Magma Math, 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 Alignment Guide shows the vertical 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 Alignment Guide section titled “Course-Level Design and Horizontal Alignment” features a grade 6 scope and sequence, illustrating the horizontal alignment of the program’s three Instructional Strands. The “Vertical Alignment and Learning Progressions” section 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, adapting 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 grade 6 Diagnostic Guide provides an overview of the beginning-of-year screening administered to students, and offers educator guidance on how to use it effectively. The “Guide to Diagnostic Skill Entry Points” section connects each screener question to its relevant prerequisite TEKS and aligned grade 6 target TEKS. The materials also outline recommended skill entry points and corresponding diagnostic strands for each question.

Additionally, the grade 6 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 include a Teacher Internalization Guide that contains specific protocols for both unit and lesson preparation. The unit internalization protocol guides educators to preview unit objectives, identify the core TEKS, and understand the vertical progression of concepts.

The Teacher Internalization Guide also provides educators with a lesson internalization protocol that includes step-by-step guidance on how to engage with the digital content. Examples of such guidance include analyzing “mild,” “medium,” and “spicy” problem variations, anticipating student misconceptions, and planning for real-time feedback using the educator dashboard. The materials emphasize how important it is for educators to consider students’ diverse needs and identify 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 materials provide educators with 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 guide educators in facilitating rollout planning, and to help educators ensure that foundational operations are established before students are introduced to the platform. This checklist covers five core operational pillars: 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 grade 6 Alignment Guide, part 2, section titled “Grade-Level Design and Horizontal Alignment,” provides a chart that sequences the 11 major chapters (Artifact 2.1, grade 6, scope and sequence). The chart also lists the subchapters and TEKS within each larger chapter. Additionally, the Lesson Companion Guide provides a breakdown of the TEKS and ELPS addressed in each lesson.

In the Lesson Companion Guide, “Lesson Components and Suggested Timeframes,” outlines how much time educators should spend on each of the five components in a 40- to 60-minute time frame. Educator guidance suggests that the first five minutes be dedicated to Set the Objective, followed by 10–15 minutes each for Launch, Monitor and Respond, and Discuss. The last 5–10 minutes should be reserved for the Track and Plan component. Additionally, the “Assessment and Progress Tracking” section of the Lesson Companion Guide provides assessment resources aligned with both the TEKS and ELPS, including guidance on using the “Progress” tab to monitor TEKS-aligned assessment data, and guidance on 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 guide, available in both English and Spanish, is intended to be shared with families at the start of the school year.

The Family Guide provides educators with guided support for each unit, including 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 grade 6 defines and explains the purpose of different types of assessments, and provides educators with guidance on how to 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 educators with a formal measure of what students know without hints. The data generated is designed to help in identifying areas for reteaching, planning reassessment, and differentiating the next unit.

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

The Assessment Guide for grade 6 provides educators with instructional support for implementing formative assessments accurately, including warm-ups, exit tickets, comprehension checks, and spiral reviews. Additionally, the guide details how to use data analytics to identify topics that require reteaching; plan for reassessment; configure settings for “quiz mode”; or tailor instruction for differentiation in the upcoming unit.

The Assessment Administration Guide provides educators with guidance on administering assessments consistently and efficiently. Math coaches, curriculum leads, and district coordinators build assessments centrally and distribute them to educators across grade levels, schools, or districts. Educators receive the assessment with all settings pre-configured, 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 grade 6 materials 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, as well as a 140-language translation tool. Educators also customize the tools available to each student 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 21 questions designed to assess students’ understanding at multiple Depth of Knowledge (DOK) levels. For example, in the grade 6 diagnostic, problem 1 asks students to compare decimals using basic recall (DOK 1), problem 5 asks students to divide decimals in a real-world context requiring skill application (DOK 2), and problem 13 is a multi-step word problem that utilizes strategic thinking (DOK 3).

The materials include diagnostic assessments with more than two interactive problem types. For example, in the grade 6 diagnostic screener, problem 18 is multiple-choice, problem 21 is free-response, and problem 20 is text entry.

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 grade 6 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, and 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: “mild,” “medium,” and “spicy.” “Mild” items assess low-level procedural recall and simple numerical operations, “medium” items require strategic application of abstract grade-level concepts, and “spicy” items demand non-routine 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 multi-layered performance metrics into the educator 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 grade 6 states that the program uses colored indicators to grade every question automatically: green indicates a correct first attempt, orange indicates a correct answer reached after multiple attempts, and red indicates an incorrect response. The heatmap displays student 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 for each assignment through the “AI Student Summaries” section on the educator dashboard. These summaries indicate which questions the student answered correctly, and provide an analysis of where the student went wrong on incorrect responses. Example rationales in the “Simplifying Linear Expressions” assignment include: “Strong with combining like terms and identifying equivalent expressions (1: 2x+4+x -> 3x+4; 2: correctly matches 2a-3b to 2a-3b, 2b-5b+2a, a+a-b-b-b),” and “Watch sign rules with subtraction of a negative expression (3: ‘-(-7g+14)’ requires changing both signs inside).”

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 grade 6 students complete their work, the system evaluates each response in real time. Students receive instant feedback that indicates whether they are progressing correctly, and their results are dynamically displayed in the heatmap. The heatmap tool highlights emerging patterns and trends across the classroom and provides educators with color-coded updates on each student’s progress, including the number of attempts made on each problem and whether hints were used.

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 grade 6 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 grade 6 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 uses a “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 that indicates whether their answers are correct or incorrect. If a student answers incorrectly, a demonstration video appears, walking them through the steps to solve a similar problem before they are given the opportunity to reattempt the question. Additionally, the “Lava Bot” feature provides automated feedback and hints that check understanding in the moment by responding to student errors with immediate feedback, hints, and guided support before students move on to other items.

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 grade 6 outlines structured, small-group intervention lessons that are 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 2 and tier 3 interventions. It also includes strategies for using the common error flag during classroom discussions.

The live assignment dashboard equips instructors with automated tracking and analytics to identify student misconceptions during activities that are scaffolded for those 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. Explicit educator guidance for using these features is provided in multiple materials, 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 grade 6 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” feature 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 grade 6 provides educators with 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 material 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 non-routine multi-step 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. This feature grants 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 grade 6 materials include accommodations such as text-to-speech, content and language supports, and calculators that educators can enable or disable to support individual students. Additionally, educators can choose a translation language for each student from a selection of over 140 languages. Finally, three calculator types are available that educators can enable or disable for each student, including basic, scientific, and graphing calculators.

The “Lava Bot” offers embedded content and language support features, such as “Lava hints,” that assist students in understanding questions by providing guiding questions that scaffold both language and process. When EB students encounter difficulties, translated “Lava hints” deliver immediate scaffolding in the students’ home language. This 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.

Through the Concrete-Representational-Abstract (CRA) approach outlined in the Implementation Guide, grade 6 educators are provided with guidance on offering students options to demonstrate their understanding of mathematical concepts. 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-ten 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 to illustrate their algebraic or arithmetic reasoning and show abstract understanding.

The Efficient Approaches Guide provides educator guidance for supporting students using a workspace where students can 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 on using the “Teacher Playback” feature to open student work and replay the full solution process. Educators can 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 how to demonstrate 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 that highlights the most frequently missed questions and common errors, offering suggested action steps to address those errors. Additionally, educator guidance includes prompts for anchoring big ideas and activating prior knowledge. For example, in a grade 6 assignment on simplifying linear equations, prompts include questions such as, “Can anyone provide another example?” and “When combining the b terms in each expression, do you end up with exactly -3b?” Also, the “AI Discussion Points” section for each assignment analyzes student work to highlight and connect the key patterns, features, and relationships seen in 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, a platform where students develop mathematical concepts through the Concrete-Representational-Abstract (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, the “AI Discussion Points” section suggests specific probing questions for each question that educators can 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,” as well as educator guidance on using the platform to demonstrate multiple ways of problem 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, Tier 1, offers grade 6 educators guidance on whole-class instruction. This includes monitoring student responses and making real-time adjustments to address individual needs by identifying students who require small-group tier 1 support. Guidance for tier 2 support encompasses error analysis discussions and ongoing student monitoring. For tier 3, 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 grade 6 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, as well as abstract equations or voice-recording capturing explanations.

The Implementation Guide outlines how each standard within the content library includes problems categorized as “mild,” “medium, or “spicy” in complexity. “Mild” problems introduce concepts with scaffolding, “medium” problems apply these concepts with grade-level rigor, and “spicy” problems involve multi-step reasoning, strategy comparison, and mathematical justification. The materials offer educator guidance on when to assign higher-level problems to specific students who they identify as ready for enrichment. For students ready to advance further, the content library offers materials for all grade levels, enabling educators to 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.

AI Discussion Points in the educator dashboard provide discussion prompts for timely feedback during lesson delivery. For example, a discussion point for a grade 6 assignment on simplifying linear expressions includes the prompt, “Two different methods were used: algebra tiles and a symbolic approach, but both arrived at 3x + 4. What does each method show about why the two x-terms combine but the 4 does not?”

The live educator 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, AI Student Summaries in the educator 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 “confuses coordinate order for x-intercepts (swaps x and y).”

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 grade 6 adaptive materials include embedded linguistic accommodations designed for EB students at the pre-production 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 utilize simpler sentence structures, increased visual scaffolding, and fewer multi-step 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, mid-level “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 “challenging” 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 grade 6 materials include embedded multilingual supports that accommodate EB students at every ELPS proficiency level. Examples of this 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 contains additional implementation guidance, including a table that illustrates how linguistic support systematically decreases as 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 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 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 grade 6 educators to support EB students in developing academic vocabulary through oral discourse, incorporating a recommended routine for pre-teaching 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 cross-linguistic 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 EB 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, and features a progressive difficulty structure that scaffolds academic vocabulary. Finally, the materials foster cross-linguistic 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 “Find Parts, Wholes, or Percents in Problems,” TEKS 6.5.B, the first two practice cards require students to solve for a missing part or whole. Students then apply this understanding to word problems in the last practice card of the set. Additionally, 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 6.11 require students to use the stylus tool in the interactive digital workspace to write the exact integer and rational coordinates of various pre-plotted points. This open-response interface guides students to demonstrate depth of geometric reasoning, as opposed to selecting a single multiple-choice option.

Instructional assessments throughout learning pathways require students to demonstrate depth of understanding aligned to the TEKS. For example, question 21 of the Diagnostic Exam directs students to “use the data to create a line plot showing how many students practiced for each number of hours” and “determine the range, the difference between the maximum and the minimum, of hours practiced.” This task requires students to construct a visual representation, interpret data, and calculate statistical measures, demonstrating depth of understanding aligned to TEKS 6.13.A.

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.

To support grade-level proficiency and enrichment, each instructional unit features a progression model that scaffolds core questions through increasingly rigorous levels of mathematics. For example, during a grade 6 assignment creation sequence on rates and unit rates (TEKS 6.4.B, 6.4.D, and 6.4.E), educators access a multi-tiered problem selection menu containing “mild,” “medium,” and “spicy” level questions. Students progress from “mild” tasks in which they calculate basic unit rates from straightforward tables, to evaluating word problems with multi-step contexts in “medium” tasks, to analyzing complex currency conversion ratios in “spicy” tasks. This satisfies both core grade-level proficiency and localized grade-level enrichment.

To facilitate advanced, above-grade-level proficiency and extensions, the curriculum documentation provides educators with resources on how to assign questions from adjacent grade levels. For example, the Implementation Guide shows educators how to access the standards-aligned content library, where they can select and assign tasks across multiple grade levels, including above-grade-level work when appropriate. This structural flexibility allows educators to purposely move beyond current grade-level constraints. Additionally, the Enrichment and Extension Guide provides educators with information on how to use the adaptive nature of assignment problems at varying levels of difficulty, and the student workspace 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, leading 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. 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, grade 6 materials begin with strand 1, “Number Systems and Operations.” This strand focuses on extending students’ understanding of the number system to include all rational numbers as well as negative integers, fractions, and decimals.

Strand 1 includes four chapters that connect the big idea of the rational number system to its applicable uses. Chapter 1, “Understanding and Representing Rational Numbers,” establishes the foundational concepts of classifying rational numbers, understanding absolute value and opposites, and comparing and ordering rational numbers. Chapter 2, “Operations on Positive Rational Numbers,” builds on this number sense by requiring students to multiply and divide fractions and decimals, connect multiplication patterns as scaling, and connect the relationship of fractions and division. Chapter 3, “Operations on Integers,” extends arithmetic to negative numbers through addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division of integers. Chapter 4, “Converting Units,” applies rational number concepts to measurement contexts, requiring students to convert between customary and metric units using multiplication and division with decimals. The horizontal coherence of this strand weaves together the relationships between rational number operations 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 grade 6 divides the material into five overarching mathematical strands, and provides an explicit vertical rationale that demonstrates coherence across concepts and grade bands. 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 non-proportional linear relationships, as well as 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.

Through scaffolded lessons and activities in each subchapter, the materials demonstrate coherence by connecting students’ prior knowledge of concepts to the mathematical concepts they will learn in the current grade level. “Mild” tasks activate students’ prior conceptual understanding from grade 5 by using familiar models and representations while introducing a new grade 6 concept. For example, in the “Understanding and Representing Rational Numbers” pathway, “mild” tasks display two integers circled on a number line and ask students to determine which is greater. This bridges the grade 5 understanding of number lines and comparing whole numbers, decimals, and positive numbers, to the new concept of ordering integers that include negative values. “Spicy” tasks extend the connection of mathematical concepts to future grade levels. For example, in the “Understanding Proportional Relationships” pathway, “spicy” problems present two sequences, one additive and one multiplicative, displayed side by side. Students are asked to determine when one quantity overtakes the other. This multi-constraint reasoning in comparing linear growth patterns previews the function analysis demands of grade 8 and Algebra I. The mathematical content stays within grade 6, but the strategic complexity builds conceptual habits that future grades require.

The materials demonstrate coherence across lessons and activities through the use of “mild,” “medium,” and “spicy” level tasks that require students to apply and extend procedural skills from grade 5 to the current grade level. For example, “medium” tasks in the “Operations on Positive Rational Numbers” pathway present decimal division without visual models or scaffolding. Instead, students must rely on the level of procedural fluency with decimal operations that they developed in grade 5 before lessons extend to division contexts at the grade 6 level, which require understanding of decimal place value. “Spicy” tasks demonstrate coherence of procedures to the mathematical concepts to be learned in future grade levels, such as “spicy” tasks in the geometry pathway that combine geometric reasoning with solving equations. These tasks require students to find unknown angle measures in triangles, where angles are expressed as algebraic expressions, such as x and (2x - 30). This procedural complexity directly prepares students for the algebraic and geometric synthesis required in grades 7 and 8.

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, and facilitates the integration of prerequisite concepts and skills into current, separate instructional pathways. For example, during an assignment creation sequence in grade 6 geometry, educators can open the digital problem selection workspace to add a problem aligned with TEKS 6.3.A and 6.3.E into a new assignment built for TEKS 6.8D. The educator can utilize the dashboard interface to add a “mild” problem from the earlier rational number pathway, prompting students to retrieve the conceptual foundation of dividing and partitioning fractional values using visual grid models. The educator can then pair this with current “medium” and “spicy” geometry problems under TEKS 6.8D, which feature fractional side lengths. These tasks require students to retrieve and execute their past fraction multiplication and division procedural skills to find the area within a completely new geometric measurement context.

The “Spiral Review” section of the Assessment Guide shows educators how to use the digital assessment creator to design spaced retrieval opportunities for previously learned concepts across learning pathways. For example, educators can create assignments that combine problems from chapter 1, “Understanding and Representing Rational Numbers,” with current problems in chapter 5, “Proportional Relationships.” The digital materials provide educators with access to content beginning in grade 2, which they can use to build assessments that include foundational content from previous grades as well as previously learned content from the current grade. The large catalog of tasks also 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.

Grade 6 educator materials 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, and requires them to continuously re-evaluate the core conceptual properties required to decode across mixed mathematical domains.



Across domains, units, and grade-level progressions, “Practice Mode” provides interleaved practice opportunities that combine related mathematical skills and concepts. Personalized recommendations based on student performance require learners to revisit previously learned content while engaging with current standards. These recommendations help strengthen connections among mathematical ideas and support retention, transfer, and deeper conceptual understanding. For example, students working with proportional relationships engage in interleaved practice that incorporates rational number operations, expressions, equations, and percent applications, which reinforces connections among multiple grade 6 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 “Dot Plots” pathway (TEKS 6.12.A, 6.13.A), one question presents two dot plots that show the weights of various dogs, and asks how many more seven-pound dogs were in group A than in group B. Students interpret and compare the data in the dot plots.

Additionally, materials include questions and tasks that require students to evaluate mathematical concepts and analyze complex, real-world situations. For example, in the “Box Plots” pathway (TEKS 6.12.A, 6.12.D, 6.13.A), one question presents a box plot of temperature data and asks students to choose the most accurate statement based on the information. Similarly, another problem presents a double box plot of test grades and asks which class performed better. Students then justify their answers.

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, grade 6 students have access to integer chips to model integer operations concretely. “Mild” level problems in the “Operations on Integers” pathway provide visual scaffolding that demonstrates how to use these manipulatives, which students can continue to use independently in later problems.

The materials include questions and tasks that give students opportunities to create pictorial representations of mathematical situations. For example, students have access to number lines to model integer operations. “Mild” level problems provide visual scaffolding that shows how to use these visuals, which students can continue to use independently on later problems. Additionally, questions in the “Operations on Integers” pathway require students to explicitly use a provided number line to model integer operations.

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 “Operations on Integers” pathway, students solve the following problem: “Pipes may freeze at 32°F. The current temperature in Tallahassee is 59°F, but will drop 3°F per hour for the next 8 hours. Should residents be concerned about their water pipes freezing? Explain.” 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, in the “Linear Equations and Inequalities” pathway, students solve the following problem: “A train is traveling at 80 miles per hour. If its next stop is 280 miles away, will the train reach the stop in exactly 3 hours and 30 minutes? Explain your answer.” This requires students not only to write and solve an equation, but also to apply it and analyze its real-world implications.

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 provide tasks designed to build the automaticity students need to complete grade-level mathematical tasks. “Mild” level problems are used for basic, repetitive calculations or tasks, including TEKS 6.1.B (use mathematical processes to acquire and demonstrate mathematical understanding), 6.3.E (add, subtract, multiply, and divide positive rational numbers fluently), and 6.4.G (generate equivalent forms of fractions, decimals, and percents). The progression of standards within each pathway ensures that students engage in repeated and varied practice with rational number operations and numerical representations, building automaticity and accuracy. Additionally, educators can add these problems to any assignment to give students a consistent refresher in foundational skills as they work through later curriculum.

The materials also include tasks designed to build the fluency that students need to complete grade-level math tasks. “Medium” tasks build on the “mild” tasks to increase fluency. For example, in the “Ratio Tables” problem set, “medium” problems deepen understanding of ratios by requiring students to find missing values in tables. These repetitive tasks use the same type of problem application, building 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.

These materials provide opportunities on the Student Canvas for students to practice applying efficient and flexible mathematical procedures across learning pathways. The interface lets students choose how to solve and record their work using multiple valid strategies, including by handwriting equations, typing text, drawing layouts, using digital manipulatives, or annotating coordinate grids, rather than forcing a single prescribed method on all students. For example, students solving an integer addition problem can choose the number line for a visual approach, integer chips for a concrete model, or the equation writer for an abstract symbolic solution. This repeated practice across multiple representations aims to build both flexibility and efficiency as students discover which strategies work best for different problem types.

Through error-analysis questions, the materials offer opportunities for students to practice applying accurate mathematical procedures across learning pathways. For example, in a question aligned with TEKS 6.7.C, students evaluate a sample calculation and answer, “In which step did Claire make an error? Justify your answer using properties of operations.” This allows students to identify the error and 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.

These materials offer opportunities for students to evaluate mathematical representations, models, strategies, and solutions for efficiency and flexibility across learning pathways. Educators receive explicit prompts and guidance to display different student approaches for comparison, and can access classroom discussion support using AI Discussion Points and the playback feature. For example, in an assignment on simplifying linear expressions, the AI Discussion Points pose the question, “Two different methods were used: algebra tiles and a symbolic approach, but both arrived at 3x + 4. What does each method show about why the two x-terms combine but the 4 does not?” 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?’” These materials support a classroom in which mathematical procedures are consistently evaluated for efficiency, and mathematical concepts for flexibility.

The materials offer opportunities for students to assess the accuracy of mathematical solutions across learning pathways through error-analysis questions. For example, in a question aligned with TEKS 6.7.A, students evaluate four example calculations and answer, “Keylene, Carina, Angel, and Venecia have evaluated the following expression. 80÷5+3×(−10). Who is correct?” This requires students to evaluate and compare multiple mathematical processes for accuracy.

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

These materials provide guidance to help students select increasingly efficient approaches to solving math problems. As tasks progress from “mild” to “medium” to “spicy,” reducing scaffolding helps students shift from less efficient conceptual approaches to more efficient procedural ones once the foundation is set. Additionally, AI Discussion Points offer educators guidance for classroom discussions and help evaluating multiple approaches for efficiency. For example, one AI Discussion Point on a question aligned to TEKS 6.7.C states, “Two different methods were used: algebra tiles and a symbolic approach, but both arrived at 3x + 4. What does each method show about why the two x-terms combine but the 4 does not?”

The Efficient Approaches Guide provides educators with guidance on how 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. To facilitate strategy-comparison discussions, educators receive specific evaluation prompts, such as, “Do you think there is a way to get the same answer in fewer steps?”

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

The Conceptual and Procedural Emphasis Guide explains how the TEKS’s conceptual and procedural emphases are integrated to 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 “Simplifying Linear Expressions” pathway, TEKS 6.7.C, “mild” problems involve combining like terms using algebra tile models. Algebra tiles represent expressions by grouping tile types to illustrate the concept of like terms. This approach emphasizes conceptual understanding before symbolic simplification.

The Enrichment and Extension Guide details how the platform balances both the conceptual and procedural demands of the TEKS. The guide outlines a “concrete-representational-abstract” approach in which students use interactive tools in the Student Canvas, such as fraction bars, number lines, and base-ten blocks, to concretely model mathematical ideas. For example, in the “Understanding and Representing Rational Numbers” pathway, TEKS 6.2.D, the materials present vertical bar models divided into 10 equal segments. Shaded sections allow students to compare decimals, such as 0.2 and 0.5, by counting sections before applying symbolic comparison rules. This addresses a student’s conceptual understanding of decimal magnitude before procedural comparison.

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.

These materials include questions and tasks that offer students opportunities to use concrete and pictorial models, as required by the TEKS. For example, problems aligned with TEKS 6.7.C use algebra tiles and pictorial models to evaluate equivalent expressions, while problems aligned with TEKS 6.5.B use bar models and base 10 blocks to solve real-world percent problems.

The materials include questions and tasks that provide opportunities for students to use abstract models, as required by the TEKS. For example, “medium” problems require students to work with symbolic and algorithmic representations, removing visual supports. In TEKS 6.2.D, on ordering rational numbers, tasks appear without bar models or number lines. In TEKS 6.3.E, on dividing decimals, students are asked to apply the algorithm without conversion tables. In TEKS 6.7.B, on simplifying linear expressions, students combine like terms without algebra tiles. The mathematical content remains the same in each, but the representational demand shifts to the abstract.

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.

Across the rational number and proportional reasoning strands, the online student platform supports students in making connections among concrete, representational, and abstract reasoning. Learning pathways progress from manipulatives to visual models—such as number lines, area models, and tape diagrams—to symbolic expressions and equations. These materials are aligned with TEKS 6.1.A–6.1.E (mathematical process standards), TEKS 6.2.A–6.2.C (representing and comparing rational numbers), TEKS 6.3.E (fluency with rational number operations), TEKS 6.4.G (equivalent forms of fractions, decimals, and percents), and TEKS 6.5.B–6.5.C (ratios and rates). This progression emphasizes the importance of students’ ability to consistently connect meaning, models, and procedures.

The grade 6 question bank includes structured opportunities to help students connect, define, and explain representational models for abstract mathematical concepts. These materials align with TEKS 6.12.A and 6.13.A, which focus on representing and interpreting numerical data distributions using graphical models. For example, a pathway aligned to a specific TEKS may include a task that features a pictorial dot plot showing a dog shelter’s weight distribution along a continuous number line. To solve the problem, students cannot simply perform a rote counting procedure. Rather, they must actively analyze the visual clusters, gaps, and isolated values on the graph, then connect them directly to formal, abstract, statistical definitions by identifying the true symbolic statements, such as defining the data as having two clusters and two outliers. This design forces students to explicitly translate visual structural properties from a graphical model into abstract vocabulary and analytical logic.

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

Students are provided with opportunities to develop their academic mathematical language using visuals and manipulatives on the Student Canvas platform, primarily through the “Manipulative Suite” and 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—using tools such as fraction bars, base-ten 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, within the “Data Distributions” pathway, students analyze a pictorial dot plot that depicts a numerical distribution. To demonstrate comprehension, students use academic vocabulary such as clusters, gaps, and outliers, to describe the dataset’s structural characteristics.

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 educators can use AI Discussion Points to prompt students to refine their language and move toward precise, TEKS-aligned academic vocabulary. For example, one open-ended question asks, “How would you explain this to a student who got a different answer?” Furthermore, each assignment 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 educators 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 grade 6, these vocabulary cards include terms such as ratio, rate, proportion, and equivalent. Visual models and contextual examples help students connect mathematical language to concrete representations.

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 the classroom as they communicate with peers and educators. For example, the guide instructs educators to use “key vocabulary” cards as the anchor for a brief pre-teaching routine before students begin solving. Educators display each term, read it aloud, ask students to repeat it, show three examples, and ask what students 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 material 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 grade 6 curriculum includes embedded guidance to help educators extend students’ use of academic vocabulary in the classroom as they communicate with peers and educators (as outlined in the Mathematical Discourse Guide). The guide directs educators 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 educators 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. An example discussion point is, “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 embeds structural frameworks to guide students in using precise mathematical vocabulary during oral discourse and peer strategy reviews, as detailed in the Mathematical Discourse Guide. This guide provides oral sentence frames—such as “I solved this by...”, and “First I, then I...”—to structure students’ explanations. Students can use the text box feature in written discourse and the voice-recording feature for oral discourse. “Spicy” level questions throughout the learning pathways explicitly prompt students to justify or explain their answers. For example, within the grade 6 “Data Distributions” pathway, students evaluate a numeric dot plot and use the voice-recording or text box tool on their canvas to justify their thinking.

Embedded guidance in the AI Discussion Points extends the discourse from student-to-teacher to peer-to-peer, facilitating students’ application of academic vocabulary during discussion. AI Discussion Points analyzes student work on an assignment, then surfaces suggested discussion structures and specific solutions for educators to highlight. Example suggestions include, “Students used both symbolic manipulation and visual modeling to represent the expression. How does connecting the physical tiles to the algebraic terms help clarify the meaning of like terms?” This question helps students apply appropriate academic vocabulary, such as symbolic, algebraic terms, and like terms.

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 educator guidance to help facilitate mathematical conversations in the classroom, which allow students to hear math language from peers. Prompts include asking, “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 “key vocabulary” materials provide guidance on how students can refine and use math language with peers before the lesson. After completing aligned problems, AI Discussion Points provide follow-up questions that scaffold from accessible language toward precise mathematical vocabulary. For example, in an assignment aligned to TEKS 6.7.C, like terms is one of the pre-taught vocabulary words. An AI Discussion Point in this same assignment prompts students to “compare simplifying algebraically versus substituting g=1 or g=2. Which method helps you spot sign or arithmetic mistakes faster?” This process facilitates mathematical language refinement. 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 “Solve Triangle Area Problems” practice card, the example solution labels the triangle’s base and height and demonstrates the correct substitution of values into the formula. Additionally, some problems within the assignment bank, such as those aligned with TEKS 6.4.D, include sample solutions.

The “Lava Bot” feature provides support and redirection of inaccurate student responses. One example prompt states, “Think of the plus and minus signs like a battle where one plus and one minus cancel each other out and disappear, so try matching them up to see which side has symbols left over.” Another prompt states, “Great job identifying that you can multiply by 4 to find the missing value, so try applying that same × 4 to the 10 students in the first class to see what the new total of students would be.”

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 6.1.A, which calls for applying mathematics to problems arising in everyday life, society, and the workplace, appears at every level of problem. “Mild” level problems aligned with TEKS 6.4.H require students to analyze conversion reference tables that show relationships between feet and inches, pounds and ounces, or liters and milliliters. “Medium” level problems aligned with TEKS 6.3.A present a jug containing half a liter of water and glasses that hold a quarter liter each, engaging students in fraction division in a tangible setting. At the “spicy” level, multi-constraint, real-world problems bring several skills together—such as determining whether a train can reach a stop when given the distance, speed, and time—in problems aligned with TEKS 6.10.B.

Additionally, “spicy” tasks in the geometry pathway feature a triangle with angle measurements provided in the form of algebraic expressions, and in alignment with process standard TEKS 6.2.B., students are asked to find the measurements. They are prompted to use the problem-solving model to analyze the angle-sum relationship, formulate the equation, determine the solution, and evaluate whether the result is geometrically valid. Students also use manipulatives as required by TEKS 6.2.C. “Mild” level 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 for grade 6 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 “Converting Units” pathway emphasizes TEKS 6.1.A and TEKS 6.1.C, while the “Proportional Relationships” pathway emphasizes TEKS 6.1.D and TEKS 6.1.F.

Additionally, the “Process Standards Integration” section of the Alignment Guide explains how process standards are integrated across learning pathways. The guide states that the TEKS process standards are not taught in isolation, but rather are 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 6.1.C, 6.1.E), “medium” problems emphasize the application of mathematics and the communication of ideas (TEKS 6.1.A, 6.1.D), and “spicy” problems emphasize analyzing relationships, justifying reasoning, and evaluating problem-solving processes (TEKS 6.1.B, 6.1.F, 6.1.G).

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

In the Lesson Companion Guide “TEKS Process Standards” section, educators are provided with a general overview of the TEKS process standards that are incorporated into all lessons. For example, “mild” level problems focus on TEKS 6.1.C and TEKS 6.1.E, “medium” level problems emphasize TEKS 6.1.A and TEKS 6.1.D, and “spicy” level problems require students to demonstrate deeper-level thinking with process standards TEKS 6.1.B, TEKS 6.1.F, and TEKS 6.1.G.

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

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

In addition to the Student Canvas, grade 6 materials provide students with opportunities to think mathematically and make sense of mathematics through the progressive structure of “mild,” “medium,” and “spicy” questions. 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” feature on the Student Canvas supports students in persevering through problem solving by offering targeted hints, which encourage them to rethink their approach without giving away the answer. For example, in the “Simplifying Linear Equations” assignment, a “Lava Bot” hint reads, “Great job counting all 7 pieces in the model, but can you think about whether the tall x bars and the small 1 squares are the same kind of thing or if they should be kept in separate groups?” 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.

Grade 6 materials in the Student Canvas help students understand that there can be multiple ways to solve problems and complete tasks. For example, students can 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 section called “Sample Teacher Prompts for Reflecting on Approaches” also supports educator-led discussion, including 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 AI Discussion Points materials support students in explaining and justifying that there can be multiple ways to solve problems and complete tasks. For example, in the “Simplifying Linear Equations” assignment aligned with TEKS 6.7.C, one AI Discussion Point asks students to “compare simplifying algebraically versus substituting g=1 or g=2. Which method helps you spot sign or arithmetic mistakes faster?” This allows the class to discuss different ways of problem 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.

These materials provide students with multiple opportunities to make sense of mathematics as they do math with educators via the Student Canvas. On the Student Canvas platform, 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 “Data Analysis” pathway, students actively solve problems by creating dot plots, analyzing data distributions, and using the canvas to show their thinking in full. Educators can also project a problem on the board and work through it with students. Additionally, educators can view and project student work using the playback feature to show their step-by-step process.

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 using explanations, arguments, and justifications, and to explore multiple points of entry through the Student Canvas and “AI Discussion Points” section. For example, a grade 6 “spicy” level question prompts students to analyze a situation in which a student made an incorrect conversion. Students are then prompted to “explain Sophie’s error and find how many ounces the rabbit actually weighs.” 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 by providing explanations, arguments, justifications, and multiple points of entry. The “Sample Teacher Prompts for Reflecting on Approaches” section of the guide includes questions that ask 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 grade 6 materials include a “Common Error” feature that helps educators provide explanatory feedback based on student responses. 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 “Simplifying Linear Equations” assignment, one prompt instructs educators to ask students, “If you have two apples and four bananas, can you say you have six apples, or do they stay separate because they are different fruits?”

The “Responding to What You See” section of the Implementation Guide offers guidance to help educators provide explanatory feedback based on student responses. Educators are directed to use the playback feature and let the different types of student work determine how to respond. For example, if there is a class-wide misconception, educators are instructed to freeze students’ screens and address the issue directly. Educators can either select a student’s response to play back for the class as a model, or demonstrate the correct approach themselves on the platform. If a small group shares the same gap, educators 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 a “most difficult problems” tab provide guidance on addressing anticipated misconceptions before students start the assignment. For example, in the “Simplifying Linear Equations” assignment, educator guidance states, “A common error among students was failing to distribute the negative sign to the second term inside the parentheses, which led them to add 14 instead of subtracting it.” This is followed by guidance and prompts for how to address this misconception.