Search

We studied how the distal policy mechanisms of curricular aims and objectives articulated in official curriculum documents influenced classroom instruction, and the factors that were associated with the enactment of those curricular aims and objectives. The study was set in the U.S. context, where there is an ambitious effort to transform curriculum and instruction via the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics (CCSSM). The CCSSM represented the curricular aims and objectives in most of the U.S. at the time of the study. We analyzed enactments of this official curriculum in terms of the rigor of mathematical activity in 47 middle school mathematics lessons from multiple state and curriculum contexts. The enactment of the CCSSM was not uniform across contexts, and the lack of uniformity was associated in part with the type of instructional materials used by teachers. The use of instructional materials classified as "delivery mechanism" was associated with activity we characterized as routine procedural rigor. In lessons involving instructional materials classified as "thinking device," we found greater variation and more occurrences of non-routine forms of rigor. These differences between types of instructional materials occurred despite the finding that teachers across the sample held similar views of the CCSSM. We conclude that the teachers responded more to features in the instructional materials than to the curriculum aims and objectives articulated in the CCSSM while planning and enacting lessons, which has implications for policy makers who aim to influence instruction through national standards and for school districts as they select materials.

An important component of the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics (CCSSM), used by the majority of states in the U.S., has the eight standards for mathematical practice (SMPs). While surveys have investigated teachers' perceptions of the CCSSM few have investigated middle school mathematics teachers' (MSMTs') (grades 6-8) perceptions of the SMPs. Similar to other countries, teachers in the United States frequently use mathematics textbooks. Two different types of textbooks have been in use in the United States, conventional and standards-based. The latter were designed on the basis of earlier standards documents including versions of the SMPs. As a result of these changes to the educational system in the U.S., we sought to characterize MSMTs' perceptions of the SMPs and investigate if these perceptions differed by the type of textbook teachers used. We found that MSMTs struggled in naming the SMPs, misinterpreted the modeling SMP, and conflated components of reform-oriented instruction with the SMPs. MSMTs using a standards-based textbook were more likely to view their textbooks as aligned with the SMPs, x[superscript 2](3) = 7.708, p = 0.026 and to view the SMPs as an instructional philosophy for the CCSSM, Fisher's Exact Test = 3.881, p = 0.05. The implications of these results are discussed.

Digital content is increasingly present in U.S. K-12 classrooms, with a current push by federal officials to increase the rate at which digital textbooks are adopted. While some teachers' use of electronic resources involves locating activities and lessons from various internet sites, textbook and educational software companies have begun to develop comprehensive programs that can supplement if not fully replace traditional paper textbooks. Digital platforms can be transformative, with possibilities for frequent updating, access to multimedia resources, connection to virtual communities, lower production and distribution costs, and customized instruction. However, there have been no attempts to analyze specific programs in mathematics education with respect to these and other features, a gap we seek to address. In this article, we developed and applied a framework to analyze a representative sample of digital curriculum programs in order to help educators better understand characteristics of these materials. We documented two distinct curriculum types, individualized learning programs and digitized versions of traditional textbooks. While the programs offered some of the features identified as transformative, particularly with respect to assessment systems that rapidly and visually report student performance, there were many features that did not take full advantage of the digital medium.

Eight middle school mathematics teachers' perceptions and uses of curriculum materials and the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics (CCSSM) were investigated. Adapting a noticing framework and models of dialogic instruction and direct instruction, teachers' noticing practices with curriculum materials and the CCSSM when planning, enacting, and reflecting on lessons were examined. Teachers who were committed to implementing the CCSSM and who were using one of two substantively different curriculum programs were purposefully selected. Data sources included multiple forms of interviews and classroom observations. The teaching evidenced three distinct noticing patterns. These patterns indicated that teachers' curriculum materials were associated with how teachers perceived and enacted the CCSSM. Teaching with a curriculum program that was designed as a thinking device prioritized the Standards for Mathematical Practice of CCSSM evidenced noticing that was consistent with dialogic instruction. Teaching with a curriculum program that was designed as a delivery mechanism prioritized the Content Standards of CCSSM and evidenced noticing consistent with direct instruction. Findings indicated that the designated curriculum and contributed to differing interpretations of CCSSM and served as a lens for noticing. However, a dialogic curriculum program was not sufficient to support dialogic approaches in practice. One pattern showed teachers planning dialogic lessons, but the lesson enactments were not consistent with teachers' plans, with evidence that the teachers were not aware that their practices differed from dialogic approaches. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

This study examines Middle School Mathematics Teachers' (MSMTs') (N = 1,241) perceptions of the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics (CCSSM) and its impact on the instructional environment. A total of eight factors appear in the data. These factors include professional support, teachers' use of district-adopted and non-district-adopted curricular resources, influence of CCSSM assessment and teacher evaluation on the instructional environment, influence of the CCSSM on classroom instruction, teachers' planning practices, and perceived rigor of the CCSSM. The data suggest that teachers' use of digital resources located online was disconnected from their district-adopted resources suggesting a lack of curricular coherence. MSMTs note that the CCSSM had caused them to incorporate more reform-oriented practices such as exploration and productive struggle into their daily instruction. MSMTs also perceive that the CCSSM includes new content that is more rigorous than previous state standards. Sampled MSMTs state that while state assessments will measure CCSSM content, they are less likely to include more complex problems or the standards for mathematical practice. Teachers are more likely to read teacher resources than student textbook activities online and to use digital resources for remediation instead of inquiry activities. Over one-third of MSMTs wanted more CCSSM professional development.

This study focused on the use of curriculum materials for three teachers who had enacted instructional sequences from the materials on multiple occasions. The study investigated how the teachers drew on the materials, what they understood about the curriculum resources, and how they connected their use of the materials to their observations of student thinking. There were similarities across the teachers, particularly with respect to their goals and how they read and followed recommendations in the teacher resource materials. There were differences in how their task revisions were in response to what they observed about student thinking. The teacher who most intensively observed student thinking made connections between her interpretations of students' strategies and her use of the curriculum resources, allowing her to design learned adaptations. Learned adaptations required both an understanding of the design rationale and empirically developed knowledge of how that rationale played out in practice. The empirically developed knowledge could not be totally anticipated by the designers, in part because it developed within a particular context by a teacher with particular characteristics. The case of the teacher who developed learned adaptations showed how these complementary forms of knowledge helped her to use the curriculum resources in ways that enhanced students' opportunities for sense making. Furthermore, her adaptations were intended to facilitate success not only at the task level, but also across instructional sequences as well. This study also shows how professional vision is not limited to informing only in-the-moment instructional decisions, but also to the use of curriculum materials.

This study investigates how teacher attention to student thinking informs adaptations of challenging tasks. Five teachers who had implemented challenging mathematics curriculum materials for three or more years were videotaped enacting instructional sequences and were subsequently interviewed about those enactments. The results indicate that the two teachers who attended closely to student thinking developed conjectures about how that thinking developed across instructional sequences and used those conjectures to inform their adaptations. These teachers connected their conjectures to the details of student strategies, leading to adaptations that enhanced task complexity and students' opportunity to engage with mathematical concepts. By contrast, the three teachers who evaluated students' thinking primarily as right or wrong regularly adapted tasks in ways that were poorly informed by their observations and that reduced the complexity of the tasks. The results suggest that forming communities of inquiry around the use of challenging curriculum materials is important for providing opportunities for students to learn with understanding. (Contains 2 tables and 2 footnotes.)

This study characterizes the teacher learning that stems from successive enactments of innovative curriculum materials. This study conceptualizes and documents the formation of curriculum-context knowledge (CCK) in three experienced users of a Standards-based mathematics curriculum. I define CCK as the knowledge of how a particular set of curriculum materials functions to engage students in a particular context. The notion of CCK provides insight into the development of curricular knowledge and how it relates to other forms of knowledge that are relevant to the practice of teaching, such as content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge. I used a combination of video-stimulated and semistructured interviews to examine the ways the teachers adapted the task representations in the units over time and what these adaptations signaled in terms of teacher learning. Each teacher made noticeable adaptations over the course of three or four enactments that demonstrated learning. Each of the teachers developed a greater understanding of the resources in the respective units as a result of repeated enactments, although there was some important variation between the teachers. The learning evidenced by the teachers in relation to the units demonstrated their intricate knowledge of the curriculum and the way it engaged their students. Furthermore, this learning informed their instructional practices and was intertwined with their discussion of content and how best to teach it. The results point to the larger need to account for the knowledge necessary to use Standards-based curricula and to relate the development and existence of well-elaborated knowledge components to evaluations of curricula.