Eighty-one percent of California-based school districts were engaged in an adoption process of K-8 math instructional materials or expected to begin that process before the end of the 2027–28 academic year, according to a report published by the Glen Price Group in May. Of those districts, 64 percent were considered in the early phases of the process — developing a vision and plan, understanding of their needs and identifying evaluation options.
California School Districts’ Perspectives on K-8 Math Instructional Materials Adoption and Implementation found that 71 percent of districts are using K-8 math instructional materials that have been in place for at least six years.
Working from a pool of districts with large enrollment and high percentages of Black, Latinx and/or free or reduced- price meal-eligible students, The Glen Price Group research team used a mixed method approach to examine the experiences of 45 districts spanning 19 counties — representing more than 1 million students in 2024–25 — in the adoption and implementation of high-quality K-8 math instructional materials in alignment with the state’s 2023 Math Framework. In November 2025, the State Board of Education released its list of approved K-8 math instructional materials including 64 options — more than double that of the 2014 list. Some districts opted to start the process prior to the list’s publishing and therefore are further along than others.
“California school districts are required under California Education Code to adopt and implement math instructional materials aligned with current state standards and consistent with the newly adopted Math Framework,” the executive summary explains.
The use of high-quality instructional materials can support student outcomes, according to an accompanying executive summary — and in California where statewide math scores fall below the national average, there is ample opportunity to improve achievement and close persistent achievement gaps.
“When asked which specific factors were important to the assessment of math instructional materials, most districts ranked the following as important: alignment with district goals, teacher/staff perceptions of math instructional materials quality, EdReports ratings, and readiness of materials to implement,” the executive summary states. In addition to soliciting feedback from educators, participating districts noted the value of gathering input from students, families and the community.
Among other key findings:
- Most districts indicated they had started on the list of approved instructional materials, though many expressed feeling overwhelmed by the quantity of options as well as the process to determine which would best suit local needs.
- Though districts’ adoption strategies were “fundamentally similar,” methods of implementation vary widely and just 28 percent of districts have offered professional development explicitly referenced providing ongoing opportunities.
- Districts indicated that there is an implementation capacity gap and while they understand that good implementation requires strategies like coaching and ongoing professional development, they don’t have the resources needed to facilitate that work at scale.
Additionally, researchers found that “the primary limitations districts face in providing professional learning to support curriculum implementation are a lack of time (due to limited professional learning days or the inability to remove teachers from the classroom) and a scarcity of substitute teachers to cover release time.”
The Glen Price Group identified opportunities for impact in areas including strategic partnerships, additional resources and financial resources to support districts that are detailed in the report.
Examples of leveraging strategic partnerships, for instance, include building the capacity of county offices of education to support districts in choosing, piloting and implementing instructional materials or equipping COEs to create resources that address local context and offer peer learning opportunities for their districts. Learn more in the report.
