Assignment Review Protocol: Math
The student work review tool is intended to help teachers, leaders, and other stakeholders answer the question, “Does this task give students the opportunity
to meaningfully engage in worthwhile grade-appropriate content?”
PART ONE: Mathematical Contenti: Does this assignment align with the expectations defined by grade-appropriate standards?
Yes Partially No
Does the assignment focus on one or more grade-appropriate mathematics standards? Standard(s):
Do all questions and/or tasks reach the depth of grade-appropriate standard(s)? Use the Yes No
following criteria to guide your thinking. Evidence:
Section 1: Target of the Standard:
Does the task match the target of the standard (conceptual understanding, procedural skill & fluency,
and/or application)? Do the numbers/number types and types of representations (area model, shapes,
graphs, functions, etc.) match those called for by the targeted standard(s)? For example,
o If the standard is conceptual understanding, does the task require more than knowing isolated
facts and methods? Are students asked to make sense of why a mathematical idea is important and
the kinds of contexts in which it is useful?
o If the standard is procedural skill/fluency, does the task require students to apply procedures
accurately, efficiently, flexibly and appropriately? Does the task focus students’ attention on the use
of procedures for the purpose of developing a deeper level of understanding of mathematical
concepts or ideas? If general procedures may be followed, can they be followed mindlessly or are
students asked to engage with the conceptual ideas that underlie the procedures to complete the
task successfully?
o If the standard is application, does the task offer students the opportunity to solve problems in a
relevant and meaningful way? Are students asked to select an efficient method to find a solution
and develop critical thinking skills? Are students asked to actively examine task constraints that
may limit possible solutions and strategies?
Section 2: Coherence: When examining the standard the task addresses,
o Looking across grade-levels, is there a coherent connection to the same topic in a previous
grade? If so, is the task crafted to elicit a more sophisticated level of understanding than would
have been acceptable in the previous grade?
o Is there a coherent connection to another standard within the current grade?
Section 3: Cognitive Complexity: Based on the target of the standard, determine the cognitive
complexity of the task.
Target of Low (Level 1) Medium (Level 2) High (Level 3)
Assignment Review Protocol: Math
the
Standard
Solving the Students may need to relate Solving the problem requires
problem requires multiple grade-level concepts or students to relate multiple
students to recall different types, create multiple grade-level concepts and to
or recognize a representations or solutions, or evidence reasoning, planning,
Conceptu
grade-level connect concepts with analysis, judgment, and/or
al
concept. The procedures and strategies. The creative thought OR work with
Complexit
student does not student must do some reasoning a sophisticated (nontypical)
y
need to relate but may not need to line of reasoning.
concepts or demonstrate a line of reasoning.
demonstrate a line
of reasoning.
Solving the Solving the problem entails Solving the problem requires
problem entails common or grade-level common or grade-level
Procedur little procedural procedure(s) with friendly procedure(s) with unfriendly
al demand or numbers. numbers, an unconventional
Complexit procedural combination of procedures, or
y demand is below requires unusual perseverance
grade level. or organizational skills in the
execution of the procedure(s).
Solving the Solving the problem entails an In addition to an interpretation
problem entails an application of mathematics and of the context, solving the
application of requires an interpretation of the problem requires recognizing
Applicatio mathematics, but context to determine the important features, and
n the required procedure or concept (may formulating, computing, and
Complexit mathematics is include extraneous information). interpreting results as part of a
y either directly The mathematics is not modeling process.
indicated or immediately obvious. Solving the
obvious. problem requires students to
decide what to do.
*Source: [Link]
%20Framework_Final_92619.pdf
Overall Content Rating
Overall, do the content demands of this assignment align with the expectations defined by grade-appropriate standards?
0 – Weakly Aligned 1 – Partially Aligned 2 – Strongly Aligned
Less than half of the questions on the assignment reach More than half (but not all) of the questions on the All the questions on the assignment reach the depth of
the depth of the targeted grade-appropriate standard(s). assignment reach the depth of the targeted grade- the targeted grade-appropriate standard(s).
appropriate standard(s).
PART TWO: Mathematical Practice: Does the assignment provide meaningful opportunities for students to engage in the standards for
mathematical practices?
Yes No
Assignment Review Protocol: Math
Evidence:
Does the assignment require students to engage with one or more mathematical practices while
working on grade-appropriate content?
Does the target standard(s) explicitly call for use of a specific mathematical practice? If so, does the task
provide opportunity for students to engage in the mathematical practice named by the standard?
It may be useful to utilize the front matter of the KAS for Mathematics (p. 12-15) and the Engaging the
SMPs: Look fors and Questions Stems document from the Getting to Know the KAS for Mathematics
module.
Overall Practice Rating
Overall, to what extent does the assignment provide meaningful practice opportunities with the standards for mathematical practices?
0 – Weakly Aligned 1 – Partially Aligned 2 – Strongly Aligned
The assignment does not have students engage with critical The assignment gives students an opportunity to engage The assignment gives students the opportunity to
mathematical practices while working on grade-appropriate with at least one math practice, but not at the level of engage with at least one mathematical practice at
content. depth required by the standard. the appropriate level of depth required by the
standard.
PART THREE: Relevance: Does the assignment give students an authentic opportunity to connect content standards to real-world issues
and/or contexts?
Yes No
Does the majority of the assignment consist of word problems or real-world application
Evidence:
problems/tasks?
Yes No
If the assignment connects grade-appropriate, content standards to real-world experiences, Evidence:
does it also allow students to apply math in a meaningful way?
Do the provided scenarios make sense in a real-world setting?
Do students have to think critically for each new problem rather than applying the same rote
computation over and over without having to make sense of the problem? Is there likely to be more
than one way to solve the problem rather than students all solving the problem in the same way?
Does the assignment provide cues (intentionally or unintentionally) for how to approach the task?
Overall Relevance Rating
Overall, to what extent does the assignment give students an authentic opportunity to
connect content standards to real-world issues and/or contexts?
0 – Weakly Aligned 1 – Partially Aligned 2 – Strongly Aligned
The assignment does not connect content standards to The assignment connects content standards to real- The assignment connects content standards to real
real world experiences. world experiences, but the problems do not allow world experiences and allows students to apply math to
students to apply math to the real world in a meaningful the real world in a meaningful way. It may also include
way. novel problems.
Assignment Review Protocol: Math
PART FOUR: Student Performance: If students have not yet completed the task, users only review the quality of the task. If students
have completed the task, users first review the quality of the task and then analyze students’ performance.
Which students met the expectations of the assignment, as communicated by the directions and/or scoring key?
If no directions and/or scoring key is provided, assume 80% accuracy and completion meets the assignment expectations.
Student 1 Student 2 Student 3 Student 4 Student 5 Student 6
Evidence:
Which students met the expectation of the target standard(s) for the assignment?
If the assignment meets the demands of the standards, then student performance on the standards should match that of the assignment
If the assignment does not meet the demands of the standards, then student performance likely won’t meet the demands of the standards
Student 1 Student 2 Student 3 Student 4 Student 5 Student 6
Evidence:
Overall Rating: Overall, based on ratings for Content Standards, Standards for Mathematical Practices, Relevance and Student Performance, how does this
assignment rate?
0 – Weakly Aligned 1 – Partially Aligned 2 – Strongly Aligned
Overall Rating Rationale:
i
The content of this section was heavily influenced by the EQuIP Student Work Protocol from Achieve, Inc. [Link]
