Independent WestEd review finds Utah draft math standards broadly strong; recommends wording edits for measurability

An independent review by WestEd concluded Utah’s draft K–12 mathematics standards are broadly aligned with leading national and international benchmarks and are ‘‘very strong’’ overall, but recommended targeted edits to improve clarity and measurability in a subset of standards. WestEd presented the findings to the Standards & Assessment Committee and urged authors to focus on wording that makes the student performance evidence explicit to improve reliable assessment.

Project lead Priya Khanan and math content specialist Angela Knott described a two‑phase review: (1) a benchmark comparison to Massachusetts, Minnesota, and Singapore and (2) an eight‑criteria rubric‑based standards‑quality review (measurability, clarity, instructional focus, depth of knowledge, mathematical rigor, developmental appropriateness, and integrated mathematical practices). WestEd found strong instructional focus and developmental appropriateness across grades, a strong sustained data‑science progression distinct to Utah, and most issues that scored lower were wording problems (verbs that describe internal cognitive processes, multi‑expectation standards, or unclear specificity) rather than content gaps.

Committee members pressed WestEd on fluency expectations, the balance of conceptual vs. procedural emphasis, and how AGA (Algebra‑Geometry‑Algebra) and integrated high‑school pathways compare. Staff proposed next steps consistent with the board’s written process: publish WestEd’s report and the updated draft that was reviewed, invite member amendments, and return to the committee with writing‑committee rationales for any changes.

"The Utah standards were broadly aligned with high‑quality mathematics expectations," WestEd reported, and recommended that the writing team prioritize line‑by‑line wording changes that specify observable student performance to improve measurability. The committee requested a condensed list of recommended edits and asked staff to circulate that summary to board members for targeted review.