Magma Math, Algebra I

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 Alignment Guide shows the vertical alignment and horizontal alignment of the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) and the English Language Proficiency Standards (ELPS), illustrating how concepts connect across and within grade levels. The materials include a rationale for learning paths across and within grade levels.


The “Course-Level Design and Horizontal Alignment” section in the Alignment Guide features an Algebra I scope and sequence, illustrating the horizontal alignment of the program’s three instructional strands. The “Vertical Alignment and Learning Progressions” section in the guide explains the vertical alignment of the five mathematical strands within the program, along with the corresponding standards from grade 3 through Algebra II.

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 provides usage recommendations for adapting to meet students’ needs in various contexts. The materials include strategies for effective educator practices adapted to a variety of contexts, such as small group instruction, independent learning, and advanced learning.

The Implementation Guide offers strategies for instruction in whole-group, small-group, and independent settings across intervention, enrichment, and extension areas. The “Whole-Group Instruction,” “Small-Group Instruction,” and “Independent Practice” sections include effective educator guidance for using the program in a variety of settings.

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

The Algebra I Diagnostic Guide provides an overview of the beginning-of-year screening administered to students and offers guidance on how to use it effectively. The “Guide to Diagnostic Skill Entry Points” links each screener question to the relevant prerequisite TEKS, aligned grade 6 target TEKS, recommended skill entry points, and corresponding diagnostic strands.

Additionally, the Algebra I Diagnostic Guide provides recommended skill entry points based on the results of the platform’s diagnostic assessments. Specifically, the guide includes a correlation table that maps student diagnostic performance to required TEKS-aligned strands and subchapters.

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

The materials provide a Teacher Internalization Guide containing specific protocols for both unit and lesson preparation. The unit internalization protocol guides educators to preview unit objectives, identify core TEKS, and understand the vertical progression of concepts.

The Teacher Internalization Guide also provides a lesson internalization with step-by-step guidance for educators to engage with the digital content, including analyzing “mild,” “medium,” and “Spicy” problem variations, anticipating student misconceptions, and planning for real-time feedback using the educator dashboard. It also emphasizes the importance of considering students’ diverse needs and identifying opportunities within the unit for differentiation and scaffolding strategies.

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

The materials feature an Instructional Leader Guide that offers comprehensive oversight strategies to help administrators support educators during implementation. Additionally, the guide provides targeted guidance and assistance for developing Common Formative Assessments (CFAs) to drive data-driven instruction.

Resources within the Instructional Leader Guide include an implementation checklist to facilitate rollout planning and ensure foundational operations are established before educators introduce the platform to students. The checklist covers five core operational pillars, including Rostering and Technical Setup, Teacher Onboarding Planning, Building Champions Across the District, Using Instructional Data for PLCs, and Collaborative Assignment Planning.

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.

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.

The materials include comprehensive overviews that explicitly align learning objectives with TEKS and ELPS requirements. The “Part 2: Grade-Level Design and Horizontal Alignment” section of the Algebra I Alignment Guide provides a chart, Artifact 2.1: Algebra I Scope and Sequence. This chart sequences the 12 major chapters and lists the subchapters and the TEKS within each larger chapter. Additionally, the Lesson Companion Guide provides a breakdown of the TEKS and ELPS addressed in each lesson.

The “Lesson Components and Suggested Timeframes” section in the Lesson Companion Guide outlines how much time to spend on each of the five components in a 40–60 minute time frame. The first five minutes are dedicated to “Set the Objective.” This section is followed by “Launch,” “Monitor and Respond,” and “Discuss,” each lasting 10–15 minutes. The “Track and Plan” component uses the last 5–10 minutes. Additionally, the “Assessment and Progress Tracking” section of the Lesson Companion Guide provides assessment resources aligned with both the TEKS and the ELPS, including guidance on using the Progress Tab to monitor TEKS-aligned assessment data and tracking ELPS growth over time using voice recording and canvas annotations.

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 materials include a Family Guide that offers a general program overview and strategies for supporting students. This Family Guide is intended to be shared with families at the start of the school year and is available in both English and Spanish.

The Family Guide provides targeted support for each unit. Guidance includes sections such as “Words You’ll Hear,” “Questions to Ask Your Student,” “Try This at Home,” and “Supporting Progress in This Unit.”

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

The Assessment Guide for Algebra I defines and explains the purpose of different types of assessments and how educators can use all assignments and data within the program. Formative assessments, or quick checks, inform daily instruction and identify student misconceptions in real time. Specific instructions for educators include creating and implementing warm-up and exit tickets, checks for understanding, spiral review, and think-pair-share activities.

The materials define “summative assessments” as tools designed to evaluate cumulative learning and skill acquisition at the conclusion of a major learning pathway. The intended purpose of these assessments is to provide a formal measure of what students know without hints. The data generated is designed to identify areas for reteaching, planning reassessment, or differentiating the next unit.

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

The Assessment Guide for Algebra I provides instructional support for implementing formative assessments, including warm-ups, exit tickets, comprehension checks, and spiral reviews. Additionally, the guide details how to configure settings for quiz mode and use data analytics to identify topics requiring reteaching, planning for reassessment, or tailoring instruction for differentiation in the upcoming unit.

The Assessment Administration Guide provides educators with guidance on administering assessments consistently and efficiently. Curriculum leads, math coaches, and district coordinators build assessments centrally and distribute them to educators across grade levels, schools, or districts. Educators receive the assessment with all settings preconfigured, and they cannot change those settings.

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.

The materials for Algebra I provide built-in accessibility configurations within the digital platform to ensure equitable testing conditions for all learners. Educators access individual student profiles to toggle specific support settings, which apply automatically across screeners, benchmarks, and daily assignments. These adjustable accommodations include a text-to-speech function that reads problem text aloud in over 40 languages, in addition to a 140-language translation tool. Educators also customize tool availability by enabling or disabling basic, scientific, or graphing calculators based on a student’s specific readiness needs or the structural demands of a lesson.

Beyond screen-based accommodations, the platform provides fully prepared, formatted files for printing to meet offline testing requirements. These printable assessment versions replicate the online items while incorporating structural adjustments, such as expanded font sizes and dedicated workspace areas for handwritten calculations.

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

The initial diagnostic screening includes 20 questions designed to assess students’ understanding at multiple Depth of Knowledge (DOK) levels. For example, in the grade 8 diagnostic, problem 15 uses basic recall in identifying the solution to a system of equations (DOK 1), problem 10 requires students to apply a formula to determine the surface area of a rectangular prism (DOK 2), and problem 9 asks students to calculate and compare the volumes of different three-dimensional figures (DOK 3).

The materials include diagnostic assessments with more than two interactive problem types. For example, in the Algebra I diagnostic screener, problem 1 is drag-and-drop, problem 8 is free-response, and problem 7 is multiple-choice.

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 Algebra I materials provide frequent formative assessment tools to help educators monitor daily student progress. Educators assign digital quick checks and practice pathways that align directly with specific grade-level standards. Students interact with multiple unique item formats that require inputs beyond standard multiple-choice selection. These interactive structures include coordinate-plane graphing grids, drag-and-drop categorization boxes, fraction-shading bars, and drawing-canvas options that allow students to display distinct types of mathematical processing.

The formative assignments feature three distinct tiers of task difficulty, which the platform classifies as “mild,” “medium,” and “spicy” complexity. “Mild” items assess low-level procedural recall and simple numerical operations. “Medium” items require strategic application of abstract grade-level concepts. “Spicy” items demand nonroutine, higher-order analysis and extended geometric reasoning. The range of task depth ensures that the daily formative data uncovers complete student proficiency levels across multiple cognitive bands. The platform automatically aggregates these multilayered performance metrics into the educator’s dashboard, establishing clear entry points for subsequent adaptive learning paths.

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

The Scoring and Response Guide for Algebra I states that the program grades every question automatically, with colored indicators. Green indicates a correct first attempt, orange indicates a correct answer reached after multiple attempts, and red indicates an incorrect response. The heatmap displays results as a color-coded class overview intended to help educators identify which students need support.

The adaptive system provides a rationale for both correct and incorrect responses through the “AI Student Summaries” section on the educator dashboard for each assignment. These summaries indicate which questions the student correctly answered, as well as provide an analysis of where the student went wrong on incorrect responses. Example rationales in the “Solving Systems of Equations by Elimination” assignment include “Solid elimination setup and variable solving when coefficients line up nicely (Problem 1: adds equations to get 2y = -2, y = -1, then x = -2)” and “Elimination scaling error in multi-step systems: multiplies 2x - y =20 by 3 but turns -y into -3y instead of -3y (that part is fine) yet the elimination step is wrong because combining 6x - 3y and 4x + 3y should give 10x = 85, not 10x = 60 (Problem 2); needs careful distribution and re-checking sums.”

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

As Algebra I students complete their work, the system evaluates each response in real time. Students receive instant feedback indicating whether they are progressing correctly, and their results are dynamically displayed in the heatmap, which highlights emerging patterns and trends across the classroom. The heatmap provides educators with color-coded updates on each student’s progress, including the number of attempts made on each problem and whether students used hints.

Educators can examine student work more closely by clicking on any problem to access the Solutions View. The Common Error Detector complements this feature by analyzing student responses across the class and highlighting frequently made errors. This allows educators to identify and address misconceptions promptly.

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 Stats Tab for Algebra I displays mastery percentages for each standard based on completed assignments. The Progress Tab monitors how performance at the standard level evolves over time, indicating whether students are improving, maintaining, or declining in specific skills.

The Progress tab monitors student performance in relation to TEKS across assignments and over time. The materials include student-facing progress charts by skill area, enabling students to track their own progress and development.

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.

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

The Algebra I digital materials provide continuous progress monitoring by embedding frequent checks for understanding directly into daily adaptive student pathways. Learners engage with interactive tasks that compile performance data in real time as they move through the digital canvas. To support this adaptive process, the system utilizes the practice mode recommendations framework to evaluate student accuracy at key points and dynamically recommend targeted practice cards based on real-time execution metrics. This functionality allows the platform to adjust subsequent content difficulty automatically and determine the next appropriate skill focus for individual learners.

When completing practice questions, students receive immediate feedback indicating whether their answers are correct or incorrect. If a student answers incorrectly, a demonstration video appears that walks them through the steps for solving a similar problem before they are given the opportunity to reattempt the question. Additionally, the Lava Bot also checks understanding in the moment by responding to student errors with immediate feedback, hints, and guided support before students move on.

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 Implementation Guide for Algebra I outlines structured small-group intervention lessons, scaffolded for students who have not yet reached proficiency in prerequisite or grade-level concepts and skills. This guide provides explicit pedagogical action steps that show educators how to pull concept-specific practice cards to address fundamental skill gaps. Additionally, the Multi-Tiered Intervention Guide provides educators with guidance on identifying students who require tier two and tier three interventions. It also includes strategies for utilizing the common-error flag during classroom discussions.

The live assignment dashboard equips instructors with automated tracking and analytics to identify student misconceptions during activities scaffolded for students who have not yet reached proficiency in prerequisite or grade-level concepts and skills. For example, the dashboard features AI-generated discussion prompts for assignments that analyze student work, helping educators identify areas for follow-up questions. These prompts focus on specific errors students make and include guiding questions to scaffold the mathematical vocabulary necessary for student success. Additionally, the interactive educator heatmap highlights incorrect student answers with color-coded alerts and surfaces high-probability calculation errors. This immediate analytical feedback allows educators to deploy targeted vocabulary support or alter question complexity parameters directly inside the active classroom window. Multiple guides outline explicit educator guidance for utilizing these features, including the Implementation Guide, Multi-Tiered Intervention Guide, Scoring and Response Guide, and Lesson Companion Guide.

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 for Algebra I include educator guidance to provide preteaching of the four “highest-leverage” mathematical vocabulary terms for each lesson, along with three contextual examples for each term. For instance, the Mathematical Discourse Guide advises educators to display each term and pronounce it aloud, encouraging students to repeat. Explicit prompts include “What do you notice across all three? What does that suggest about the meaning of this word?” Additionally, the Academic Language Proficiency Guide provides recommendations for educators on how to use the embedded language support features to provide preteaching supports for unfamiliar references in text. For instance, the guide recommends the translation toggle feature for students at the beginning proficiency level, as it allows them to read each problem in both languages, side by side.

The Lava Bot provides embedded support for developing academic vocabulary and understanding unfamiliar references in the text. Lava hints assist students in comprehending questions by providing guiding prompts that scaffold language and procedural steps. For emergent bilingual (EB) students, translated Lava hints offer immediate scaffolding in their home language when they encounter difficulties.

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.

The Implementation Guide for Algebra I offers educators strategies to support students who have demonstrated mastery of grade-level content. Examples include formal extension activities, such as presenting more advanced, challenging problems, as well as informal extensions that encourage students to articulate their reasoning clearly through various methods. For example, the guide provides educator guidance on assigning specialized spicy-level problems that deliberately raise the cognitive demand by requiring advanced learners to explain mathematical reasoning; compare operational strategies; or solve nonroutine, multistep challenges on an open digital canvas using multiple representation methods. These problems include open-ended formats that allow students to annotate, diagram, and write equations, promoting deeper engagement beyond simply selecting an answer.


The Enrichment and Extension Guide provides additional guidance for supporting students who have demonstrated proficiency in content and skills beyond grade level. For example, the guide outlines an independent practice mode that automatically evaluates student performance to recommend targeted practice cards across custom, educator-configured grade ranges, granting advanced learners access to higher-grade problem sets directly within their standard user interface.

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 Algebra I materials include accommodations, such as text-to-speech, content and language supports, and calculators that educators can turn on or off to support individual students. For example, the text-to-speech can be individually toggled on and off by the student. Additionally, educators can choose a translation language from a selection of over 140 languages for each student. Finally, three different calculator types are available for educators to turn on or off for each student. These calculator types are basic, scientific, and graphing calculators.

The Lava Bot offers embedded content and language support features. Lava hints assist students in understanding questions by providing guiding questions that scaffold both language and process. For EB students, translated Lava hints deliver immediate scaffolding in their home language when they encounter difficulties. The feature cannot be turned on or off by the educator. However, educators can create two versions of the same assignment—one with the Lava Bot enabled and one without. These versions can then be assigned to different student groups based on their specific content and language support needs.

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 Implementation Guide provides Algebra I educators with guidance on offering students options to demonstrate their understanding of mathematical concepts through the Concrete-Representational-Abstract (CRA) approach. Instead of selecting answers from a list, students construct their solutions at the level of representation that makes the most sense for them. Students use built-in digital manipulatives, such as base 10 blocks, fraction bars, counters, place-value charts, and algebra tiles to demonstrate concrete understanding. Students create number lines, sketch area models, and construct diagrams to represent their understanding, and ultimately express solutions symbolically using an equation writer or freehand drawings. This illustrates their algebraic or arithmetic reasoning to show abstract understanding.

The Efficient Approaches Guide provides educator guidance for supporting students using the workspace that allows them to drag the problem into a drawing area, use drawing and writing tools, type with math symbols, and use grade-appropriate manipulatives to model and solve. For example, educators receive guidance to use the Teacher Playback feature to open student work, replay the full solution process, and share selected responses with the class to model thinking; demonstrate multiple approaches, representations, and reasoning; compare strategies; and support discussion. Other explicit guidance includes how the educator can enter student mode to model demonstrating understanding through a variety of ways on the platform.

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 materials include an Instructions tab for each lesson, highlighting most frequently missed questions, common errors, and suggested action steps to address those errors. The tab provides explicit guidance, including prompts for anchoring big ideas and activating prior knowledge. For example, in an Algebra I assignment on solving systems of equations, prompts include questions such as, “Can anyone provide another example?” and “If -y = -3, what operation do you need to perform on both sides to find the value of y?” Additionally, AI Discussion Points for each assignment analyze student work that highlights and connects the key patterns, features, and relationships seen in the student work samples. These discussion points can be used by the educator to guide discourse to overcome misconceptions, activate prior knowledge, anchor big ideas, and push thinking to deeper levels.

The Enrichment Extension Guide offers specific educator guidance on using the student canvas as a platform where students develop mathematical concepts through the CRA approach. This approach emphasizes highlighting and connecting key patterns, features, and relationships through multiple means of representation. Sample prompts include “Here are two approaches to the same problem. What are the differences? Which approach is more efficient, and why?” Additionally, AI Discussion Points suggest specific probing questions that educators use to connect patterns, address misconceptions, and compare different student strategies during evidence-based discussion.

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.

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 Implementation Guide provides guidance for various types of practice. The “Independent Practice” section covers skill building through student utilization of practice mode for self-paced independent practice. Examples of guided practice include platform-provided Lava hints for guided practice, as well as educator guidance on using the platform to demonstrate multiple ways of solving. Guidance on collaborative practice relies mainly on group discussion centered around student work pinned by the educator for classroom view.

The Multi-Tiered Intervention Guide offers Algebra I educators guidance on tier one, whole-class instruction, including monitoring student responses and making real-time adjustments to address individual needs by identifying students who require small-group tier two support. Guidance for tier two support encompasses error analysis discussions and ongoing student monitoring. For tier three, individual instruction involves providing additional guided practice and identifying potential foundational gaps. Educators also have access to previous grade-level content to assign relevant questions.

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 Enrichment and Extension Guide for Algebra I offers educators strategies for implementing enrichment and extension activities. The guide includes sections on fostering a culture of demonstrating work, celebrating student thinking as a learning opportunity, comparing instructional strategies, and using data to continuously elevate student achievement. Various forms of engagement outlined in this guide include using concrete manipulatives, representational drawings and annotations, and abstract equations or voice recording capturing explanations.

The Implementation Guide outlines how each standard within the content library includes problems categorized as “mild,” “medium,” and “spicy” in complexity. “Mild” problems introduce concepts with scaffolding, while “medium” problems apply these concepts with grade-level rigor. “Spicy” problems involve multistep reasoning, strategy comparison, and mathematical justification. Educators receive guidance on when to assign higher-level problems to specific students they identify as ready for enrichment. For students ready to advance further, the content library offers materials for all grade levels. Educators can assign problems from higher grade levels directly to individual students or groups.

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

The AI Discussion Points in the educator dashboard provide discussion prompts for timely feedback during lesson delivery. For example, a discussion point for an Algebra I assignment on systems of equations includes the prompt “One student found x = 6. Locate the arithmetic or sign error and show how substituting the proposed solution into both equations checks correctness.”

The dashboard incorporates real-time analytical monitoring features to help educators deploy immediate verbal and written interventions during digital student work cycles. For example, the interactive classroom heatmap highlights incorrect student scratchpad submissions with color-coded warning flags and populates specific error-analysis data fields on the instructor console. This immediate tracking system empowers educators to instantly identify struggling learners and deliver personalized explanatory guidance right at the moment of conceptual friction. Additionally, the AI Student Summaries in the dashboard provide educators with actionable guidance on individual student misconceptions to address. For example, an AI student summary for one student informs the educator that the student has “Frequent ordered-pair/variable-order mistake: finds x = -2, y = -1 but writes (-1,-2) first, then corrects to (-2,-1) (Problem 1); reinforce writing (x,y) explicitly before substituting.”

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.

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 Algebra I adaptive materials include embedded linguistic accommodations designed for emergent bilingual students at the preproduction level. For example, the student platform offers translation and text-to-speech features in the student’s home language. Accommodations for Beginning-level EB students include a translation toggle that allows them to view each problem in both languages side by side. Translated Lava hints provide real-time scaffolding in the student’s home language when additional support is needed. Additionally, lower-level “mild” questions use simpler sentence structures, increased visual scaffolding, and fewer multistep instructions to ensure accessibility.

Support for EB students at the Intermediate level includes a voice-recording feature that allows students to practice verbalizing their reasoning. Additionally, midlevel “medium” questions incorporate slightly more advanced language compared to “mild” sentence structures, with reduced visual scaffolding and longer, more complex question sentences. Embedded supports for high-Intermediate and Advanced EB students include open-ended discussion points designed to facilitate extended discourse. Furthermore, higher-level problems require students to interpret longer prompts, justify their reasoning in writing, and engage with more abstract mathematical language.

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

The Algebra I materials include embedded multilingual supports that accommodate emergent bilingual students at every ELPS proficiency level. Examples include translation, text-to-speech, voice recording, Lava hints, and discussion points. The materials provide guidance for educator use of these supports in multiple locations, including the Lesson Companion Guide, Efficient Approaches Guide, Academic Language Proficiency Guide, and Implementation Guide.

The Academic Language Proficiency Guide includes additional implementation guidance. This guide includes a table that illustrates how linguistic support systematically decreases while the demand for academic English increases across all five ELPS proficiency levels. Other educator support includes the “Implementation Across State-Approved Bilingual and ESL Programs” section, which provides guidance for four specific program types. In bilingual classrooms, students use the translation toggle to read in both languages. In (English as a Second Language (ESL) classrooms, translation and text-to-speech serve as scaffolds while students attempt problems in English first. In dual language programs, multilingual capabilities strengthen both languages simultaneously through intentional toggling. Finally, in ESL pull-out settings, practice mode provides self-paced work with visually based instructional videos, immediate feedback, and full language support.

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 Mathematical Discourse Guide includes embedded guidance for Algebra I educators to support emergent bilingual students in developing academic vocabulary through oral discourse, incorporating a recommended routine for preteaching key terms. Additionally, oral discourse is employed to increase comprehension by using a translation toggle and discussion prompts. The materials offer explicit prompts to build background knowledge through oral discourse, such as asking, “What looks familiar?” and “What connects to something we have already learned?” Finally, the materials foster crosslinguistic connections through oral discourse, using the translation toggle and text-to-speech features alongside discussion questions related to cognates.

The Mathematical Discourse Guide includes embedded guidance for educators to support emergent bilingual students in developing academic vocabulary through written discourse, incorporating scaffolded language and student canvas features. Additionally, written discourse is employed to increase comprehension by annotating steps in the student canvas. The materials encourage building background knowledge through written discourse, using the student canvas for written explanations of processes, as well as a progressive difficulty structure that scaffolds academic vocabulary. Finally, the materials foster crosslinguistic connections through written discourse, with educator guidance on using the translation feature to annotate or label mathematical ideas in both English and the student’s native language.

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.

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

Practice opportunities throughout learning pathways require students to demonstrate depth of understanding aligned to the TEKS. For example, in “Represent constraints with equations and inequalities,” TEKS A.2.H, students identify constraints from real-world problems, including multiple-choice answers, as well as explain what each variable represents in a real-world context. The student platform provides independent practice opportunities that require learners to demonstrate multiple mathematical representations in daily assignments. For example, questions from the assessment item bank aligned to TEKS A.12.C require students to use the open digital workspace to evaluate sequential patterns and find the specific term at a designated position in an arithmetic sequence. This open-response interface forces students to track their numerical reasoning visibly rather than selecting a single multiple-choice option.

Instructional assessments throughout learning pathways require students to demonstrate depth of understanding aligned to the TEKS. For example, in the Algebra I assessment “Solve linear equations with variables on both sides (A.5.A.ii),” students first solve linear equations. Next, students utilize this skill to identify how many solutions a linear equation has. Finally, students apply their understanding to solve word problems that require students to set up and solve a linear equation with variables on both sides. Additionally, the materials include assessment questions that require strategic thinking beyond basic recall. One example is question 20 of the diagnostic exam, which asks students to compare simple versus compound interest. Students must apply both the simple interest formula and compound interest formula, calculate the difference, and interpret the result in the financial context, requiring multistep financial reasoning and application of exponential functions aligned to TEKS A.9.B and A.12.D.

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 materials feature a progression model that scaffolds core questions through increasingly rigorous levels of mathematics within each instructional unit to support grade-level proficiency and enrichment. For example, during an Algebra I assignment creation sequence for direct variation under TEKS A.2.D, educators access a multitiered problem selection menu containing “mild,” “medium,” and “spicy” questions. Students progress from evaluating standard algebraic direct-variation setups in “mild” tasks to calculating linear real-world unit-rate purchasing costs in medium tasks to resolving compound, multilayered proportional word problems containing fractional variables in “spicy” tasks, satisfying both core grade-level proficiency and localized grade-level enrichment.

The curriculum documentation provides instructional resources that direct educators to assign questions from adjacent grade levels to facilitate advanced, above-grade-level proficiency and extensions. For example, the Implementation Guide instructs educators to access the standards-aligned content library to select and assign tasks across multiple grade levels, including above-grade-level work when appropriate. This structural flexibility allows educators to purposely move beyond the current grade-level constraints to deliver advanced enrichment and extension materials that foster above grade-level proficiency for accelerated learners. Additionally, the Enrichment and Extension Guide explains how the program enriches and extends in multiple ways. This guide provides educators with guidance on how to use the assignment problems’ adaptive nature at varying levels of difficulty, combined with a workspace that encourages students to show their thinking in multiple ways. Educators use features such as playback, live activity, discussion points, and voice explanations to deliver strategically scaffolded questions and tasks that progressively increase in rigor and complexity and lead to grade-level and above-grade-level proficiency.

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

The materials demonstrate horizontal coherence across concepts by organizing them into three instructional strands. The topics within each strand relate to the same big idea and are designed to build conceptual understanding before application, connecting patterns and relationships within the grade. For example, Algebra I materials begin with Strand 1, “Linear Functions, Equations, and Inequalities.” This strand focuses on the study of linear relationships, forming the foundation of the course.

Strand 1 contains four chapters that connect patterns and relationships within linear equations and inequalities. Chapter 1, “Linear Functions and Two-Variable Equations,” establishes the core concepts of slope, intercepts, domain, and range through multiple representations: tables, graphs, equations, and verbal descriptions. Students build fluency with slope-intercept, point-slope, and standard forms while connecting the relationship between rate of change and real-world contexts. Chapter 2, “Solving Linear Equations and Inequalities in One Variable,” develops algebraic fluency by requiring students to solve equations with variables on both sides and multistep inequalities. Chapter 3, “Linear Inequalities,” extends the graphical and contextual work from Chapter 1 to two-variable inequality constraints. Chapter 4, “Systems of Linear Equations and Inequalities,” synthesizes all prior linear work. Students write systems of equations from real-world situations; solve them by graphing, substitution, or elimination; and interpret solutions in context. The horizontal coherence of this strand weaves together the relationships between linear equations and inequalities and their various applications.

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 Standards Alignment Guide for Algebra I provides an explicit vertical rationale that demonstrates coherence across concepts and grade bands by dividing the material into five overarching mathematical strands. For example, the “Linear Relationships and Proportional Reasoning” strand connects patterns, big ideas, and relationships across grade 3 through Algebra II. In grades 3–5, students explore multiplicative relationships through equal groups, arrays, and input-output tables, generating numerical patterns and describing relationships between paired quantities. Grade 6 formalizes this work into ratios, rates, and unit rates, requiring students to compare two quantities using ratio language, generate equivalent ratios using tables, and graph proportional relationships on the coordinate plane. Students also represent relationships with equations of the form y = kx and y = x + b and identify independent and dependent variables.

Grade 7 deepens proportional reasoning by applying it to constant rates of change, similar figures, and percent increase and decrease. Grade 8 formalizes the transition to linear functions by requiring students to distinguish between proportional and nonproportional linear relationships, define slope as the rate of change, and write equations in the form y = mx + b. Algebra I provides a comprehensive study of linear functions through multiple representations and solution methods, and Algebra II extends to systems of three equations and more complex function analysis.

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 materials demonstrate coherence across lessons or activities by connecting students’ prior knowledge of concepts to the mathematical concepts to be learned in the current grade level through scaffolded problems in each subchapter. At the “mild” level, problems activate students’ prior conceptual understanding from middle school by using familiar models and representations while introducing a new algebra concept. For example, in the “Exponential Functions” pathway, “mild” problems display a curve on a coordinate plane passing through labeled points and ask students to determine the exponential function. The visual representation connects to grade 8 work with function tables and graphs, ensuring students build a new understanding of exponential behavior on a graphical foundation they already possess. Additionally, “spicy” problems extend the connection between mathematical concepts and future grade levels. For example, in the “Quadratic Functions” pathway, spicy problems require students to determine the equation of a quadratic function given constraints on its vertex and a point it passes through, combining graphical reasoning with algebraic manipulation in ways that preview the function-analysis demands of Algebra II.

The materials demonstrate coherence across lessons or activities through the use of “medium” problems that require students to apply and extend procedural skills developed in earlier grades to perform current course–level tasks. For example, in the “Solving Linear Equations” pathway, “medium” problems present multistep equations with variables on both sides and no scaffolding, such as equations requiring distribution and combining like terms before isolating the variable. Students rely on procedural fluency in equation solving developed in grades 7 and 8. Additionally, “spicy” problems demonstrate coherence of procedures to the mathematical concepts to be learned in future grade levels. For example, “spicy” problems in the “Operations on Polynomials” pathway require students to multiply and factor to support a geometric application, such as determining the dimensions of a rectangle given its polynomial area expression. This procedural complexity directly prepares students for the geometric and algebraic synthesis required in Geometry and Algebra II.

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

The digital assignment workspace provides spaced retrieval opportunities for previously learned skills by facilitating the integration of prerequisite concepts and skills directly into current, separate instructional pathways. For example, in the creation sequence for an Algebra I quadratic functions assignment, the educator can open the digital problem selection workspace to insert a problem from TEKS A.11.B into a new assignment built for TEKS A.8.A. The educator uses the dashboard interface to add a “mild” problem from the earlier polynomials pathway, prompting students to retrieve the conceptual foundation for factoring and distributing binomial expressions using geometric area-grid dimensions. The educator then pairs this with current “medium” and “spicy” quadratic problems under TEKS A.8.A, requiring students to pinpoint the coordinates of the axis of symmetry and graph key vertex points, thereby forcing them to retrieve and apply their past polynomial-simplification procedural skills in a completely new, nonlinear, function-analysis context.

The “Spiral Review” section of the Assessment Guide provides guidance on how educators can create spaced-retrieval opportunities for previously learned concepts across learning pathways using the digital assessment creator. For example, educators can create assignments that combine problems from earlier pathways, such as chapter 2 (“Linear Inequalities”), with those in the current work, chapter 4 (“Systems of Linear Equations and Inequalities”). The digital materials provide educators with access to content beginning in grade 2, which can be used to build assessments that include foundational content from previous grades and previously learned content from the current grade. The large catalog of problems allows educators to add previously learned content, such as district-identified, high-priority learning standards, to any assignment.

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

The educator materials for grade Algebra I provide a structurally alternated instructional sequence that varies predictable block groupings to promote conceptual flexibility. For example, the Standards Alignment Guide outlines an integration framework in which separate strands interleave previously learned skills throughout the units. The pacing guide embeds quick-cycle spiral review sets that routinely replace expected topic problems with unrelated conceptual tasks. This shuffling ensures that students can’t rely on a single strategy, such as rote repetition. This forces students to continuously reevaluate the core conceptual properties required to decode across mixed mathematical domains.

Practice mode provides interleaved practice opportunities that combine related mathematical skills and concepts across domains, units, and grade-level progressions. Personalized recommendations based on student performance require learners to revisit previously learned content while engaging with current standards; strengthening connections among mathematical ideas; and supporting retention, transfer, and deeper conceptual understanding. Students working with proportional relationships engage in interleaved practice that incorporates rational number operations, expressions, equations, and percent applications, reinforcing connections among multiple Algebra I domains and mathematical representations.

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

The materials include questions and tasks that require students to interpret and analyze mathematical concepts and complex, real-world situations. For example, in the “Quadratic Functions and Equations” pathway, the questions require students to interpret key features of a quadratic function in its real-world context and to analyze interpretations derived from the data. Examples include interpreting the maximum value of a profit model and analyzing what the vertex represents in a fuel-efficiency model.

Additionally, the materials include questions and tasks that require students to evaluate mathematical concepts and analyze complex, real-world situations. For example, in the “Systems of Linear Equations and Inequalities” pathway, students evaluate scenarios such as the number of pizza slices purchased and the number of people at a movie. Other questions in the problem set include error analysis, in which students assess the correctness of their work. The question type requires students to analyze situations and apply the appropriate mathematical concept.

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

The materials include questions and tasks that give students opportunities to build concrete models of mathematical situations. For example, Algebra I students have access to algebra tiles to model one-variable equations concretely. While questions aligned with TEKS A.5.A do not explicitly require concrete modeling, educators can require it and use the playback feature to view a student’s workspace.

The materials include questions and tasks that give students opportunities to create pictorial representations of mathematical situations. For example, problems aligned to TEKS A.2.C require students to create tables and graphs to model linear, real-world situations, such as liquid draining from a tank. Similarly, in the “Quadratic Functions and Equations” pathway, students create tables and graphs to model real-world quadratic situations, such as throwing a ball.

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

The materials include questions and tasks that give students opportunities to apply their conceptual understanding to new problems and contexts. For example, in the “Quadratic Functions and Equations” pathway, students examine a sample of a student’s work on transformations and solve the following problem: “Identify and explain her error(s) in the type of transformation. Determine the value of k that maps g(x) to f(x). Then select the correct transformation of g(x) to the graphed function f(x).” These questions require students not only to calculate an answer, but also to apply conceptual understanding and logic to evaluate how it relates to a real-world context.

Additionally, the materials include questions and tasks that require students to evaluate mathematical concepts and analyze complex, real-world situations. For example, in the “Exponential Functions” pathway, students solve the following problem: “A video has 5,000 views on Platform A and 2,000 views on Platform B. The number of views on Platform A increases by 1.5% each month, while on Platform B it increases by 3.2% each month. After 4 years, how many more views does Platform A have than Platform B?” This requires students not only to calculate values but also to evaluate them in a real-world context for comparison.

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

The materials include tasks designed to build the automaticity students need to complete grade-level mathematical tasks. “Mild” cover basic, repetitive calculations and tasks, including TEKS A.1B, TEKS A.2A, and TEKS A.3D. Sequenced tasks provide repeated and distributed practice in algebraic manipulation, solving equations, and analyzing functions. This intentional progression supports the development of automaticity, ensuring students can efficiently execute foundational skills required for success in more complex, grade-level mathematics. Additionally, problems can be assigned to any assignment, giving students a consistent refresher in foundational skills as they work through later curriculum.

Additionally, the materials include tasks designed to build the fluency students need to complete grade-level mathematical tasks. “Medium” problems build on the mild tasks to increase fluency. For example, the “medium” problems in the “Factoring Polynomials” pathway require students to factor trinomials, perfect squares, and differences of squares. These repetitive tasks involve the same type of problem application, which builds procedural fluency.

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

The materials provide opportunities for students to practice applying efficient and flexible mathematical procedures across learning pathways through the student canvas. The interface lets students choose how to solve and record their work using multiple valid strategies, such as handwriting equations, typing text, drawing layouts, using digital manipulatives, or annotating coordinate grids, rather than forcing a single prescribed method. For example, students solving a one-variable equation can choose algebra tiles to model concretely, use pictorial models, or use the equation writer for an abstract symbolic solution. Repeated practice across multiple representations aims to build both flexibility and efficiency as students discover which strategies work best for different problem types.

The materials provide opportunities for students to practice applying accurate mathematical procedures across learning pathways through error-analysis questions. For example, in a question aligned with TEKS A.3.D, students evaluate an incorrect graph and answer the following prompt: “Select the error made, and draw the graph correctly.” This gives students the opportunity not only to identify the error but also to correct it.

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.

The materials offer opportunities for students to evaluate mathematical representations, models, strategies, and solutions for efficiency and flexibility across learning pathways, with classroom discussion supported by “AI Discussion Points” and the playback feature. Educators receive explicit prompts and guidance to display different student approaches for comparison. For example, in an assignment on simplifying linear expressions, the AI Discussion Points pose the question, “Two different approaches are shown: one used the bar model to identify the part and whole before dividing, and one went straight to the equation. How does the bar model help you decide which operation to use?”

The materials offer opportunities for students to practice applying accurate mathematical procedures across learning pathways through error-analysis questions. For example, in a question aligned with TEKS A.5.C, students evaluate a real-world theater ticketing model. Students construct and analyze a graphic representation on a coordinate grid, evaluate the accuracy of the intersection point as a viable solution model, and interpret the resulting ordered pair explicitly in terms of the practical ticket pricing context rather than relying on an abstract numeric value.

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

The materials provide guidance to help students select increasingly efficient approaches to solving math problems. Reduced scaffolding as tasks progressing from “mild” to “medium” to “spicy” helps students shift from less efficient conceptual approaches to more efficient procedural ones once a foundation is set. Other guidance appears in the Lesson Companion Guide, which states, “As you monitor, look for students who are modeling with base-ten blocks, students who are sketching area models or number lines, and students who are writing equations. Pin a selection of these solutions—anonymized—and use Playback to walk through them with the class. Ask: ‘What do these strategies have in common? How are they different? Which one helps you see why this works?’” This supports a classroom in which mathematical procedures are consistently evaluated for efficiency and mathematical concepts for flexibility.

The Efficient Approaches Guide provides educators with guidance to help students move away from cumbersome approaches and toward increasingly efficient methods. For example, the platform includes a teacher playback feature that records the student’s full solution and process, allowing the educator to project two different methods side by side. Educators receive specific evaluation prompts, such as “Do you think there is a way to get the same answer in fewer steps?” to facilitate strategy-comparison discussions.

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

The Conceptual and Procedural Emphasis Guide explicitly states how the TEKS’s conceptual and procedural emphases build fluency through “mild,” “medium,” and “spicy” problems. Conceptual understanding is built at “mild,” procedural fluency is developed at “medium,” and the connection between them is demonstrated at “spicy.” For example, in the “Exponential Growth and Decay” pathway, TEKS A.9.B, “mild” problems present exponential functions on graphs and ask students to classify the functions as representing growth or decay by analyzing the graph’s visual behavior. This approach emphasizes conceptual understanding by allowing students to observe what exponential growth and decay look like before engaging with their symbolic representations.

The Enrichment and Extension Guide explicitly explains how the platform balances conceptual understanding of functions with procedural fluency in algebraic manipulation. For example, in the “Exponential Growth and Decay” pathway for TEKS A.9.B, students first visually analyze exponential functions as graphs plotted on the coordinate plane, with key points visible. Later, students analyze the functions in symbolic form, requiring students to determine growth or decay parameters and reason about the base using abstract notation. Students build conceptual understanding of linear, quadratic, and exponential relationships through multiple representations before applying procedures such as solving equations, factoring, and interpreting graphs. This ensures that procedural work is grounded in an understanding of function, behavior, and structure.

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.

The materials include questions and tasks that provide opportunities for students to use concrete and pictorial models, as required by the TEKS. For example, in “mild” problems in the “Linear Functions” pathway, TEKS A.2.A, and TEKS A.3.C, coordinate plane graphs display line segments with closed and open endpoints, allowing students to read the domain and range directly from the graph before encountering interval or set notation.

The materials include questions and tasks that provide opportunities for students to use abstract models, as required by TEKS A.10.B. For example, “medium” problems remove visual supports and require students to analyze geometric word problems that introduce variable-dimension shifts, prompting them to rely on internal representations or custom drawings to compute polynomial area differences. Additionally, “spicy” problems aligned with TEKS A.8.A require students to use the Quadratic Formula without a visual table or graph.

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 Standards Alignment Guide supports progression across representations aligned with TEKS A.1.A–A.1.E (process standards), TEKS A.2D (linear equations), TEKS A.3.B–A.3.D (linear functions), and TEKS A.6.A (quadratic functions). Students move fluidly across concrete real-world modeling situations, representational forms such as graphs and tables, and abstract symbolic representations, including equations, function notation, and algebraic expressions. This progression aims to ensure that students can define, interpret, and explain relationships across multiple representations of functions.

The Algebra I question bank includes structured opportunities that help students connect, define, and explain representational models for abstract mathematical concepts, as required by TEKS A.9.B, which focuses on interpreting exponential growth and decay functions. For example, students evaluate a numerical table model that lists x-coordinates alongside corresponding y-values, displaying fractional relationships. Students connect the table’s structural properties to abstract algebraic concepts and analyze the geometric progression as inputs change to isolate and define the abstract exponential multiplier. This design forces students to directly translate a tabular data layout into a precise numeric growth factor.

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

The materials provide opportunities for students to develop their academic mathematical language using visuals and manipulatives on the student canvas, primarily through the “Manipulative Suite” and the voice recording feature. The “Manipulative Suite” helps students connect mathematical language to models and representations by allowing them to represent mathematical ideas visually and concretely with fraction bars, base 10 blocks, number lines, and area models while discussing and explaining their thinking. Additionally, the voice recording function works in tandem with the “Manipulative Suite” to support multi-step oral reasoning. Students practice using visual representations on the canvas to support their explanations. For example, in the “Exponential Growth and Decay Functions” pathway, students determine the exact exponential growth factor by analyzing ratios between successive outputs in numerical tables with geometric progressions. Students use the open canvas workspace to write algebraic rules and the voice recording feature to explain their analytical shortcuts verbally, ensuring a grounded connection between symbolic functions and precise mathematical vocabulary.

Additionally, the materials offer opportunities for students to develop their academic mathematical language through other language development strategies, such as discussion. The Academic Language Proficiency Guide provides explicit guidance on how teachers should use “AI Discussion Points” to prompt students to refine their language and move toward precise, TEKS-aligned academic vocabulary. Open-ended prompts include “How would you explain this to a student who got a different answer?” Each assignment also includes a “Key Vocabulary” feature that provides vocabulary flip cards with key terms, definitions, and real-world examples to support the introduction and discussion of concepts. The Implementation Guide instructs teachers to “use these cards to spark conversation, encourage pupils to contribute their own examples, and establish shared understanding of key ideas before starting the assignment.” For Algebra 1, these cards include terms such as “exponential function,” “quadratic,” “vertex,” “discriminant,” and “correlation coefficient,” along with visual supports that help students connect academic language to mathematical concepts.

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.

The Mathematical Discourse Guide includes embedded educator guidance to scaffold and support students’ use of academic vocabulary in context as they communicate with peers and educators. For example, the guide instructs educators to use the “Key Vocabulary” cards as the anchor for a brief preteaching routine before students begin solving. Educators display each term, read it aloud, ask students to repeat it, show the three examples, and ask what they notice across all three. Embedded educator prompts include “What is the same in each of these? What does that tell us about what this word means? What is the mathematical term for what you did?” Other guidance in the guide includes prompting students to replace everyday phrases with advanced terms, such as shifting from “the top number” to “the numerator” or from “I split it” to “I partitioned the whole into equal parts.”

The Algebra I curriculum includes embedded guidance to help educators extend students’ use of academic vocabulary in context when communicating with peers and educators, as outlined in the Mathematical Discourse Guide. The guide directs teachers to facilitate structured oral discourse routines, using the “Teacher Playback” feature and educator-led questioning to help transition students from informal language to precise terminology. For example, after students solve a problem, the guide instructs the teacher to project student work and prompt the class with follow-up questions generated by AI Discussion Points. This embedded guidance encourages educators to promote linguistic precision during class discussions. Example discussion points include “compare two solutions that arrived at the same answer through fundamentally different approaches.” Through comparison-based discussions with peers and educators, students deepen their academic vocabulary.

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

The student-facing platform provides embedded structural frameworks to guide students in using precise mathematical vocabulary during oral discourse and peer strategy reviews, as detailed in the Mathematical Discourse Guide. The guide offers oral sentence frames, such as “I solved this by...” and “First I, then I...”, to structure their explanations in written discourse via the text box feature or in oral discourse via the voice recording feature. “Spicy” level questions throughout the learning pathways explicitly prompt students to justify or explain their answers. For example, in the Algebra I questions aligned to TEKS A.3.I, students justify solutions to systems of linear equations, and in TEKS A.6.A, they analyze key features of quadratic functions and graphs.

The embedded guidance of the “AI Discussion Points” extends the discourse from student-to-educator and to peer-to-peer, facilitating student application of academic vocabulary during discourse. AI Discussion Points analyzes student work on an assignment and surfaces suggested discussion structures and specific solutions for teachers to highlight. Example suggestions include “Students used the elimination method to isolate one variable. How do these different ways of organizing the additional step help in keeping track of the variables?” This question helps students apply appropriate academic vocabulary terms such as elimination, isolate, and variable.

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

The Mathematical Discourse Guide provides guidance to help the educator facilitate mathematical conversations, allowing students to hear math language from peers. Prompts include “Can anyone in the class give another example?” during preteaching key vocabulary and “What is the mathematical term for what you did?” when discussing various problem-solving methods in an after-assignment reflection discussion among students.

Additionally, the materials provide guidance on how students can refine and use math language with peers through the Key Vocabulary tab before the lesson and the AI Discussion Points after completing aligned problems. These discussion points provide follow-up questions that scaffold from accessible language toward precise mathematical vocabulary. For example, in an assignment aligned to TEKS A.5.C, elimination is one of the pre-taught vocabulary words. An AI Discussion Point in this same assignment asks, “Three different approaches are shown for organizing and solving the elimination. How does each approach make it clear which variable was eliminated and why?” This process facilitates refinement of mathematical language. Students have the opportunity to explain their process using the new vocabulary from guided discourse with peers.

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.

The practice cards feature lesson videos with solutions that illustrate exemplary student responses. These videos demonstrate the appropriate use of academic language, mathematical representations, and reasoning processes for students to emulate. For instance, in the “Write Linear Functions From a Table” practice card, the example solution sets up the correct way to calculate slope and labels the y-intercept. The values are then substituted into the slope-intercept equation. Additionally, some problems within the assignment bank, such as those aligned with TEKS A.2.C, include sample solutions.

The Lava Bot provides support and redirection of inaccurate student responses. Example prompts include “Check the slope sign-it shows how temperature changes with time. Is it increasing or decreasing? Adjust the sign in your equation if needed. Want help fixing that?” and “Great job finding the rate of change and the starting temperature, now try to rewrite your equation into standard form as requested.”

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

The materials appropriately integrate TEKS process standards across all strands. For example, TEKS A.1.A, which calls for applying mathematics to problems arising in everyday life, society, and the workplace, appears at every level of problem. A “mild”-level problem aligned with TEKS A.2.D requires students to identify direct variation in a grape-purchasing context where total cost varies proportionally with pounds purchased. A “medium”-level problem aligned with TEKS 8.12.B requires evaluating a house’s value after 10 years using an exponential function that connects algebra to financial modeling. At the “spicy” level, multi-constraint real-world problems bring several skills together, such as modeling an accident-reduction plan for a road safety program using an exponential decay function with biannual decay.

Additionally, “spicy” tasks in the “Quadratic Functions” pathway aligned with process standard TEKS A.2.B require students to analyze a quadratic equation’s structure, formulate which solution method is most efficient, determine the solution, and evaluate whether the answer is consistent with the function’s graph. Students use manipulatives as required by TEKS A.2.C. “Mild” problems throughout pathways provide concrete and visual tool selection, such as area model grids, integer chips, algebra tiles, and number lines.

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

The Alignment Guide includes a “Process Standards Integration” section that describes how process standards are incorporated throughout the learning pathways. A table in this section indicates which process standards are emphasized in each pathway. For example, the “Systems” pathway emphasizes TEKS A.1.A and A.1.B, while the “Linear Functions” pathway emphasizes TEKS A.1.D and A.1.F.

Additionally, the “Process Standards Integration” section of the Alignment Guide explains how process standards are integrated across the learning pathways. The guide states that the TEKS process standards are not taught in isolation but are instead woven into the content of every learning pathway through the design of the problems themselves. The leveled scaffolding structure integrates the multiple process standards across levels of complexity. “Mild” problems emphasize selecting tools and creating representations (TEKS A.1.C, A.1.E). “Medium” problems emphasize the application of mathematics and the communication of ideas (TEKS A.1.A, A.1.D). “Spicy” problems emphasize analyzing relationships, justifying reasoning, and evaluating problem-solving processes (TEKS A.1.B, A.1.F, A.1.G).

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

In the Lesson Companion Guide, “The TEKS Process Standards” section provides a general overview of the TEKS process standards incorporated into all lessons. For example, “mild”-level problems focus on TEKS A.1.C and TEKS A.1.E. “Medium”-level problems emphasize TEKS A.1.A and TEKS A.1.D. “Spicy”-level problems require students to demonstrate deeper-level thinking with process standards TEKS A.1.B, TEKS A.1.F, and TEKS A.1.G.

Additionally, the Lesson Companion Guide provides a detailed overview of the process standards specific to each individual lesson. Each unit of the Lesson Companion Guide, “TEKS Process Standards in this Lesson,” includes specific examples of how the process standards are addressed in the specific lessons.

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

The Algebra I materials provide opportunities for students to think mathematically and make sense of mathematics through the progressive structure of “mild,” “medium,” and “spicy” questions, as well as the student canvas. Within each concept, problems scaffold student understanding from concrete models to abstract applications. “Mild” level problems include tasks that help students make sense of mathematics using manipulatives on the student canvas. “Medium” level problems move from models and visual supports to symbolic procedures, and “spicy” problems focus on multistep applications. This progression provides opportunities for students to move from simply making sense of mathematics to thinking mathematically as they apply these newly learned concepts.

The Lava Bot on the student canvas supports students in persevering through problem-solving by offering targeted hints that encourage them to rethink their approach without giving away the answer. For example, in the “Writing Linear Equations from Graphs” assignment, a Lava Bot hint reads, “Great job identifying that the line starts at 0, but take another look at the fraction for the slope to see if you have the vertical rise and horizontal run in the correct order.” This gives students the opportunity to persevere by not only encouraging them but also honing in on exactly where they are going wrong.

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 Algebra I materials help students understand that there can be multiple ways to solve problems and complete tasks through the student canvas. Students use the “Manipulative Suite” to access concrete models, such as algebra tiles, and visual models, such as number lines. Explanations can be written symbolically or in words. Additionally, the Efficient Approaches Guide “Sample Teacher Prompts for Reflecting on Approaches” section supports educator-led discussion with prompts such as, “Before you start, look at the numbers in this problem. Which strategy do you think will work best here? Why?” This helps students consider multiple ways to solve the problem before beginning.

The materials support students in explaining and justifying that there can be multiple ways to solve problems and complete tasks by using AI Discussion Points. For example, in the “Solving Systems of Equations by Elimination” assignment aligned with TEKS A.5.C, an AI Discussion Point prompts, “Three different approaches are shown for organizing and solving the elimination. How does each approach make it clear which variable was eliminated and why?” This prompts the class to discuss different ways of solving and helps them move toward efficiency by explaining or justifying different approaches.

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 materials offer multiple opportunities for students to make sense of mathematics as they do math with educators through the student canvas. Students do math by dragging problems into a drawing area, using drawing and writing tools, typing math symbols, and using grade-appropriate manipulatives to model and solve problems. For example, in the “Solving Systems of Equations by Elimination” assignment, students work step-by-step on-screen to multiply equations, combine like terms, and determine coordinate locations. Educators can also project a problem on the board and work through it with students. Additionally, teachers can view and project student work using the playback feature, which shows students’ step-by-step work.

The materials offer multiple opportunities for students to make sense of mathematics as they write about and discuss math with peers or educators. For example, many “spicy” level problems require students to explain or justify their answers or reasoning. Students can do this verbally using the voice recording feature or in writing using the text box feature. Additionally, AI Discussion Points provide prompts for educator-led classroom discussions.

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 materials support educators in guiding students to share their problem-solving approaches, including explanations, arguments, and justifications, and to explore multiple points of entry through the student canvas and AI Discussion Points. For example, an Algebra I “spicy” level question prompts students to analyze a student’s solution to an inequality and asks, “Is she correct? Justify your answer.” These explanations and justifications are then shared during educator-led discussions using the AI Discussion Points. Many of these points also focus on different points of entry, such as concrete modeling versus symbolic, and on different problem-solving approaches, such as the standard algorithm versus repeated addition.

Additionally, the Efficient Approaches Guide helps educators guide students to reflect on their problem-solving approaches, including explanations, arguments, justifications, and multiple points of entry. The “Sample Teacher Prompts for Reflecting on Approaches” section of the guide includes questions that prompt students to explain their approach, such as “What strategy did you use to solve this? Can you walk me through your steps?” Prompts that support students in arguing for their approach include “Let’s look at these two solutions. Both are correct. Which one would you choose if the numbers were much larger? Why?” Justification prompts include “You used base ten blocks to solve this. Could you solve it just as quickly without them? What would you do differently?” Finally, reflections on multiple points of entry are supported with the prompt “Before you start, look at the numbers in this problem. Which strategy do you think will work best here? Why?”

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

The Algebra I materials include prompts to help educators provide explanatory feedback based on student responses via the “Common Error” feature. This data appears in real time, allowing the educator to pause, pull up two or three student solutions, and lead a brief comparison. Prompts include “Several students made the same mistake here. What do you think happened? Is there a different approach that would avoid this error?” Additionally, some assignments include a “Most Difficult Problems” tab, which provides prompts for anticipated misconceptions based on aggregated misconception data within the program. For example, in the “Solving Systems of Equations by Elimination” assignment, one prompt instructs teachers to ask, “If you are asked to find the price of an apple but your math first shows you the price of an orange, what should you do next?”

In the Implementation Guide, the “Responding to What You See” section offers guidance to help educators provide explanatory feedback based on student responses. Educators use the “Playback” feature and let the different types of student work determine how to respond. For example, if it’s a class-wide misconception, educators are instructed to freeze students’ screens and address it directly by either selecting a student’s response to play back for the class as a model or demonstrating the correct approach themselves on the platform. If a small group shares the same gap, educatorrs are directed to pull them together for a quick reteach, address the misconception, and then have them continue working through targeted follow-up. Additionally, assignments with the “Most Difficult Problems” tab provide guidance on addressing anticipated misconceptions before starting the assignment. For example, in the “Solving Systems of Equations by Elimination” assignment, guidance states, “Students often correctly solved for the first variable but then missed the negative sign when performing the final subtraction to find the second variable, leading them to give a positive result instead of a negative one.” Additional guidance then prompts for how to address this misconception.