Longitudinal investigation of the curricular effect: An analysis of student learning outcomes from the liecal project in the united states

International Journal of Educational Research

Volumn 50, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 117-136

  Cai, Jinfa ^a   Wang, Ning ^b   Moyer, John C ^c   Wang, Chuang ^d   Nie, Bikai ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE   (United States)

^b WIDENER UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c MARQUETTE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHARLOTTE   (United States)

Author keywords

Growth curve modeling; Learning of algebra; Longitudinal study; Mathematics curriculum reform

Indexed keywords

EID: 80052374410     PISSN: 08830355     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijer.2011.06.006     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Bailey R., Day R., Frey P., Howard A.C., Hutchens D.T., McClain K., et al. Mathematics: Applications and concepts (teacher wraparound edition), course 1 2006, The McGraw-Hill Company, Columbus, OH.
2. Bailey R., Day R., Frey P., Howard A.C., Hutchens D.T., McClain K., et al. Mathematics: applications and concepts (teacher wraparound edition), course 2 2006, The McGraw-Hill Company, Columbus, OH.
3. Bailey R., Day R., Frey P., Howard A.C., Hutchens D.T., McClain K., et al. Mathematics: applications and concepts (teacher wraparound edition), course 3 2006, The McGraw-Hill Company, Columbus, OH.
4. Ball D.L., Cohen D.K. Reform by the book: What is-or might be-the role of curriculum materials in teacher learning and instructional reform?. Educational Researcher 1996, 25(9). 6-8, 14.
5. Approaches to algebra: perspectives for research and teaching 1996, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands. N. Bednarz, C. Kieran, L. Lee (Eds.).
6. Cai J. What research tells us about teaching mathematics through problem solving. Teaching mathematics through problem solving: Prekindergarten-grade 6 2003, 241-254. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Reston, VA. F.K. Lester (Ed.).
7. Cai J. Mathematical thinking involved in U.S. and Chinese students' solving process-constrained and process-open problems. Mathematical Thinking and Learning: An International Journal 2000, 2:309-340.
8. Cai J., Knuth E. Early algebraization: A global dialogue from multiple perspectives 2011, Springer, New York, NY.
9. Cai J., Nie B., Moyer J. The teaching of equation solving: Approaches in standards-based and traditional curricula in the United States. Pedagogies: An International Journal 2010, 5(3):170-186.
10. Cai, J., Wang, N., Moyer, J.C., Nie, B., & Wang, C. (submitted). Learning mathematics from classroom instruction using Standards-based and traditional curricula: A longitudinal study, Submitted for publication.
11. Carpenter T.P., Franke M.L., Levi L. Thinking mathematically: Arithmetic and algebra in elementary school 2003, Heinemann, Portsmouth, NH.
12. Clements D.H., Sarama J. Experimental evaluation of the effects of a research-based preschool mathematics curriculum. American Educational Research Journal 2008, 45(2):443-494.
13. College Board EQUITY 2000: A systemic education reform model 2000, Author, Washington DC.
14. Compton D.L. Modeling the growth of decoding skills in first grade children. Scientific Studies in Reading 2000, 4:219-259.
15. Domitrovich C.E., Gest S.D., Gill S., Bierman K.L., Welsh J., Jones D. Fostering high-quality teaching with an enriched curriculum and professional development support: The head start REDI program. American Educational Research Journal 2009, 46:567-597.
16. Hambleton R.K., Swaminathan H., Rogers H.J. Fundamentals of item response theory 1991, Sage Press, Newbury Park, CA.
17. Harwell M.R., Post T.R., Maeda Y., Davis J.D., Cutler A.L., Anderson E., et al. Standards-based mathematics curricula and secondary students' performance on standardized achievement tests. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 2007, 38:71-101.
18. Herman R., Boruch R., Powell R., Fleischman S., Maynard R. Overcoming the challenges: A response to Alan H. Schoenfeld's " What doesn't work" Educational Researcher 2006, 35(2):22-23.
19. Howson G., Keitel C., Kilpatrick J. Curriculum development in mathematics 1981, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge; New York.
20. Kaput J. Teaching and learning a new algebra. Mathematical classrooms that promote understanding 1999, 133-155. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ. E. Fennema, T.A. Romberg (Eds.).
21. Katz, V.J. (2007). Algebra: Gateway to a technological future. Retrieved August 17, 2010 from http://www.maa.org/algebra-report/Algebra-Gateway-Tech-Future.pdf.
22. Kieran C. Mathematical concepts at the secondary school level: the learning of algebra and functions. Learning and teaching mathematics: An international perspective 1997, 133-158. Psychology Press, East Sussex. T. Nunes, P. Bryant (Eds.).
23. Kilpatrick J. What works?. Standards-based school mathematics curricula: What are they? What do students learn? 2003, 471-488. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, N.J. S.L. Senk, D.R. Thompson (Eds.).
24. Kreft I., de Leeuw J. Introducing multilevel modeling 1998, Sage, Newbury Park, CA.
25. Lappan G., Fey J.T., Fitzgerald W.M., Friel S.N., Phillips E.D. Connected mathematics 2002, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
26. Lappan G., Fey J.T., Fitzgerald W.M., Friel S.N., Phillips E.D. Moving straight ahead 2002, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
27. Lane S., Silver E.A., Ankenmann R.D., Cai J., Finseth C., Liu M., et al. QUASAR cognitive assessment instrument (QCAI) 1995, University of Pittsburgh, Learning Research and Development Center, Pittsburgh, PA.
28. Lord F.M. Applications of item response theory to practical testing problems 1980, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., New Jersey.
29. Loveless T. The misplaced math student. The 2008 Brown Center Report on American Education: How well are American students learning? 2008, Brookings, Washington.
30. Lubienski S.T., Gutiérrez R. Bridging the gaps in perspectives on equity in mathematics education. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 2008, 39:365-371.
31. Mathematical Sciences Education Board The nature and role of algebra in the K-14 curriculum: proceedings of a national symposium 1998, National Research Council, Washington D.C.
32. Mayer R.E. Educational psychology: A cognitive approach 1987, Little & Brown, Boston.
33. Mislevy R.J. What can we learn from international assessments?. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 1995, 17(4):419-437.
34. National Academy of Education. (1999, March). Recommendations regarding research priorities: An advisory report to the National Educational Research Policy and Priorities Board. Retrieved August 17, 2010 from http://www.naeducation.org/Research_Priorities_Publication.pdf.
35. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics 1989, Author, Reston VA.
36. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics Principles and standards for school mathematics 2000, Author, Reston, VA.
37. National Mathematics Advisory Panel Foundations for success: The final report of the national mathematics advisory panel 2008, U.S. Department of Education, Washington, D.C.
38. National Research Council Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. Committee on the Foundations of Assessment 2001, National Academy Press, Washington, DC. J. Pelligrino, N. Chudowsky, R. Glaser (Eds.).
39. National Research Council On evaluating curricular effectiveness: Judging the quality of k-12 mathematics evaluations 2004, National Academy Press, Washington, DC. J. Confrey, V. Stohl (Eds.).
40. Nie B., Cai J., Moyer J.C. How a standards-based mathematics curriculum differs from a traditional curriculum: With a focus on intended treatments of the ideas of variable. ZDM (International Journal on Mathematics Education) 2009, 41(6):777-792.
41. Pelavin S.H., Kane M. Changing the odds: Factors increasing access to college 1990, College Board, New York.
42. Post T.R., Harwell M.R., Davis J.D., Maeda Y., Cutler A., Andersen E., et al. Standards-based mathematics curricula and middle-grades students' performance on standardized achievement tests. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 2008, 39:184-212.
43. RAND Mathematics Study Panel (2003). Mathematical proficiency for all students: Toward a strategic research and development program in mathematics education. MR-1643-OERI.
44. Raudenbush S.W., Bryk A.S. Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods 2002, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. 2nd ed.
45. Raudenbush S., Bryk A., Congdon R. HLM 6.03 for Windows 2005, Multivariate Software.
46. Reardon S.F., Galindo C. The hispanic-white achievement gap in math and reading in the elementary grades. American Research Journal 2009, 46:853-891.
47. Reys R., Reys B., Lapan R., Holliday G., Wasman D. Assessing the impact of standards-based middle grades mathematics curriculum materials on student achievement. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 2003, 34:74-95.
48. Riordan J., Noyce P. The impact of two standards-based mathematics curriculum in student achievement in Massachusetts. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 2001, 32:368-398.
49. Rivette K., Grant Y., Ludema H., Rickard A. Connected mathematics project: Research and evaluation summary 2003 edition 2003, Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
50. Schoen H.L., Cebulla K.J., Finn K.F., Fi C. Teacher variables that relate to student achievement when using a standards-based curriculum. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 2003, 34:228-259.
51. Schoenfeld A.H. What doesn't work: The challenge and failure of the works clearinghouse to conduct meaningful reviews of studies of mathematics curricula. Educational Researcher 2006, 35(2):13-21.
52. Show-Me Center (2002). CMP implementation map. http://www.math.msu.edu/cmp/Overview/ImplementationMap.htm.
53. Schoenfeld A.H. Making mathematics work for all children: Issues of standards, testing, and equity. Educational Researcher 2002, 31:13-25.
54. Standards-based school mathematics curricula: What are they? What do students learn? 2003, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, N.J. S.L. Senk, D.R. Thompson (Eds.).
55. Stein M.K., Lane S. Instructional tasks and the development of student capacity to think and reason: An analysis of the relationship between teaching and learning in a reform mathematics project. Educational Research and Evaluation 1996, 2(1):50-80.
56. Tarr J.E., Reys R.E., Reys B.J., Chávez O., Shih J., Osterlind S.J. The impact of middle-grades mathematics curricula and the classroom learning environment on student achievement. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 2008, 39:247-280.
57. Usiskin Z. Which curriculum is best?. UCSMP Newsletter 1999, 24(Winter):3-10.
58. Wilson S.M., Floden R.E. Hedging bets: standards-based reform in classrooms. From the capitol to the classroom: Standards-based reform in the states (One hundredth yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part 2, pp. 193-216 2001, University of Chicago Press, Chicago. S. Fuhrman (Ed.).
59. Wu H. The mathematics education reform: Why you should be concerned and what you can do. American Mathematical Monthly 1997, 104:946-954.