The impact of prior mathematics achievement on the relationship between high school mathematics curricula and postsecondary mathematics performance, course-taking, and persistence

Journal for Research in Mathematics Education

Volumn 41, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 274-308

  Post, Thomas R ^a   Medhanie, Amanuel ^a   Harwell, Michael ^a   Norman, Ke Wu ^b   Dupuis, Danielle N ^a   Muchlinski, Thomas ^a   Andersen, Edwin ^a   Monson, Debra ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA   (United States)

Author keywords

College mathematics; Integrated curriculum; Large scale studies; Longitudinal studies; Quasi experimental design

Indexed keywords

EID: 77952967079     PISSN: 00218251     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. ACT, Inc. (2007). ACT test manual. Iowa City, IA: Author.
2. Baer, L. (2001). Testimony to Minnesota House Educational Policy Committee, January 23, 2001, St. Paul, MN.
3. Benbow, C. P., Lubinski, D. L., Shea, D., & Eftekhari-Sanjani, H. (2000). Sex differences in mathematical ability at age 13: Their status 20 years later. Psychological Science, 11, 474-487.
4. Billstein, R., & Williamson, J. (2003). Middle grades MATH Thematics: The STEM project. In S. L. Senk & D. R. Thompson (Eds.), Standards-based school mathematics curricula: What are they? What do students learn? (pp. 251-284). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
5. Boyer, E. (1983). High school: A report on secondary education in America. New York: Harper & Row.
6. Coxford, A. F., Fey, J. T., Hirsch, C. R., Schoen, H. L., Burrill, G., Hart, E. W., et al. (1997). Contemporary mathematics in context: A unified approach. Chicago, IL: Everyday Learning Corporation.
7. Ding, C. S., & Davison, M. L. (2005). A longitudinal study of math achievement gains for initially low achieving students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30, 81-95.
8. Dorans, N. J. (1999). Correspondence between ACT and SAT I scores (College Board Report No. 99-1). New York: College Entrance Examination Board.
9. Ertle, B., Ginsburg, H. P., & Lewis, A. E. (2006, April). Measuring the efficacy of Big math for little kids: A look at fidelity of implementation. Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
10. Fendel, D., Resek, D., Alper, L., & Fraser, S. (1997). Interactive mathematics program (Years 1-4). Berkeley, CA: Key Curriculum Press.
11. Garfunkel, S. (2007). The case of Mathematics: Modeling our world. In C. R. Hirsch (Ed.), Perspectives on the design and development of school mathematics curricula (pp. 161-164). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
12. Garfunkel, S., Godbold, L., & Pollak, H. (1999). Mathematics: Modeling our world. Cincinnati, OH: South-Western Educational Publishing.
13. Ganter, S. L., & Barker, W. (2004). A collective vision: Voices of the partner disciplines. In S. L. Ganter & W. Barker (Eds.), The Curriculum Foundations Project (pp 1-13). Washington DC: Mathematical Association of America.
14. Harwell, M. R., Post, T. R., Cutler, A., Maeda, Y., Anderson, E., Norman, K., et al. (2009). The preparation of students from National Science Foundation-funded and commercially developed high school mathematics curricula for their first university mathematics course. American Educational Research Journal, 46, 203-231.
15. Harwell, M. R., Post, T. R., Maeda, Y., Davis, J. D., Cutler, A. Andersen, E., et al. (2007). Standardsbased mathematics curricula and secondary students' performance on standardized achievement tests. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38, 71-101.
16. Hill, R. O., & Parker, T. H. (2006). A study of Core-Plus students attending Michigan State University. American Mathematical Monthly, 113, 905-921.
17. Hofacker, E. B. (2006). The effect of different college algebra courses on students' understanding of linear and exponential function concepts. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities, 2006). Dissertation Abstracts International, 67, 2915A.
18. 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.
19. Kasten, M., et al. (1988). ERIC/SMEAC Mathematics Education Digest: No. 1. The role of calculus in college mathematics. Columbus, OH: ERIC Clearinghouse for Science Mathematics and Environmental Education. (ERIC Document No. ED321970)
20. Klein, D. (2000). A quarter century of US 'math wars' and political partisanship. BSHM Bulletin: Journal of the British Society for the History of Mathematics, 22, 22-33.
21. Lappan, G., Fey, J. T., Fitzgerald, W. M., Friel, S. N., & Difanis Phillips, E. (1998). Connected mathematics. Glenview, IL: Prentice Hall.
22. Little, R. J. A., & Rubin, D. B. (2002). Statistical analysis with missing data (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.
23. Mathematical Association of America. (2001). Guidelines for programs and departments in undergraduate mathematical sciences. Retrieved January 2007, from http://www.maa.org/guidelines/guidelines.html
24. Mathematical Sciences Education Board. (2004). On evaluating curricular effectiveness: Judging the quality of K-12 mathematics evaluations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
25. Mowbray, C. T., Holter, M. C., Teague, G. B., & Bybee, D. (2003). Fidelity criteria: Development, measurement, and validation. American Journal of Evaluation, 24, 315-340.
26. National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for education reform. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
27. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
28. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
29. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2009). Focus in high school mathematics: Reasoning and sense making. Reston, VA: Author.
30. National Research Council. (2004). On evaluating curricular effectiveness: Judging the quality of K-12 mathematics evaluations. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
31. Norman, K. W., Medhanie, A. G., Harwell, M. R., Post, T. R., & Andersen, E. (in press). High school mathematics curricula, university mathematics placement recommendations, and student university mathematics performance. Prius.
32. O'Donnell, C. L. (2008). Defining, conceptualizing, and measuring fidelity of implementation and its relationship to outcomes in K-12 curriculum intervention research. Review of Educational Research, 78, 33-84.
33. Parsad, B., & Lewis, L. (2003). Remedial education at degree-granting postsecondary institutions in Fall 2000 (NCES 2004010). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved January 27, 2008, from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2004010
34. Pedhazur, E. J., & Pedhazur Schmelkin, L. (1991). Measurement, design, and analysis: An integrated approach (pp. 213-215). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
35. Planty, M., Hussar, W., Snyder, T., Provasnik, S., Kena, G., Dinkes, R., et al. (2008). The condition of education 2008 (NCES 2008-031). Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved April 9, 2008, from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2008/2008031.pdf
36. Post, T. R., Harwell, M. R., Davis, J. D., Maeda, Y., Cutler, A., Andersen, E., et al. (2008). Standardsbased mathematics and middle-grades students' performance on standardized achievement tests. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 39, 184-212.
37. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
38. Remillard, J. T. (2005). Examining key concepts in research on teachers' use of mathematics curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75, 211-246.
39. Reys, R., Reys, B. R., Tarr, J., & Chávez, Ó. (2006, March). Assessing the impact of Standards-based middle school mathematics curricula on student achievement and the classroom learning environment. Final report submitted to National Center for Education Research, Institute of Education Sciences. Retrieved December 3, 2008, from http:// mathcurriculumcenter.org/MS2-report.pdf
40. Ridgway, J. E., Zawojewski, J., Hoover, M., & Lambdin, D. V. (2003). Student attainment in the Connected Mathematics curriculum. In S. L. Senk & D. R. Thompson (Eds.), Standards-based school mathematics curricula: What are they? What do students learn? (pp. 193-224). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
41. Romberg, T. A., & Shafer, M. C. (2003). Mathematics in Context (MiC)-Preliminary evidence about student outcomes. In S. L. Senk & D. R. Thompson (Eds.), Standards-based school mathematics curricula: What are they? What do students learn? (pp. 225-250). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
42. Schoen, H. L., & Hirsch, C. R. (2003). The Core-Plus Mathematics Project: Perspectives and student achievement. In S. L. Senk & D. R. Thompson (Eds.), Standards-based school mathematics curricula: What are they? What do students learn? (pp. 311-344). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
43. Schoen, H. L., Hirsch, C. R., & Ziebarth, S. W. (1998, April). An emerging profile of the mathematical achievement of students in the Core-Plus Mathematics Project. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 421 351)
44. Schoenfeld, A. H. (2004). The math wars. Educational Policy, 18, 253-286.
45. Šidák, Z. (1967). Rectangular confidence regions for the means of multivariate normal distributions. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 62, 626-633.
46. Swafford, J. (2003). Reaction to high school curriculum projects research. In S. L. Senk & D. R. Thompson (Eds.), Standards-based school mathematics curricula: What are they? What do students learn? (pp. 457-468). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
47. Tarr, J. E., Reys, R. E., Reys, B. J., Chávez, Ó., Shih, J., & Osterlind, S. J. (2008). The impact of middle-grades mathematics curricula and the classroom learning environment on student achievement. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 39, 247-280.
48. University of Chicago School Mathematics Project. (1996). Secondary curriculum (2nd ed.). Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman.
49. Webb, N. L. (2003). The impact of the Interactive Mathematics Program on student learning. In S. L. Senk & D. R. Thompson (Eds.), Standards-based school mathematics curricula: What are they? What do students learn? (pp. 375-398). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
50. Wu, H. H. (1997). The mathematics education reform: Why you should be concerned and what you can do. The American Mathematical Monthly, 104, 946-954.