explain their mathematical thinking. The “Problem-Solving Graphic Organizer,” available in English and Spanish, extends this accommodation by giving students bilingual access to the same problem-solving structure, allowing them to engage with mathematical content in their language of instruction while building toward academic English.

Evaluation for 3.3c
Materials include implementation guidance to support educators in effectively using the materials in state-approved bilingual/ESL programs.

The materials include guidance within the Implementation Guide for supporting language access and implementation for emergent bilingual students. The guide provides explicit educator guidance on how to enable and use built-in language supports, including translation features that support over 60 languages and provide translation into 45 languages. Step-by-step instructions help educators activate these supports and increase access to instruction for emergent bilingual students. Additionally, the guide contains a dedicated section for bilingual and English as a Second Language (ESL) programs that outlines how the language-support features can be implemented within those instructional settings.

The program includes implementation guidance to support educators in using the materials within state-approved bilingual and ESL programs. For example, the program offers Spanish versions of grades K–6 lessons and the student interface, along with on-screen translations in 60+ languages and audio translations in 45 languages. These language-support features help emergent bilingual students access the instructional materials.

Evaluation for 3.3d
Materials include embedded guidance to support emergent bilingual students in developing academic vocabulary, increasing comprehension, building background knowledge, and making cross-linguistic connections through oral and written discourse.

The “Facilitating Discourse with Mathematical Vocabulary” section of the Teacher Guide provides educator and student question stems to support oral and written discourse around mathematics. The question stems offer structured opportunities for students to discuss, explain, and justify their reasoning in meaningful ways, helping reduce language barriers while strengthening conceptual understanding. Additionally, the materials provide educators with practical tools to support student language development while maintaining a focus on content understanding and mathematical proficiency.

The materials include embedded guidance to support emergent bilingual students in developing academic vocabulary and increasing comprehension. The materials also help students build background knowledge and make cross-linguistic connections through oral and written discourse. For example, educators use Frayer models, sentence stems, writing frames, math journals, and graphic organizers to help students connect mathematical vocabulary to prior knowledge and explain their reasoning through both speaking and writing. The materials also support cross-linguistic connections by allowing students to express their understanding in Spanish and transition to English through guided writing activities, strengthening academic language while communicating mathematical thinking.

Evaluation for 3.3e
If designed for dual language immersion (DLI) programs, materials include resources that outline opportunities to address metalinguistic transfer from English to the partner language.

This guidance is not applicable because the program is not designed for dual language immersion (DLI) programs.

This guidance is not applicable to the program.

Evaluation for 4.1a
Practice opportunities throughout learning pathways (including instructional assessments) require students to demonstrate depth of understanding aligned to the TEKS.

The materials provide instructional assessments that require students to demonstrate depth of understanding aligned to the TEKS, giving educators accurate data on students’ grade-level proficiency to inform instructional decisions. For example, students demonstrate understanding through interactive, technology-enhanced questions in the Mastery Check, which aligns with the full intent of the TEKS by requiring students to show conceptual understanding, procedural fluency, and application.

The materials provide practice opportunities throughout learning pathways that require students to demonstrate depth of understanding aligned with the TEKS. The instructional design progresses students through Guided Learning, Practice, and Mastery Check experiences that support conceptual understanding, procedural fluency, and application of mathematical knowledge at increasing levels of rigor. For example, within the Convert Units of Measure I learning pathway, students begin with Guided Learning, engaging with visual models, measurement tools, and real-world examples to build conceptual understanding of the relationships between customary and metric units. Students then engage in practice activities that require them to convert measurements, compare equivalent quantities, and solve measurement problems, with tasks that increase in complexity and require applying conversion strategies to multi-step, real-world situations. The pathway culminates in a Mastery Check, in which students select appropriate conversion methods, reason about equivalent measures, and solve problems aligned to the TEKS, moving beyond procedural calculations to demonstrate deeper understanding of measurement concepts.

Evaluation for 4.1b
Questions and tasks, including enrichment and extension materials, increase in rigor and complexity, leading to grade-level and above grade-level proficiency in the mathematics TEKS.

The Imagine+ Math program provides questions and tasks that increase in rigor and complexity, leading to grade-level and above grade-level proficiency in the mathematics TEKS. Students experience rigor through tasks that promote critical thinking, problem-solving, and real-world application using concrete, representational, and abstract models that connect concepts across learning pathways. For example, educators receive detailed, lesson-specific enrichment and extension strategies that increase in rigor and complexity, including a STEM-focused, project-based learning experience that enables students to extend and apply their understanding beyond the grade-level TEKS expectations.

The materials provide questions, tasks, and enrichment opportunities that increase in rigor and complexity, leading to grade-level and above-grade-level proficiency in the mathematics TEKS. The program uses assessment-based recommendations and adaptive learning pathways so students engage with content that is appropriately challenging. Based on domain-level performance data, students receive personalized learning experiences that target areas of need while continuing to engage with grade-level content in domains where they demonstrate proficiency. Mastery Checks guide progression by allowing students to move beyond content they have mastered. Additionally, educators use the Assignment Builder to create customized assignments from the TEKS-aligned content library, selecting lessons, STEM-focused application tasks, and practice activities that extend learning beyond a student’s assigned pathway. For example, in a grade 6 enrichment activity, students apply their knowledge of adding and subtracting fractions by creating a fraction art project, using different shapes and colors to represent fractional parts of the whole artwork.

Evaluation for 4.2a
Materials demonstrate coherence across concepts horizontally within the grade level by connecting patterns, big ideas, and relationships.

The Imagine+ Math program demonstrates coherence across concepts horizontally within the grade level by intentionally connecting mathematical patterns, big ideas, and relationships across content domains. The grade 6 “Horizontal Concept Map” shows how students’ understanding of rational numbers begins with representing, comparing, and ordering positive and negative numbers on a number line and then extends as students perform operations with integers and multiply and divide positive rational numbers. Students apply these same rational number skills within “Proportionality,” as they solve problems involving ratios, rates, percentages, and measurement conversions, using ratio reasoning to analyze relationships between quantities and solve real-world problems involving unit rates and pricing.

The materials demonstrate horizontal coherence within the grade level by connecting patterns, big ideas, and relationships. For example, the grade 6 “Expressions, Equations, and Relationships” unit guides educators in helping students transition from arithmetic reasoning to algebraic thinking. Students build on their prior understanding of operations with whole numbers, fractions, and decimals as they learn to write, interpret, and evaluate algebraic expressions, applying the order of operations and properties such as the distributive, associative, and commutative properties to generate equivalent expressions. Students then solve one-step equations and inequalities using models, algebra tiles, and symbolic representations, such as in the Equation Mystery Match activity, reinforcing the relationship between concrete models and abstract algebraic reasoning.

Evaluation for 4.2b
Materials demonstrate coherence vertically across concepts and grade bands, including connections from grades 3–12, by connecting patterns, big ideas, and relationships.

The Imagine+ Math program demonstrates coherence vertically across concepts and grade bands by connecting patterns, big ideas, and mathematical relationships across grades 3-12. For example, the grade 6 “Expressions, Equations, and Relationships” unit builds on students’ prior experiences with numerical patterns, operations, and problem-solving from grades 4 and 5, where students analyze numerical patterns, evaluate numerical expressions, and solve problems involving the four operations with whole numbers, fractions, and decimals. Building on this foundation, grade 6 students transition from arithmetic reasoning to algebraic thinking by writing, interpreting, and evaluating algebraic expressions, applying the order of operations and the distributive, associative, and commutative properties to generate equivalent expressions. Students also move from solving numerical problems to representing relationships with variables, equations, and inequalities, using models, algebra tiles, and balance-scale representations to connect concrete and visual understandings developed in earlier grades to abstract algebraic representations. These activities prepare students for more advanced algebraic concepts in later grades.

The materials demonstrate coherence vertically across concepts and grade bands and make connections from grades 3–12 by connecting patterns, big ideas, and relationships. The materials include a “Vertical Concept Map” that identifies explicit connections to prior knowledge and future mathematical concepts, supporting vertical coherence across grade levels aligned to the TEKS. For example, in grade 6, students begin formal work with ratios and rates, building on earlier multiplicative reasoning, representing ratios using models, tables, and graphs, and solving problems involving equivalent ratios. Unit concepts extend into rates and unit rates, including proportional relationships in real-world contexts such as recipes, maps, and speed, promoting an understanding of proportionality that is foundational for later study of slope and linear functions. The Teacher Guide includes reflection questions asking how a problem connects to prior learning and why the problem matters in mathematics, prompting students to make connections across their developing understanding.

Evaluation for 4.2c
Materials demonstrate coherence across lessons or activities by connecting students’ prior knowledge of concepts and procedures to the mathematical concepts to be learned in the current grade level and future grade levels.

The Imagine+ Math program demonstrates coherence across lessons and activities through structural program features that explicitly connect prior knowledge to current and future learning. The “Lesson Coherence Map” identifies relationships among lessons within and across domains, enabling educators to target reinforcement or enrichment based on students’ existing understanding. The Alignment Guide further supports coherent instruction by highlighting connections across lessons within a module, helping educators see how mathematical concepts develop and build upon one another throughout the grade level.

Before students begin a grade 6 lesson on finding unknown angle measures, the materials provide educators with strategies to activate and assess prerequisite knowledge, ensuring students have the foundational understanding needed to access grade-level content. Students review basic angle types, the sum of angles in a triangle, and linear pairs before applying these relationships to find unknown angle measures. This intentional sequencing within and across lessons ensures that new concepts are introduced in a way that builds directly on what students already know, supporting coherent mathematical understanding.

Evaluation for 4.3a
Materials provide spaced retrieval opportunities with previously learned skills and concepts across learning pathways.

The materials provide spaced retrieval opportunities with previously learned skills and concepts allowing for continuous assessment of student progress so educators can adjust teaching strategies as needed. Every unit includes spaced retrieval opportunities with previously learned skills and concepts, and educators administer home activities to support students with retaining previously learned skills and concepts.

The materials demonstrate coherence across concepts horizontally within the grade level by connecting patterns, big ideas, and relationships. For example, the grade 6 “Expressions, Equations, and Relationships” unit guides educators in helping students transition from arithmetic reasoning to algebraic thinking. Students build on their prior understanding of operations with whole numbers, fractions, and decimals as they learn to write, interpret, and evaluate algebraic expressions, applying the order of operations and properties such as the distributive, associative, and commutative properties to generate equivalent expressions. Students then solve one-step equations and inequalities using models, algebra tiles, and symbolic representations, such as in the Equation Mystery Match activity, reinforcing the relationship between concrete models and abstract algebraic reasoning.

Evaluation for 4.3b
Materials provide interleaved practice opportunities with previously learned skills and concepts across learning pathways.

The materials provide interleaved practice opportunities with previously learned skills and concepts, requiring students to apply a variety of skills and concepts within the same learning sequence rather than practicing a single skill in isolation. For example, students engage in practice tasks that combine prior mathematical understandings with newly introduced concepts, requiring them to select appropriate strategies and justify their thinking. Materials also guide educators in monitoring student understanding through reflection prompts, mathematical discussions, and analysis of student work, along with instructional guidance and worked examples that support effective implementation.

The Imagine+ Math program enhances students’ problem-solving abilities and promotes flexible thinking by requiring students to switch between different types of problems and strategies within the same activity, improving retention and helping students integrate knowledge and skills over time. For example, grade 6 students complete Interleaved Practice #1, a printable practice with problems involving comparison and ordering of decimals, whole numbers, and rational numbers; division of rational numbers; algebraic reasoning; mean, median, and mode; conversions; coordinate grids; and area. As students work through these problems, they draw on previously learned concepts and skills to choose the most effective strategy for solving each one.

Evaluation for 5.1a
Questions and tasks provide opportunities for students to interpret, analyze, and evaluate mathematical concepts and complex, real-world situations.

The Imagine+ Math program provides questions and tasks that require students to interpret, analyze, and evaluate mathematical concepts and complex, real-world situations. For example, tasks require students to explain their thinking, interpret models, and critique others’ reasoning by analyzing solution strategies, identifying misconceptions, and providing evidence to support why an answer is correct or incorrect. Prompts such as “How can you tell their answer is wrong?” require students to examine mathematical representations critically. Real-world application tasks ask students to defend decisions and justify solutions using mathematical evidence.

The materials provide questions and tasks that require students to interpret, analyze, and evaluate mathematical concepts and complex, real-world situations. For example, students explore ratios through tasks that require them to interpret and analyze multiple representations, including ratio tables, tape diagrams, double number lines, and equivalent ratio equations, explaining how each representation demonstrates the relationship between quantities. Students evaluate the accuracy of ratio models, identify errors in reasoning, and defend conclusions using mathematical evidence. In real-world contexts, students use ratio representations to compare quantities, make predictions, and determine whether relationships are equivalent. The materials also engage students in interpreting and analyzing a data table to evaluate and select the histogram that correctly matches the data.

Evaluation for 5.1b
Questions and tasks provide opportunities for students to create concrete models and representations of mathematical situations.

The Imagine+ Math materials provide questions and tasks that require students to create concrete models and representations of mathematical situations. For example, in grade 6, students create concrete models and pictorial representations of mathematical situations using two dedicated spaces in a graphic organizer, responding to questions that provide opportunities to build or draw models and representations to solve problems.

The materials provide questions and tasks that require students to create concrete models and representations of mathematical situations. For example, in grade 6, students construct pictorial and concrete representations of equivalent expressions for the perimeter of a rectangle, demonstrating their understanding of the relationship between the expressions.

Evaluation for 5.1c
Questions and tasks provide opportunities for students to apply conceptual understanding to new problem situations and contexts.

The Imagine+ Math program provides questions and tasks that require students to apply conceptual understanding to new problem situations and contexts. For example, in the “Summarizing Data” lesson, students extend their understanding of data collection, organization, and analysis to interpret information in tables, charts, and datasets in unfamiliar contexts, using mathematical evidence to draw conclusions and justify their reasoning about real-world situations.

The materials provide questions and tasks that require students to apply conceptual understanding to new problem situations and contexts. For example, in grade 6, students extend their understanding of data representation to analyze and interpret real-world situations using histograms in unfamiliar contexts.

Evaluation for 5.2a
Materials provide tasks that are designed to build student automaticity and fluency necessary to complete grade-level mathematical tasks.

The Imagine+ Math program provides tasks that build the automaticity and fluency necessary for students to complete grade-level mathematical tasks. For example, in grade 6, the materials provide students and educators with five fluency activities that reinforce skills such as integers, ratios, one- and two-step equations, and surface area, building accuracy, efficiency, and flexibility in mathematical thinking. The materials also include interleaved practice that revisits previously learned skills alongside new content, strengthening retention and fluency across varied contexts.

The materials include tasks designed to build the student automaticity and fluency necessary to complete grade-level mathematical tasks. The materials include dedicated mathematical fluency activities that offer focused practice opportunities to strengthen students’ accuracy, efficiency, and flexibility with foundational math skills, emphasizing quick recall, mental math strategies, number sense, and reasoning to build automaticity with key mathematical concepts. Interleaved practice activities reinforce fluency by engaging students in a mix of previously learned skills and new concepts, requiring them to select appropriate strategies, apply mathematical reasoning, and solve problems efficiently across varied contexts.

Evaluation for 5.2b
Materials provide opportunities for students to practice the application of efficient, flexible, and accurate mathematical procedures throughout learning pathways.

The Imagine+ Math program provides opportunities for students to practice efficient, flexible, and accurate mathematical procedures. For example, in grade 6, interleaved practice activities engage students in applying previously learned skills alongside new learning. This encourages them to use multiple solution strategies and make connections across mathematical concepts, demonstrating procedural accuracy, flexibility, and efficiency across varied contexts.

The materials provide opportunities for students to practice the application of efficient, flexible, and accurate mathematical procedures. For example, in grade 6, students participate in payment method role-plays, comparison charts, and real-world budgeting projects that require them to evaluate and use cash, checks, debit cards, and credit cards in different purchasing scenarios, applying mathematical procedures accurately and efficiently while demonstrating flexibility in problem-solving. Students also engage in a real-world shopping challenge in which they create a shopping list with items priced in fractions, decimals, and percents, converting all prices to a single format to find the total cost.

Evaluation for 5.2c
Materials provide opportunities for students to evaluate mathematical representations, models, strategies, and solutions for efficiency, flexibility, and accuracy throughout learning pathways.

Imagine+ Math provides opportunities for students to evaluate mathematical representations, models, strategies, and solutions, encouraging efficiency, flexibility, and accuracy. For example, in grade 6, students work with ordering rational numbers by analyzing and evaluating another student’s work to identify and correct errors, considering which approach is most efficient and accurate. Prompts such as “Margie says the set of numbers are in order from least to greatest. What is her error?” and “Which statement describes Jaiden’s error?” require students to critically examine mathematical representations, assess the accuracy of different approaches, and determine more efficient and flexible solution strategies.

The materials provide opportunities for students to evaluate mathematical representations, models, strategies, and solutions for efficiency, flexibility, and accuracy throughout learning pathways. For example, in grade 6, students use a problem-solving reflection sheet to evaluate their mathematical representations, models, strategies, and solutions. Students reflect on the strategy used to solve the problem, explain their thinking to others, and consider how their reasoning ensures accuracy.

Evaluation for 5.2d
Materials contain guidance to support students in selecting the most efficient approaches when solving mathematics problems.

The Imagine+ Math materials offer guidance for students to select increasingly efficient approaches to solve mathematics problems. For example, the materials provide educator guidance in selecting efficient strategies and approaches to solving problems, helping students become adaptable and strategic problem solvers.

The Imagine+ Math Teacher Guide provides educators with guidance to support students in selecting efficient approaches when solving mathematical problems. The materials encourage students to compare different solution paths, discuss similarities and differences among strategies, and evaluate the efficiency of each approach. This guidance supports students in determining which strategies are most appropriate and efficient for solving mathematical problems.

Evaluation for 5.3a
Materials explicitly state how the conceptual and procedural emphasis of the TEKS are addressed.

The Imagine+ Math program explicitly addresses the conceptual and procedural emphases of the TEKS. The Imagine+ Math K–6 Rationale for Learning Paths, used alongside the Alignment Guide, identifies the TEKS addressed within each domain and explains the mathematical concepts and skills emphasized in the Teacher Guide. The rationale outlines the progression of learning across grade levels by illustrating how concepts in numbers and operations, algebraic reasoning, geometry and measurement, data analysis, and personal financial literacy build over time. It also explains how units within a grade are sequenced to reinforce prior learning and prepare students for subsequent content. The guide additionally identifies prerequisite skills and extension opportunities that support progression into Algebra I, Geometry, and Algebra II.

The materials clearly state how the conceptual and procedural emphases of the TEKS are addressed. For example, in grade 6, the materials include an overview of the progression in the “Number and Operations” unit that balances conceptual understanding and procedural fluency in alignment with the TEKS. This overview provides clear direction for embedding reasoning, problem-solving, and skill mastery into instruction.

Evaluation for 5.3b
Questions and tasks provide opportunities for students to use concrete models, pictorial representations, and abstract models as required by the TEKS.

Students represent fractional situations using visual fraction models and connect these representations to addition equations when solving problems. The materials incorporate concrete models within instructional videos to demonstrate mathematical concepts and support conceptual understanding. Although physical manipulatives are not provided, students are encouraged to use physical objects or drawings to represent mathematical situations and reinforce their understanding. Through Interleaved Practice and worksheets, students apply these representations to solve problems and connect concrete and pictorial models to symbolic notation. These opportunities support students in developing conceptual understanding and strengthening problem-solving skills through multiple representations.

The materials provide opportunities for students to represent mathematical ideas using pictorial and abstract models in grade 6. For example, students use visual representations and symbolic expressions to identify equivalent expressions when finding the perimeter of a rectangle. These tasks support conceptual understanding by linking visual and symbolic representations.

Evaluation for 5.3c
Materials include supports for students in connecting, creating, defining, and explaining concrete and representational models to abstract (symbolic/numeric/algorithmic) concepts, as required by the TEKS.

The Imagine+ Math program includes supports that guide students in connecting, creating, defining, and explaining concrete and representational models to abstract concepts aligned with the TEKS. Instructional supports emphasize moving from visual and hands-on models to symbolic and algorithmic reasoning. For example, students use instructional videos and practice tasks to create and explain models when writing inequalities, supporting transitions from representations to symbolic expressions.

The materials support students in defining and explaining representational models and connecting those models to abstract mathematical concepts. Lessons prompt students to describe how visual models represent relationships and how those representations translate into symbolic or numeric forms.

Evaluation for 5.4a
Materials provide opportunities for students to develop academic mathematical language using visuals, manipulatives, or other language development strategies.

The “Developing Vocabulary” Teacher Support for the grade 6 lesson “Bar Graphs and Histograms” pre-teaches the term bar graph using visual examples and the sentence frame “The bar graph shows ___ for each category.” Educators build on this by introducing histogram through a visual of data distribution, paired with the frame “The histogram displays ___ for each interval.” Educators also define data for students as “information collected for analysis,” illustrated with real-life examples such as survey results and the frame “The data shows ___.”

Vocabulary instruction in the grade 6 lesson “Compare Checking Accounts” begins with the term checking account, which educators explain using visuals of checks and debit cards to show how the account is used in everyday transactions. From there, students learn debit card through a real-life example and the sentence frame “A debit card is used to ___.” Students then encounter financial institution through a student-friendly definition paired with an anchor chart of examples such as banks and credit unions.

Evaluation for 5.4b
Materials include embedded educator guidance to scaffold, support, and extend students’ use of academic mathematical vocabulary in context when communicating with peers and educators.

In the grade 6 Teacher Guide, the “Scaffolding Mathematical Vocabulary” section provides embedded guidance for educators to model academic language through the Frayer model, using sentence frames such as “The definition of ____ is ____.” and “An example of ____ is ____.” Educators also pose clarifying questions such as “Why does this example represent ____?” Educators facilitate partner discussions in which students explain a section of their Frayer model to a peer and restate a peer’s explanation using the vocabulary word.

In the grade 6 Teacher Guide, the “Extending Academic Vocabulary” section provides embedded guidance for educators to extend students’ use of a vocabulary word once they demonstrate understanding, including comparing two vocabulary words using Frayer models, creating original word problems that require correct use of the term, and justifying thinking during discussions with prompts such as “Explain how ____ helps you solve this problem.” Educators also encourage students to respond to peer ideas using academic language, agreeing or disagreeing with evidence.

Evaluation for 5.4c
Materials include embedded guidance to support student application of appropriate mathematical language and academic vocabulary in discourse.

In the grade 6 Teacher Guide, the “Facilitating Discourse with Mathematical Vocabulary” section provides question prompts that guide students to apply academic vocabulary during oral discourse, such as “Can you use this word in a sentence about math?” and “Turn to your partner and use this word to describe a problem you worked on.” These prompts guide students to explain, describe examples and non-examples, and connect vocabulary to prior learning using precise mathematical language.

Beyond oral discourse, the “Writing with Mathematical Vocabulary” section of the grade 6 Teacher Guide directs educators to give students structured opportunities to apply academic vocabulary in written explanations, including sentence frames such as “The word ____ means ____” and “This example shows ____ because ____.” The section also provides prompts for students to revise written responses using precise mathematical language after peer or educator feedback.

Evaluation for 5.4d
Materials include embedded guidance to facilitate mathematical conversations allowing students to hear, refine, and use math language with peers.

In the grade 6 Teacher Guide, the “Supporting Collaborative Problem-Solving and Discourse” section provides embedded guidance for educators to facilitate partner or small-group work in which students solve problems together, particularly during word-problem tasks. Educators prompt students to explain their strategies to peers using precise mathematical language, and students hear one another’s reasoning as they compare different approaches and ask clarifying questions. The materials note that this collaborative structure strengthens students’ language development alongside their reasoning skills, giving students repeated opportunities to listen to and process the range of strategies and vocabulary peers use during shared problem-solving.

In the grade 6 Teacher Guide, the “Justifying Solution Strategies” section provides embedded guidance for educators to facilitate discussions in which students refine and use academic vocabulary by explaining the reasoning behind their approach and connecting their strategy to models, equations, or representations. Educators pose questions such as “Did anyone solve this in a different way?” and “Which strategy was most efficient, and why?” to prompt students to respond to peer strategies. Educators encourage students to agree or disagree with justification, using sentence frames such as “I agree/disagree with this strategy because ____” and “This model shows ____.” The “Practice Peer Review” step of the “Journaling Lesson Plan” section reinforces this refinement, having students trade revised journal entries with a peer to compare differing strategies and representations. The student rubric asks students to be “prepared to explain my work to my educator or a classmate using mathematical and academic language from the lesson.”

Evaluation for 5.4e
Materials include embedded guidance to anticipate a variety of student answers including exemplar responses to questions and tasks, including guidance to support and/or redirect inaccurate student responses.

In the grade 6 Teacher Guide, the “Mastery Check Answer Rationales” section provides educators with anticipated correct and incorrect answer choices for each digital Mastery Check item. For correct answers, the rationale outlines the steps used to reach the exemplar solution, modeling clear mathematical reasoning and academic language that educators can reference when assessing student understanding.

In the grade 6 lesson “Compare Checking Accounts,” the “Common Misconceptions” Teacher Support anticipates specific inaccurate student thinking, such as assuming all checking accounts are the same or that debit cards carry no cost, and provides feedback to redirect students by clarifying that accounts differ by fees, interest rates, and minimum balance requirements. Similarly, in the grade 6 lesson “Bar Graphs and Histograms,” the “Support for Struggling Students” section offers a reteaching strategy for students who struggle to interpret a histogram, guiding them step by step to identify the range of scores, the most common score range, and any outliers before drawing conclusions from the data.

Evaluation for 5.5a
TEKS process standards are integrated appropriately into the materials.

The grade 6 Teacher Guide explains that Imagine+ Math lessons provide targeted opportunities for students to practice and apply TEKS-aligned skills through tasks that emphasize the mathematical process standards, including problem-solving, reasoning, representation, communication, and precision. In the “Representation and Solutions of Equations/Inequalities” module of the Alignment Guide, lessons on writing and simplifying algebraic expressions integrate these standards by requiring students to apply mathematics to real-world situations, use a structured problem-solving model, and communicate their reasoning through multiple representations such as equations and graphs.

In the “Representation/Interpretation of Data” module of the Alignment Guide, lessons such as “Bar Graphs and Histograms” integrate the TEKS process standards by requiring students to apply mathematics to real-world data analysis, use problem-solving strategies to interpret and summarize data, and communicate their reasoning through graphs, diagrams, and statistical measures such as measures of center and spread.

Evaluation for 5.5b
Materials include a description of how process standards are incorporated and connected throughout the learning pathways.

The Imagine+ Math K–6 Rationale for Learning Paths explains that the mathematical process standards are embedded within both the Math Builder and Math Mastery pathways used in grade 6, rather than taught in isolation. Students apply these standards directly as they explore concepts, solve problems, represent their thinking, and explain their reasoning within instructional lessons and practice activities throughout the program.

In the Alignment Guide, the same core process standards recur across grade 6 modules covering different content. For example, 6.1.A (applying mathematics to real-world contexts), 6.1.B (using a problem-solving model), and 6.1.D and 6.1.E (communicating through representations) all appear in the “Representation and Solutions of Equations/Inequalities,” “Representation/Interpretation of Data,” and “Ratios/Rates/Percentages” modules. This recurring integration connects the process standards across the grade 6 learning pathway rather than isolating them within a single unit.

Evaluation for 5.5c
Materials include an overview of the TEKS process standards incorporated into each lesson.

The Imagine+ Math K–6 Rationale for Learning Paths guide illustrates how process standards are incorporated into the grade 6 lesson “Introduction to Solving Word Problems with Algebra.” In this lesson, students analyze the relationship between area, length, and width to represent the situation with an equation, determine the unknown value, and evaluate which equation correctly models the problem context.

Imagine+ Math K–6 Rationale for Learning Paths describes the “Explaining and Justifying Reasoning” process standard as requiring students to demonstrate mathematical reasoning by selecting correct solutions, evaluating strategies, and interpreting feedback that explains why a solution is correct or incorrect, reinforcing precise mathematical reasoning and supporting educators in facilitating further classroom discussion and written explanations. The guide illustrates this standard with the grade 6 lesson “Data Representation,” in which students identify which data display is most appropriate for different situations, applying this reasoning and justification process directly within the lesson task.

Evaluation for 6.1a
Materials provide opportunities for students to think mathematically, persevere through solving problems, and to make sense of mathematics.

The Imagine+ Math program engages students in mathematically driven problem-solving tasks that require sustained effort and help students build meaning around mathematical concepts. Students explain and justify their reasoning while engaging in problem-solving activities. In the Teacher Guide the “Promoting Self-Efficacy” strategies encourage students to persist through challenging tasks, monitor their understanding, and adjust their approach when they encounter difficulty. These strategies also help students make sense of problems and express their mathematical reasoning clearly.

The materials support mathematical thinking through the “Problem-Solving Graphic Organizer” and grade 6 interleaved practice tasks. Students analyze problems, organize relevant information, select appropriate strategies, and explain the reasoning behind their solutions. Interleaved tasks require students to apply previously learned concepts and persist through increasingly complex problems. Students justify their mathematical thinking and communicate how their chosen approach leads to a correct solution, strengthening both reasoning and sense making.

Evaluation for 6.1b
Materials support students in understanding, explaining, and justifying that there can be multiple ways to solve problems and complete tasks.

The Imagine+ Math program helps students recognize that a single problem can be approached in different ways and still lead to a correct result. Students select strategies that work for them, explain their reasoning, and justify why their chosen method produces a valid solution. Discussions with peers and educators reinforce flexible thinking and strengthen mathematical reasoning.

The materials include an “Interleaved Practice” section, which guides educators to prompt students to explain how they decided which strategy to use for each problem, sharing their thinking with peers either orally or in writing. Discussion questions, such as how students knew which strategy applied to a given problem, prompt them to reflect on and communicate their reasoning. This structured discussion helps students recognize that different strategies can be applied thoughtfully to reach a solution.

Evaluation for 6.1c
Materials are designed to require students to make sense of mathematics through multiple opportunities for students to do, write about, and discuss math with peers and/or educators.

The Imagine+ Math program builds students’ capacity to make sense of mathematics by combining hands-on problem-solving, written reflection, and peer dialogue across the program. The “Problem-Solving Graphic Organizer” scaffolds students as they analyze a problem, model it visually, and check their solution for reasonableness. The Student Journal reinforces this work: Its Problem-Solving Reflection page asks students to explain their strategy and justify why it worked, and its End of Lesson Organizer prompts students to reflect on new vocabulary and lingering questions. Interleaved practice extends this work into discussion, during which students explain to a partner how they chose a strategy for each problem and identify what made certain problems more challenging than others.

Across a grade 6 unit, the materials give students several ways to make sense of a problem before moving on. Students use the “Problem-Solving Graphic Organizer” to sort out what a problem is asking, sketch a model, and solve for an answer. The Student Journal then asks students to write a short reflection explaining which strategy they used and why it made sense for the problem. In fluency activities such as Ratio Match-Up, students find classmates holding equivalent ratio cards, build a table together, and explain to the group how their ratios connect. Across these opportunities, students move from solving on their own, to writing about their thinking, to defending it out loud with peers.

Evaluation for 6.2a
Materials support educators in guiding students to share and reflect on their problem-solving approaches, including explanations, arguments, justifications, and multiple points of entry.

The Imagine+ Math Teacher Guide equips educators with structured routines for helping students share and reflect on how they solved a problem. In “Supporting Multiple Solution Strategies,” educators set the expectation that a problem may have more than one correct path and then facilitate students sharing their approaches, comparing strategies, and responding to a peer’s solution by agreeing or disagreeing with evidence. “Justifying Solution Strategies” gives educators discussion questions and sentence frames such as “My strategy works because ____” and “Another way to solve this is ____ and it works because ____,” pushing students to explain their reasoning and argue for why their method holds up. The “Problem-Solving Graphic Organizer” asks students to reflect on their thinking after solving, building their abilities to explain, argue, and justify their solutions. In the “Supporting Collaborative Problem-Solving and Discourse” section, students compare approaches and justify their thinking with a partner or small group.

In each grade 6 unit’s problem-solving activity, the Teacher Guide walks the educator through a single problem using five categories of prompts. Under “Understanding & Explanation,” the educator asks a student to explain how they solved the problem and why they chose that strategy. Under “Justifying Multiple Solutions,” the educator asks whether another approach could also work and how the student knows the answer is correct. Under “Writing & Discussing Math,” the student writes a sentence explaining the solution and describes their thinking to a classmate. Under “Making Sense of Mathematics,” the educator prompts students to identify mathematical relationships, connect the problem to previously learned concepts, and explain how their strategies and solutions make sense within the mathematical context. Finally, under “Reflection & Growth,” the student looks back at what was most challenging and what they would do differently next time. Repeated across units, this structure gives educators a consistent way to help students share multiple entry points into a problem, make meaningful mathematical connections, justify their reasoning, and reflect on their problem-solving strategies.

Evaluation for 6.2b
Materials include prompts and guidance to support educators in providing explanatory feedback based on student responses and anticipated misconceptions.

The Imagine+ Math program includes a “Common Misconceptions” Teacher Support for each lesson, identifying likely student errors and pairing each one with specific feedback educators can use to correct it. In the “Understand Fractions as Division” lesson, for example, the support notes that students may treat a fraction such as 3/4 as a whole number rather than a division of 3 by 4 or may believe the numerator and denominator can be worked with separately. For each misconception, it gives educators concrete feedback to offer, such as using a number line to show that 3/4 falls between 0 and 1, or dividing a shape into equal parts to model what the fraction represents. This structure lets educators anticipate where students are likely to struggle and respond with feedback that targets the specific misunderstanding rather than simply marking an answer right or wrong.

Beyond anticipated misconceptions, the materials generate feedback tied to what a student actually selects. Each Mastery Check item includes an answer rationale that explains the reasoning behind every answer choice: For a correct response, it walks through the steps that led to the right answer, and for an incorrect response, it describes the likely thinking that led the student there and explains how to solve the problem correctly. Educators can review these rationales alongside student results in the Assignment Builder to see exactly why a student missed a question. Educators can then choose a matching Teacher Support, such as “Common Misconceptions” or “Building the Foundation,” to address it in a small group or one-on-one. This pairs real-time student response data with explanatory feedback educators can act on immediately.