We use non-experimental data from a large panel of schools and districts in Indiana to evaluate the impacts of math curricula on student achievement. Using matching methods, we obtain causal estimates of curriculum effects at just a fraction of what it would cost to produce experimental estimates. Furthermore, external validity concerns that are particularly cogent in experimental curricular evaluations suggest that our non-experimental estimates may be preferred. In the short term, we find large differences in effectiveness across some math curricula. However, as with many other educational inputs, the effects of math curricula do not persist over time. Across curriculum adoption cycles, publishers that produce less effective curricula in one cycle do not lose market share in the next cycle. One explanation for this result is the dearth of information available to administrators about curricular effectiveness.
This book reviews the evaluation research literature that has accumulated around 19 K-12 mathematics curricula and breaks new ground in framing an ambitious and rigorous approach to curriculum evaluation that has relevance beyond mathematics. The committee that produced this book consisted of mathematicians, mathematics educators, and methodologists who began with the following charge: Evaluate the quality of the evaluations of the thirteen National Science Foundation (NSF)-supported and six commercially generated mathematics curriculum materials; Determine whether the available data are sufficient for evaluating the efficacy of these materials, and if not; Develop recommendations about the design of a project that could result in the generation of more reliable and valid data for evaluating such materials. The committee collected, reviewed, and classified almost 700 studies, solicited expert testimony during two workshops, developed an evaluation framework, established dimensions/criteria for three methodologies (content analyses, comparative studies, and case studies), drew conclusions on the corpus of studies, and made recommendations for future research.
In recent years, funding agencies like the Institute of Educational Sciences and the National Science Foundation have increasingly emphasized large-scale studies with experimental and quasi-experimental designs looking for 'objective truths'. Educational researchers have recently begun to use large-scale studies to understand what really works, from developing interventions, to validation studies of the intervention, and then to efficacy studies and the final "scale-up" for large implementation of an intervention. Moreover, modeling student learning developmentally, taking into account cohort factors, issues of socioeconomics, local political context and the presence or absence of interventions requires the use of large data sets, wherein these variables can be sampled adequately and inferences made. Inroads in quantitative methods have been made in the psychometric and sociometric literatures, but these methods are not yet common knowledge in the mathematics education community. In fact, currently there is no volume devoted to discussion of issues related to large-scale studies and to report findings from them. This volume is unique as it directly discusses methodological issue in large-scale studies and reports empirical data from large-scale studies.
School leaders who succeed at creating a high-achieving learning community must also be committed to creating an equitable environment for all students. In this new book, key scholars across the content areas show how to put into practice a commitment to equity and excellence across the Pre-K12 spectrum. Readers learn directly from experts in each of the content domains (literacy, mathematics, science, social studies, music, early childhood, special education, English language learners, world languages, and physical education) how a commitment to social justice and equity can be grounded in core subject areas, why each has a place in the school, and what they need to know and do in each subject area. This book is a critical instructional leadership resource for new and veteran principals who want to see all students succeed. Contributors: Antonio J. Castro, Julie Causton-Theoharis, Virginia Collier, Katherine Delaney, Catherine Ennis, Virginia Goatley, Beth Graue, Rochelle Gutirrez, Kathleen A. Hinchman, Anne Karabon, Christi Kasa, Dave McAlpine, Mitchell Robinson, Victor Sampson, Sherry A. Southerland, and Wayne Thomas
Encompasses the main concepts and approaches of quantitative impact evaluations, used to consider the effectiveness of programmes, policies, projects or interventions. This textbook for economics graduate courses can also serve as a manual for professionals in research institutes, governments, and international organizations.
This study addresses the effectiveness of "Everyday Mathematics" (EM), a widely used core mathematics curriculum that reflects over two decades of National Science Foundation (NSF)-sponsored research and development studies (Klein, 2007; National Research Council, 2004) and aligns well with recommended policies and practices by the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) Curriculum Focal Points (2006) and National Mathematics Advisory Panel (NMAP) (2008). This and other similar curricula are increasingly needed to strengthen student math skills and ensure that all children are at or above grade level in math proficiency. Statistics present concerns to reaching this goal--only 42% of fourth grade students and 35% of eighth grade students are at or above proficient-level on National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) math scores (National Center for Educational Statistics, 2013). Recent initiatives emphasize the role of early math instruction and curricula, recognizing that students need to develop a well-defined set of skills in critical math content areas (e.g., whole numbers, fractions, elements of geometry, and measurement) in early grades in order to prevent difficulties in later grades. The NMAP (2008) recommended that all students receive effective preparation from an early age to ensure their later success in algebra and emphasized the need for early math programs that mitigate and prevent difficulties. To date, however, Everyday Mathematics is only one of a few elementary school math curriculum reviewed by the What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) (2007) that has demonstrated "potentially positive effects," with the evidence for effectiveness on math achievement rated as medium to large. The "Everyday Mathematics" (EM) curriculum, developed by the University of Chicago School Mathematics Project (UCSMP) during the mid-1980s, and published by Wright Group/McGraw-Hill, relies on research-based practices, which according to the National Research Council (2004), are supported by more researchers and empirical studies than any other elementary mathematics curriculum. EM is a PK-6 curriculum emphasizing six content strands (numbers and numeration; operations and computation; data and chance; measurement and reference frames; geometry; and patterns, functions, and algebra) with learning targets or curriculum focal points identified for each of the six strands at each grade level. Developed largely from NSF-sponsored studies, the curriculum shows promise in preventing math difficulties in early grades. It emphasizes a constructivist philosophy, with a strong emphasis on real-life problem solving, manipulatives, concept development, and targeted use of technology and parent participation. Besides being the highest rated elementary school math curriculum in terms of effectiveness by the WWC (2007), it has also been widely adopted and used across the country. EM is used by nearly 4 million students in more than 11,000 schools in more than 3,000 districts in all 50 states (SRA/McGraw-Hill, 2009). Results from quasi-experimental evaluations have revealed statistically significant math achievement advantages of +0.16 relative to other math curricula (Carroll, 1998; Carroll & Isaacs, 2003; Riordan & Noyce, 2001; SRA/McGraw-Hill, 2003; Waite, 2000; WWC, 2009; Woodward & Baxter, 1997). In addition, a cluster randomized controlled trial (RCT) currently being conducted by the publisher is documenting potential impacts of EM on math achievement in grades K-5 students in three schools in Washington D.C. The study is assessing classroom-level impacts of treatment assignment on the TerraNova math achievement test scores (SRA/McGraw-Hill, 2009b). Despite the curriculum's widespread use and promising research findings, EM has not been evaluated rigorously on a large scale as part of an objective, third-party evaluation. This study provides preliminary evidence that the impacts of EM are not significant on overall students' mathematics performance when implemented at scale in a large sample of schools after one or two years relative to other core math curricula. Tables are appended. [SREE documents are structured abstracts of SREE conference symposium, panel, and paper or poster submissions.].
How good is your school's mathematics program? Test scores can provide some general trend information, but what you--and your students' parents--really need are specifics about the quality of the curriculum, the effectiveness of the instruction, and the school's overall capacity to support mathematics learning.The Mathematics Program Improvement Review (MPIR) is a proven evaluation process focused on standards for high-quality mathematics programs in grades K-12. Based on research into effective program-evaluation methods, the MPIR approach uses multiple data sources to clarify exactly what is working within an individual school's math program and what is not.Author and MPIR developer Ron Pelfrey has used this process to evaluate mathematics programs in more than 300 rural, urban, and suburban schools and has trained hundreds of educators to conduct reviews. Now this handbook makes the MPIR process and its benefits available to everyone. Inside, you'll find guidelines for training review team members and all the materials needed to conduct a review, including* Lists of standards and indicators for the 10 essential components of an effective mathematics program.* Templates for questionnaires, interviews, and classroom observations.* Detailed evaluation rubrics.* Forms for compiling ratings and generating a final report.Whether used as a basis for informal faculty or departmental discussion, to promote best practices in a particular area (such as curriculum or instruction), or to guide a formal program evaluation, this book will help any school or district apply MPIR tools and procedures to bring about positive change in students' mathematics learning.
The audience remains much the same as for the 1992 Handbook, namely, mathematics education researchers and other scholars conducting work in mathematics education. This group includes college and university faculty, graduate students, investigators in research and development centers, and staff members at federal, state, and local agencies that conduct and use research within the discipline of mathematics. The intent of the authors of this volume is to provide useful perspectives as well as pertinent information for conducting investigations that are informed by previous work. The Handbook should also be a useful textbook for graduate research seminars. In addition to the audience mentioned above, the present Handbook contains chapters that should be relevant to four other groups: teacher educators, curriculum developers, state and national policy makers, and test developers and others involved with assessment. Taken as a whole, the chapters reflects the mathematics education research community's willingness to accept the challenge of helping the public understand what mathematics education research is all about and what the relevance of their research fi ndings might be for those outside their immediate community.
