Mathematics Curriculum Policies and Practices in the U.S.: The Common Core State Standards Initiative
In the U.S. three curriculum strategies are being used to improve school mathematics programs and student learning outcomes: (a) the movement to common standards; (b) advances in technology-based instructional resources; and (c) the pressure of accountabi
- PDF / 361,518 Bytes
- 14 Pages / 441 x 666 pts Page_size
- 97 Downloads / 216 Views
Abstract In the U.S. three curriculum strategies are being used to improve school mathematics programs and student learning outcomes: (a) the movement to common standards; (b) advances in technology-based instructional resources; and (c) the pressure of accountability measured by end-of-year assessments. Together, these strategies are creating a “perfect storm” for significant changes in mathematics curriculum. Elements of the reform strategy are reviewed and discussed. In addition, an argument is made for systematic monitoring of the initiative in order to learn about its impact and inform future policy decisions. Keywords Mathematics · Curriculum · Standards · Textbooks · Digital · Assessments
Introduction Current efforts to improve the K-12 educational system in the U.S. and promote increased student learning in mathematics employ a “standards-based” reform strategy. That is, the reform agenda seeks to “establish clear goals for student achievement through the establishment of standards and related assessments, generate data to improve teaching and learning, create incentives for change through rewards and sanctions, and provide assistance to low-performing schools” (Goertz 2009). Confrey and Maloney (2011) describe standards and high-stakes assessments as policy-imposed “bookends” of a reform strategy designed to stimulate change (see Fig. 1). In this system, success is defined by the extent to which student scores on annual assessments increase and eventually match or exceed international benchmarks. What happens between the bookends of this system is the hard work of educational leaders and teachers—designing, and implementing instruction that supports student learning of mathematics. Key features of the “internal” work (central column) of a standards-based accountability system are: instructional practices and curriculum B.J. Reys (B) Center for the Study of Mathematics Curriculum, University of Missouri, Columbia, USA e-mail: [email protected] Y. Li, G. Lappan (eds.), Mathematics Curriculum in School Education, Advances in Mathematics Education, DOI 10.1007/978-94-007-7560-2_3, © Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014
35
36
B.J. Reys
Fig. 1 Standards-based school reform strategy
materials that teacher’s use to engage students and formative assessments to inform instructional modifications and plan for individual needs. These internal features are highly dependent on the knowledge and skills of teachers and are influenced by the nature and extent of their initial and ongoing professional development as well as by the support provided to teachers within curriculum materials. In this paper, I provide a summary of how the standards-based reform strategy is currently being structured and implemented in the U.S. In particular, several key curricular tools of the system are highlighted: standards, textbooks, and assessments. Although instructional practices (the processes of teaching) are not directly discussed in this paper, it is not because of lack of importance. Indeed, I acknowledge that teach
Data Loading...
