Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2017-3
Middle School Mathematics Teachers’ Perceptions of the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics and Related Assessment and Teacher Evaluation Systems
In this study, U.S. middle school teachers’ perceptions of Common Core State Standards for Mathematics (CCSSM), CCSSM-related assessments, teacher evaluation processes, and resources for implementing CCSSM were investigated. Using a mixed methods design, a national sample of 366 teachers was surveyed, and 24 teachers were interviewed. Findings indicated that teachers viewed CCSSM as including new content for their grade level. Teachers also reported using multiple curriculum resources to align with CCSSM and indicated that new assessments would serve as a proxy for CCSSM. Implications for rapidly changing policy, curriculum, assessment, instruction, and professional development related to CCSSM are discussed.
AuW. (2007). High-stakes testing and curricular control: A qualitative metasynthesis. Educational Researcher, 36, 258-267.
2.
BallD. (1990). The mathematical understandings that prospective teachers bring to teacher education. Elementary School Journal, 90, 449-466.
3.
BillsteinR.WilliamsonJ. (1998). Middle Grades MATH Thematics. Evanston, IL: McDougal Littell.
4.
BogdanR.BiklenS. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods. Boston, MA: Pearson.
5.
CarmichaelS. B.MartinoG.Porter-MageeK.WilsonW. S. (2010). The state of state standards—And the Common Core—In 2010. Washington, DC: Thomas B. Fordham Institute.
6.
CarterJ.CuevasJ.DayR.MalloyC. (2013). Glencoe Math. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
7.
ChoppinJ.DavisJ.DrakeC.Roth McDuffieA. (2013). Middle school teachers’ perceptions of the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics and related assessment and teacher evaluation systems. Rochester, NY: Warner Center for Professional Development and Education Reform. Retrieved from http://www.warner.rochester.edu/files/warnercenter/docs/commoncoremathreport2.pdf
8.
CoganL.SchmidtW.HouangR. (2013, January). Implementing the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics: What we know about teachers of mathematics in 41 states (Working Paper No. 33). East Lansing: The Education Policy Center at Michigan State University.
9.
CohenD. (1990). A revolution in one classroom: The case of Mrs. Oublier. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12, 327-345.
10.
CohenD.HillH. (2001). Learning policy: When state education reform works. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
11.
CohenD.RadenbushS.BallD. (2003). Resources, instruction, and research. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 25, 119-142.
12.
CollinsC.Amrein-BeardsleyA. (2014). Putting growth and value-added models on the map: A national overview. Teachers College Record, 116(1), 1-32.
ConfreyJ.KrupaE. (2012). The Common Core State Standards for Mathematics: How did we get here and what needs to happen next? In HirschC. R.LappanG. T.ReysB. J. (Eds.), Curriculum issues in an era of Common Core State Standards for Mathematics (pp. 3-16). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
CreswellJ. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
18.
DavisJ.ChoppinJ.DrakeC.Roth McDuffieA. (2014). Factors underlying middle school teachers’ perceptions of the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics. Middle Grades Research Journal, 9 (3), 11-25.
19.
DavisJ.ChoppinJ.DrakeC.Roth McDuffieA. (in press). Factors underlying middle school teachers’ perceptions of the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics. Middle Grades Research Journal.
DrakeC.SherinM. G. (2009). Developing curriculum vision and trust: Changes in teachers’ curriculum strategies. In RemillardJ.Herbel-EisenmannB.LloydG. (Eds.), Mathematics teachers at work: Connecting curriculum materials and classroom instruction (pp. 321-337). New York, NY: Routledge.
DuncanA. (2009b, June). States will lead the way towards reform. Address by the Secretary of Education at the 2009 Governors Education Symposium. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/news/speeches/2009/06/06142009.pdf
FennellS.JohnsonA.MilouE.MurphyS.SchielackJ.ShermanH.. . . WigginsG. (2010). Digits. New York, NY: Pearson.
27.
FreemanD. J.PorterA. C. (1989). Do textbooks dictate the content of mathematics instruction in elementary schools?American Educational Research Journal, 26, 403-421.
28.
Gates Foundation & Scholastic Inc. (2012). Primary sources 2012: America’s teachers on the teaching profession. Seattle, WA: Gates Foundation.
29.
GrouwsD. A.SmithM. S.SztajnP. (2004). The preparation and teaching practices of United States mathematics teachers: Grades 4 and 8. In KloostermanP.LesterF. K. (Eds.), Results and interpretations of the 1990 through 2000 mathematics assessments of the national assessment of educational progress (pp. 221-267). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
MilesM.HubermanA.SaldañaJ. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
37.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
38.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
39.
PalmerD.RangelV. (2011). High stakes accountability and policy implementation: Teacher decision making in bilingual classrooms in Texas. Educational Policy, 25, 614-647.
40.
PorterA.McMakenJ.HwangJ.YangR. (2011). Common Core Standards: The new U.S. intended curriculum. Educational Researcher, 40, 103-116.
RentnerD. S. (2013). Year three of implementing the Common Core State Standards: An overview of states’ progress and challenges. Washington, DC: Center on Education Policy.
43.
RentnerD. S.KoberN. (2014). Common Core State Standards in 2014: Curriculum and professional development at the district level. Washington, DC: Center on Education Policy.
44.
ReysB. J. (Ed.). (2006). The intended mathematics curriculum as represented in state-level curriculum standards: Consensus or confusion?Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
45.
ReysB. J.DoughertyB. J.OlsonT. A.ThomasA. (2012). Common Core State Standards for middle grades mathematics: Implications for curriculum and instruction. In HirschC. R.LappanG. T.ReysB. J. (Eds.), Curriculum issues in an era of Common Core State Standards for Mathematics (pp. 33-46). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
46.
SaldañaJ. (2013). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
47.
SchmidtW. H.HouangR. (2012). Curricular coherence and the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics. Educational Researcher, 41, 294-308.
48.
SchmidtW. H.WangH.McKnightC. (2005). Curriculum coherence: An examination of U.S. mathematics and science content standards from an international perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 35, 525-559.
SpillaneJ. P.ZeuliJ. S. (1999). Reform and teaching: Exploring patterns of practice in the context of national and state mathematics reforms. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 21, 1-27.
51.
TarrJ.ReysR. E.ReysB. J.ChavezO.ShihJ.OsterlindS. (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.
52.
WoolardJ. (2013). Prelude to the Common Core: Internationally benchmarking a state’s math standards. Educational Policy, 24, 615-644.
53.
YoshikawaS. (2008). Education ministry perspectives on mathematics curriculum in Japan. In UsiskinZ.WillmoreE. (Eds.), Mathematics curriculum in Pacific Rim countries—China, Japan, Korea and Singapore: Proceedings of a conference (pp. 9-21). Chicago, IL: Information Age Publishing.
