Steven W. Ziebarth – författare

The study reported in this volume adds to the growing body of evaluation studies that focus on the use of NSF-funded Standards-based high school mathematics curricula. Most previous evaluations have studied the impact of field-test versions of a curriculum. Since these innovative curricula were so new at the time of many of these studies, students and teachers were relative novices in their use. These earlier studies were mainly one year or less in duration. Students in the comparison groups were typically from schools in which some classes used a Standards-based curriculum and other classes used a conventional curriculum, rather than using the Standards-based curriculum with all students as curriculum developers intended.The volume reports one of the first studies of the efficacy of Standards-based mathematics curricula with all of the following characteristics:· The study focused on fairly stable implementations of a first-edition Standards-based high school mathematics curriculum that was used by all students in each of three schools.· It involved students who experienced up to seven years of Standards-based mathematics curricula and instruction in middle school and high school.· It monitored students’ mathematical achievement, beliefs, and attitudes for four years of high school and one year after graduation.· Prior to the study, many of the teachers had one or more years of experience teaching the Standards-based curriculum and/or professional development focusing on how to implement the curriculum well.· In the study, variations in levels of implementation of the curriculum are described and related to student outcomes and teacher behavior variables.

The study reported in this volume adds to the growing body of evaluation studies that focus on the use of NSF-funded Standards-based high school mathematics curricula. Most previous evaluations have studied the impact of field-test versions of a curriculum. Since these innovative curricula were so new at the time of many of these studies, students and teachers were relative novices in their use. These earlier studies were mainly one year or less in duration. Students in the comparison groups were typically from schools in which some classes used a Standards-based curriculum and other classes used a conventional curriculum, rather than using the Standards-based curriculum with all students as curriculum developers intended.The volume reports one of the first studies of the efficacy of Standards-based mathematics curricula with all of the following characteristics:· The study focused on fairly stable implementations of a first-edition Standards-based high school mathematics curriculum that was used by all students in each of three schools.· It involved students who experienced up to seven years of Standards-based mathematics curricula and instruction in middle school and high school.· It monitored students’ mathematical achievement, beliefs, and attitudes for four years of high school and one year after graduation.· Prior to the study, many of the teachers had one or more years of experience teaching the Standards-based curriculum and/or professional development focusing on how to implement the curriculum well.· In the study, variations in levels of implementation of the curriculum are described and related to student outcomes and teacher behavior variables.

Curriculum materials are among the most pervasive and powerful influences on school mathematics. In many mathematics classes, student assignments, the questions the teacher asks, the ways students are grouped, the forms of assessment, and much more originate in curriculum materials. At the same time, teachers have considerable latitude in how they use their curriculum materials. Two classes making use of the same materials may differ markedly in what mathematics content is emphasized and how students are engaged in learning that content. This volume considers a variety of research tools for investigating the enactment of mathematics curriculum materials, describing the conceptualization, development, and uses of seven sets of tools. Mathematics education researchers, curriculum developers, teacher educators, district supervisors, teacher leaders, and math coaches will find insights that can improve their work, and guidance for selecting, adapting, and using tools for understanding the complex relationship between curriculum materials and their enactment in classroom instruction.