Research over the past two decades has shown the alignment of teachers’ instruction with state standards is generally weak. Proposing that alignment is a useful measure of teachers’ curricular knowledge (Shulman, 1986), this study uses a large database of teacher reports of their content coverage to understand the relationship of teacher educational and career experience variables with instructional alignment. The results of the fixed effects models indicate significant, positive associations, though they are generally modest in magnitude. Implications for research and policy are discussed.
AdamsP. E.KrockoverG. H. (1997). Beginning science teacher cognition and its origins in the preservice secondary science teacher program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 633-653.
2.
AndersonL.StillmanJ. (2013). Making learning the object: Using cultural historical activity theory to analyze and organize student teaching in urban high-needs schools. Teachers College Record, 115(3). Retrieved from http://www.tcrecord.org/Content.asp?ContentId=16466
3.
BallD. L.ThamesM. H.PhelpsG. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special?Journal of Teacher Education, 59, 389-407.
4.
Darling-HammondL. (2000). How teacher education matters. Journal of Teacher Education, 51, 166-173.
5.
DavisE. A.PetishD.SmitheyJ. (2006). Challenges new science teachers face. Review of Educational Research, 76, 607-651.
6.
DengZ. (2007). Transforming the subject matter: Examining the intellectual roots of pedagogical content knowledge. Curriculum Inquiry, 37, 279-295.
7.
DesimoneL. M.Le FlochK. C.AnsellS.TaylorJ. (2005, April). Are we asking the right questions on national surveys about teacher’s professional development? Insights from cognitive interviews with teachers. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Quebec.
8.
ElbazF. (1991). Teachers’ curricular knowledge in fourth grade: The interaction of teachers, children, and texts. Curriculum Inquiry, 21, 299-320.
9.
EnnisC. D. (1994). Knowledge and beliefs underlying curricular expertise. Quest, 46, 164-175.
10.
Feiman-NemserS. (2003). What new teachers need to learn. Educational Leadership, 60(8), 25-29.
11.
FriedrichsenP. J.AbellS. K.ParejaE. M.BrownP. L.LankfordD. M.WolkmannM. J. (2009). Does teaching experience matter? Examining biology teachers’ prior knowledge for teaching in an alternative certification program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 357-383.
12.
FrykholmJ. A. (1999). The impact of reform: Challenges for mathematics teacher preparation. Journal for Mathematics Teacher Education, 2, 79-105.
13.
GamoranA.PorterA. C.SmithsonJ.WhiteP. A. (1997). Upgrading high school mathematics instruction: Improving learning opportunities for low-achieving, low-income youth. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 19, 325-338.
14.
GrossmanP. L. (1990). The making of a teacher: Teacher knowledge and teacher education. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
15.
GrossmanP. L. (1991). The selection and organization of content for secondary English: Sources for teachers’ knowledge. English Education, 23(1), 39-53.
16.
HamiltonL. S.BerendsM. (2006). Instructional practices related to standards and assessments (RAND Working Paper WR-374-EDU). Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
17.
HargreavesA. (2005). Educational change takes ages: Life, career, and generational factors in teachers’ emotional responses to educational change. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 967-983.
18.
HarrisD. N.SassT. R. (2011). Teacher training, teacher quality, and student achievement. Journal of Public Economics, 95, 798-812.
19.
HillH. C. (2001). Policy is not enough: Language and the interpretation of state standards. American Educational Research Journal, 38, 289-318.
20.
JepsenC. (2005). Teacher characteristics and student achievement: Evidence from teacher surveys. Journal of Urban Economics, 57, 302-319.
21.
KoretzD. M.BarronS. I.MitchellK. J.StecherB. M. (1996). Perceived effects of the Kentucky instructional results information system. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
22.
MayerD. P. (1999). Measuring instructional practice: Can policymakers trust survey data?Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 21, 29-45.
23.
NyeB.KonstantopoulosS.HedgesL. V. (2004). How large are teacher effects?Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 26, 237-257.
24.
O’DayJ. A.SmithM. S. (1993). Systemic reform and educational opportunity. In FuhrmanS. H. (Ed.), Designing coherent education policy (pp. 250-312). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
25.
PapayJ. M.KraftM. (2010, November). Do teachers continue to improve with experience? Evidence of long-term career growth in the teacher labor market. Paper presented at the Fall meeting of the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management, Boston, MA.
26.
PedullaJ. J.AbramsL. M.MadausG. F.RussellM. K.RamosM. A.MiaoJ. (2003). Perceived effects of state-mandated testing programs on teaching and learning: Findings from a national survey of teachers. Chestnut Hill, MA: National Board on Educational Testing and Public Policy.
27.
PolikoffM. S. (2012a). Instructional alignment under No Child Left Behind. American Journal of Education, 118, 341-368.
28.
PolikoffM. S. (2012b). The association of state policy attributes with teachers’ instructional alignment. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. Advance online publication. doi:10.3102/0162373711431302
29.
PolikoffM. S. (2012c, April). Comparing the instructional sensitivity of state assessments and off-the-shelf measures of student learning: Evidence from the Measures of Effective Teaching project. Paper presented at the 2012 Annual Conference of the National Council of Measurement in Education, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
30.
PolikoffM. S.PorterA. C.SmithsonJ. (2011). How well aligned are state assessments of student achievement with state content standards?American Educational Research Journal, 48, 965-995.
31.
PorterA. C. (2002). Measuring the content of instruction: Uses in research and practice. Educational Researcher, 31(7), 3-14.
32.
PorterA. C.FlodenR. E.FreemanD. J.SchmidtW. H.SchwilleJ. R. (1988). Content determinants in elementary school mathematics. In GrouwsD.CooneyT. (Eds.), Perspectives on research on effective mathematics teaching. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
33.
PorterA. C.KirstM. W.OsthoffE. J.SmithsonJ.SchneiderS. A. (1993). Reform up close: An analysis of high school mathematics and science classrooms. Madison: Wisconsin Center for Education Research.
34.
PorterA. C.McMakenJ.HwangJ.YangR. (2011). Common core standards: The new US intended curriculum. Educational Researcher, 40, 103-116.
35.
PorterA. C.PolikoffM. S.SmithsonJ. (2009). Is there a de facto national intended curriculum? Evidence from state content standards. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 31(3), 238-268.
36.
PorterA. C.PolikoffM. S.ZeidnerT.SmithsonJ. (2008). The quality of content analyses of state student achievement tests and state content standards. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 27(4), 2-14.
37.
PorterA. C.SmithsonJ.BlankR.ZeidnerJ. (2007). Alignment as a teacher variable. Applied Measurement in Education, 20, 27-51.
38.
PutnamR. T.BorkoH. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning?Educational Researcher, 29(1), 4-15.
39.
RemillardJ. T. (2005). Examining key concepts in research on teachers’ use of mathematics curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75, 211-246.
40.
RossM. (1989). Relation of implicit theories to the construction of personal histories. Psychological Review, 96, 341-357.
41.
RossM.ConwayM. (1986). Remembering one’s own past: The construction of personal histories. In SorrentinoR. M.HigginsE. T. (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition (pp. 122-124). New York, NY: Guilford.
42.
RovegnoI. (1993). Content-knowledge acquisition during undergraduate teacher education: Overcoming cultural templates and learning through practice. American Educational Research Journal, 30, 611-642.
43.
SchwarzN.OysermanD. (2001). Asking questions about behavior: Cognition, communication, and questionnaire construction. American Journal of Evaluation, 22, 127-160.
44.
ShulmanL. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
45.
ShulmanL. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-22.
46.
SleeterC. E. (2005). Un-standardizing the curriculum: Multicultural teaching in the standards-based classroom. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
47.
SmithM. S.O’DayJ. (1990). Systemic school reform. In FuhrmanS. H.MalenB. (Eds.), The politics of curriculum and testing. Yearbook of the politics of education association (pp. 233-267). London, England: Taylor & Francis.
48.
SpillaneJ. P. (2004). Standards deviation: How schools misunderstand education policy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
49.
WilsonS. M.FlodenR. E. (2003). Creating effective teachers: Concise answers to hard questions. Washington, DC: AACTE Publications.
WongK. K.AnagnostopoulosD.RutledgeS.EdwardsC. (2003). The challenge of improving instruction in urban high schools: Case studies of the implementation of the Chicago academic standards. Peabody Journal of Education, 78(3), 39-87.
