![]() When our publisher, McGraw Hill Education, pointed out a sampling of the problems, EdReports corrected some of the review’s most egregious errors, but declined to substantively revise their conclusions. ![]() We found the “evidence” provided by reviewers to be largely based upon misconceptions of EM4, misinterpretations of the CCSS-M, outright errors, and what sometimes appear to be fabrications. When we began looking at the specifics, our shock turned to dismay and anger. The EdReports Review ProcessĮdReports claims that the CCSS-M and the Publishers’ Criteria formed the basis of its review process, so given the care we took to adhere to the spirit and letter of those documents, we were initially shocked at the conclusions in the EdReports review. This process is not the only one capable of producing a CCSS-M-aligned curriculum, but we believe it led to a high-quality product that is fully grounded in both the CCSS-M and the latest research on mathematics teaching and learning. ![]() Once lessons were drafted, many were extensively tested in classrooms and revised, some of these undergoing multiple rounds of field testing and revision. As we moved into the writing phase, we attended meticulously to both the CCSS-M and the Publishers’ Criteria, a document that provides stringent guidelines for developing CCSS-M programs. ![]() The early stages of our work included months of careful analysis of the Common Core content and practice standards in-depth research into key aspects of mathematics content and learning and consultation with nationally recognized experts in mathematics education, including the Common Core writers themselves. When we began the development of EM4, we purposefully carried out a process that allowed us to adhere to both the letter and the spirit of the CCSS-M, while still building on the research-based strategies that have been foundational to the success of Everyday Mathematics for decades. The depth of misinformation in the EdReports review has compelled us to respond. In this letter we, the EM4 authors, summarize our response to the EdReports review, which we found to be so appallingly replete with errors and misjudgments about both EM4 and the CCSS-M as to suggest ineptitude.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |