The impact of middle-grades mathematics curricula and the classroom learning environment on student achievement

Journal for Research in Mathematics Education

Volumn 39, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 247-280

  Tarr, James E ^a   Reys, Robert E ^a   Reys, Barbara J ^a   Chávez, Óscar ^a   Shih, Jeffrey ^b   Osterlind, Steven J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA   (United States)

Author keywords

Achievement; Curriculum; Integrated curriculum; Middle grades (5 8); Quasi experimental design; Reform in mathematics education; Teaching practice

Indexed keywords

EID: 44349106540     PISSN: 00218251     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. Bay-Williams, J. M., Reys, B. J., Reys, R. E. (2003). Effectively implementing standards-based mathematics curricula in middle schools. Middle School Journal, 34 (4), 36-41.
2. Ben-Peretz, M. (1990). The teacher-curriculum encounter: Freeing teachers from the tyranny of texts. Albany: State University of New York Press.
3. Borko, H., Kieran, C., & Lester, F. K. (2004). Teaching and learning. In F. K. Lester & J. Ferrini-Mundy (Eds.), Proceedings of the NCTM research catalyst conference (pp. 163-169). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
4. Briars, D. (March, 2001). Mathematics performance in the Pittsburgh public schools. Paper presented at a conference of the Mathematics Assessment Resource Service, San Diego, CA.
5. Bryk, A. S., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1992). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
6. Chval, K., Chávez, Ó., Reys, B. J., & Tarr, J. E. (in press). Considerations and limitations related to conceptualizing and measuring textbook integrity. In J. T. Remillard, B. Herbel-Eisenmann, & G. Lloyd (Eds.), Teachers' use of mathematics curriculum materials: Research perspectives on relationships between teachers and curriculum.
7. Chval, K., Reys, R. E., Reys, B. J., Tarr, J. E., & Chávez, Ó. (2006). Pressures to improve student performance: A context that both urges and impedes school-based research. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 37, 158-166.
8. Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (1992). Teacher as curriculum maker. In P. W. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research in curriculum: A project of the American Educational Research Association (pp. 369-401). New York: Macmillan.
9. Clarke, B., Clarke, D., & Sullivan, P. (1996). The mathematics teacher and curriculum development. In A. J. Bishop, K. Clements, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick, & C. Laborde (Eds.), International handbook of mathematics education (pp. 1207-1233). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
10. Davis, R. B. (1990). Discovery learning and constructivism. In R. B. Davis, C. A. Maher, & N. Noddings (Eds.), Constructivist views on the teaching and learning of mathematics (JRME Monograph 4, pp. 93-106). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
11. Geisinger, K. F., Spies, R. A., Carlson, J. F., & Plake, B. S. (Eds.). (2007). The seventeenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.
12. Griffin, L. A., Evans, A., Timms, T., & Trowell, J. (2000). Arkansas grade 8 benchmark exam: How do Connected Mathematics schools compare to state data? Little Rock: Arkansas State Department of Education.
13. Grouws, D. A., & Smith, M. S. (2000). NAEP findings on the preparation and practices of mathematics teachers. In E. A. Silver & P. A. Kennedy (Eds.), Results from the seventh mathematics assessment of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (pp. 107-139). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
14. Harwell, M. R., Post, T. R., Maeda, Y., Davis, J. D., Cutler, A. L., Andersen, E., et al. (2007). Standards-based mathematics curricula and secondary students' performance on standardized achievement tests. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38, 71-101.
15. Hiebert, J. (1999). Relationships between research and the NCTM Standards, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30, 3-19.
16. Hill, H. C., Rowan, B., & Ball, D. L. (2005). Effects of teachers' mathematical knowledge for teaching on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 42, 371-406.
17. Huntley, M. A., Rasmussen, C. L., Villarubi, R. S., Sangtong, J., & Fey, J. T. (2000). Effects of standards-based mathematics education: A study of the Core-Plus mathematics project algebra and functions strand. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31, 328-361.
18. Jackson, P. W. (Ed.). (1992). Handbook of research on curriculum: A project of the American Educational Research Association. New York: Macmillan.
19. Jennings, J. & Rentner, D. (2006). Ten big effects of the No Child Left Behind Act on public schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 88, 110-113.
20. Kilpatrick, J. (2003). What works? In S. L. Senk & D. R. Thompson (Eds.), Standards' based school mathematics curricula. What are they? What do students learn? (pp. 471-493). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
21. Lappan, G., Fey, J., Fitzgerald, W., Friel, S., & Phillips, E. D. (1998). Connected Mathematics Project. Palo Alto, CA: Dale Seymour.
22. Lindquist, M. M. (1997). NAEP findings regarding the preparation and classroom practices of mathematics teachers. In P. Kenney & E. A. Silver (Eds.), Results from the Sixth Mathematics Assessment of the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Reston, VA: National Council of Teacher of Mathematics.
23. Little, R. J. A., & Rubin, D. B. (1987). Statistical analysis with missing data. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
24. Love, E., & Pimm, D. (1996). "This is so": A text on texts. In A. J. Bishop, K. Clements, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick & C. Laborde (Eds.), International handbook of mathematics education (pp. 371-410). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
25. Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Gonzalez, E. J., Gregory, K. D., Garden, R. A., O'Connor, et al. (2000). TIMSS 1999 international mathematics report: Findings from IEA's repeat of the Third International Mathematics and Science Study at the eighth grade. Chestnut Hill, MA: International Study Center, Boston College.
26. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
27. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1991). Professional standards for teaching mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
28. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1995). Assessment standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
29. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
30. National Research Council. (2001a). Investigating the influence of standards: A framework for research in mathematics, science, and technology education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
31. National Research Council. (2001b). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
32. National Research Council. (2004). On evaluating curricular effectiveness: Judging the quality of K-12 mathematics evaluations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
33. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110, 115 Stat. 1425 (2002).
34. Peak, L. (1996). Pursuing excellence: A study of U.S. eighth-grade mathematics and science teaching, learning, curriculum, and achievement in international context. Initial findings from the Third International Mathematics and Science Study (No. NCES-97-198). Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
35. Porter, A. C. (2002). Measuring the content of instruction: Uses in research and practice. Educational Researcher, 31(7), 3-14.
36. Porter, A. C., & Smithson, J. L. (2001, December). Defining, developing, and using curriculum indicators (CPRE Research Report No. RR-048). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, Consortium for Policy Research in Education. Retrieved February 3, 2003, from http://www.cpre.org/images/stories/ cpre_pdfs/rr48.pdf.
37. Remillard, J. T. (1999). Curriculum materials in mathematics education reform: A framework for examining teachers' curriculum development. Curriculum Inquiry, 29, 315-342.
38. Remillard, J. T. (2005). Examining key concepts in research on teachers' use of mathematics curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75, 211-246.
39. Remillard, J. T., & Bryans, M. B. (2004). Teachers' orientations toward curriculum materials: Implications for curricular change. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 35, 352-388.
40. Reys, B. J. (Ed.) (2006). The intended mathematics curriculum as represented in state-level curriculum standards: Consensus or confusion? Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing, Inc.
41. Reys, B. J. & Reys, R. E. (2006). The development and publication of elementary mathematics textbooks: Let the buyer beware! Phi Delta Kappan, 87, 377-383.
42. Reys, R. E., Reys, B. J., Lapan, R., Holliday, G., & Wasman, D. G. (2003). Assessing the impact of standards-based middle grades mathematics curriculum materials on student achievement. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 34, 74-95.
43. Reys, B. J., Robinson, E., Sconiers, S., & Mark, J. (1999). Mathematics curricula based on rigorous national standards: What, why, how? Phi Delta Kappan, 80, 454-456.
44. Riordan, J. E., & Noyce, P. E. (2001). The impact of two standards-based mathematics curricula on student achievement in Massachusetts. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 32, 368-398.
45. Robitaille, D. F., Schmidt, W. H., Raizen, S., McKnight, C., Britton, E., & Nicol, C. (1992). TIMSS monograph 1: Curriculum frameworks for mathematics and science. Vancouver, Canada: Pacific Educational Press, University of British Columbia.
46. Romberg, T. A. & Shafer, M. C. (2003). Mathematics in Context (MiC) - Preliminary evidence about student outcomes. In S. Senk & D. Thompson (Eds.) Standards-based school mathematics curricula: What are they? What do students learn? (pp. 225-284). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
47. Sawada, D., Piburn, M. D., Judson, E., Turley, J., Falconer, K., Benford, R., et al. (2002). Measuring reform practices in science and mathematics classrooms: The reformed teaching observation protocol. School Science and Mathematics, 102, 245-253.
48. Schmidt, W. H., McKnight, C. C., & Raizen, S. A. (1997). A splintered vision: An investigation of U. S. science and mathematics education. Hingham, MA: Kluwer.
49. Schoenfeld, A. H. (2000). Purposes and methods of research in mathematics education. Notices of the American Mathematical Society, 47, 641-649.
50. Senk, S. and Thompson, D. (Eds.). (2003). Standards-based school mathematics curricula: What are they? What do students learn? Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
51. Sewall, G. T. (2005). Textbook publishing. Phi Delta Kappan, 86, 498-502.
52. Spies, R. A., & Plake, B. S. (Eds.). (2005). The sixteenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.
53. Stein, M. K., Remillard, J., & Smith, M. S. (2007). How curriculum influences student learning. In F. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 319-370). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
54. Tarr, J. E., Chávez, Ó., Reys, R. E., & Reys, B. J. (2006). From the written to the enacted curricula: The intermediary role of middle school mathematics teachers in shaping students' opportunity to learn. School Science and Mathematics, 106, 191-201.
55. Thomas B. Fordham Institute. (2004). The mad, mad world of textbook adoption. Washington, DC: Author.
56. Trafton, P. R., Reys, B. J., & Wasman, D. G. (2001). Standards-based mathematics curriculum materials: A phrase in search of a definition. Phi Delta Kappan, 83, 259-264.
57. Travers, K. J., & Westbury, I. (1989). The IEA study of mathematics I: Analysis of mathematics curricula. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
58. Tyson, H. (1997). Overcoming structural barriers to good textbooks. Paper commissioned by the National Education Goals Panel. Retrieved October 11, 2005, from http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/negp/Reports/ tyson.htm
59. Tyson-Bernstein, H., & Woodward, A. (1991). Nineteenth century policies for twenty-first century practice: The textbook reform dilemma. In P. G. Altbach, G. P. Kelly, H. G. Petrie & L. Weis (Eds.), Textbooks in American society (pp. 91-104). Albany: State University of New York Press.
60. Usiskin, Z. (1998). Which curriculum is best? UCSMP Newsletter, 24, 3-10.
61. Virginia Department of Education. (1997). The Virginia State Assessment Program: Transition from the Iowa Tests of Basic Skills and the tests of academic proficiency to the Stanford 9. Richmond: Author.
62. Weiss, I. R., Banilower, E., McMahon, K., & Smith, P. S. (2001). Report of the 2000 National survey of science and mathematics education. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research.