Mathematical Communication in State Standards Before the Common Core

Abstract

Mathematical communication has been an important feature of standards documents since National Council of Teachers of Mathematics’ (NCTM) (1989) Curriculum and Evaluation Standards. Such an emphasis has influenced content standards of states from then to present. This study examined how effective the prevalence of various forms of mathematical communication in 2009 state standards documents was in regard to National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) 2009 achievement scores for Grade 4. Analysis suggests mixed results with potential implications as states move toward fully implementing the Common Core State Standards in Mathematics. Specifically, although including language requiring mathematical descriptions from students had a positive effect on Grade 4 NAEP 2009 achievement scores, including language requiring rationales and justifications was not found to have a statistically significant effect.

Keywords

mathematics education standards achievement common core

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2010). Common Core State Standards for Mathematics. Retrieved from http://corestandards.org/assets/CCSSI_Math%20Standards.pdf

Clotfelter

C. T.

Ladd

H. F.

Vigdor

J. L.

(2007). Teacher credentials and student achievement: Longitudinal analysis with student fixed effects. Economics of Education Review, 26(6), 673-682.

Confrey

Nguyen

K. H.

Lee

Panorkou

Corley

A. K.

Maloney

A. P.

(2012). Turn-on common core math: Learning trajectories for the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics. Available from www.turnonccmath.net

de Fraine

van Damme

van Landeghem

Opdenakker

Onghena

(2003). The effect of schools and classes on language achievement. British Educational Research Journal, 29, 841-859.

de Jong

Westerhof

K. J.

Kruiter

J. H.

(2004). Empirical evidence of a comprehensive model of school effectiveness: A multilevel study in mathematics in the 1st year of junior general education in the Netherlands. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 15, 3-31.

Halliday

M. A. K.

Matthiessen

C. M. I. M.

(2004). An introduction to functional grammar (3rd ed.). London, England: Hodder Education.

Hamilton

L. S.

Berends

(2006). Instructional practices related to standards and assessments. Pittsburgh, PA: RAND Education.

Hiebert

Wearne

(1993). Instructional tasks, classroom discourse, and students’ learning in second-grade arithmetic. American Educational Research Journal, 30, 393-425.

Hill

H. C.

(2001). Policy is not enough: Language and the interpretation of state standards. American Educational Research Journal, 38, 289-318.

10.

Hill

H. C.

(2005). Content across communities: Validating measures of elementary mathematics instruction. Educational Policy, 19, 447-475.

11.

Hill

M. S.

Jenkins

S. P.

(2001). Poverty among British children: Chronic or transitory? In Bradbury

Jenkins

S. P.

Micklewright

(Eds.), The dynamics of child poverty in industrialised countries (pp. 174-195). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

12.

Hruschka

D. J.

Schwartz

Picone-Decaro

Jenkins

R. A.

Carey

J. W.

(2004). Reliability in coding open-ended data: Lessons learned from HIV behavioral research. Field Methods, 16, 307-331.

13.

Hufferd-Ackles

Fuson

K. C.

Sherin

M. G.

(2004). Describing levels and components of a math-talk learning community. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 35, 81-116.

14.

Koichu

Berman

Moore

(2007). The effect of promoting heuristic literacy on the mathematical aptitude of middle-school students. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 38, 1-17.

15.

Kosko

K. W.

(2012). Student enrollment in classes with frequent mathematical discussion and its longitudinal effect on mathematics achievement. The Mathematics Enthusiast, 9(1&2), 111-148.

16.

Kosko

K. W.

Herbst

P. G.

(2011). Where’s the proof? Proof in U.S. high school geometry content standards. In Wiest

L. R.

Lamberg

(Eds.), Proceedings of the 33rd annual meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 329-337). Reno: University of Nevada, Reno.

17.

Kosko

K. W.

Miyazaki

(2012). The effect of student discussion frequency on fifth-grade students’ mathematics achievement in U.S. schools. The Journal of Experimental Education, 80, 173-195.

18.

Kosko

K. W.

Rougee

Herbst

(2014). What actions do teachers envision when asked to facilitate mathematical argumentation in the classroom? Mathematics Education Research Journal, 26, 459-476.

19.

Kosko

K. W.

Wilkins

J. L. M.

(2011). Communicating quantitative literacy: An examination of open-ended assessment items in TIMSS, NALS, IALS, and PISA. Numeracy, 4(2). Retrieved from http://services.bepress.com/numeracy/vol4/iss2/art3

20.

Lampert

Cobb

(2000). Communication and language. In Kilpatrick

Martin

W. G.

Schifter

(Eds.), A research companion to Principles and Standards for School Mathematics (pp. 237-249). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

21.

Landis

J. R.

Koch

G. G.

(1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159-174.

22.

Lappan

Wanko

J. J.

(2003). The changing roles and priorities of the federal government in mathematics education in the United States. In Stanic

G. M. A.

Kilpatrick

(Eds.), A history of school mathematics (Vol. 2, pp. 897-930). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

23.

Larnell

G. V.

Smith

J. P.

(2011). Verbs and cognitive demand in K-8 geometry and measurement grade level expectations. In Smith

J. P.

(Ed.), A companion analysis of K-8 state mathematics standards (pp. 95-118). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.

24.

Loeber

G. H.

(2008). An inquiry into teacher implementation of NCTM standards in kindergarten through second grade instructional setting (Master’s thesis). Walden University, Naples, FL.

25.

Lubienski

S. T.

(2002). A closer look at Black-White mathematics gaps: Intersections of race and SES in NAEP achievement and instructional practices data. The Journal of Negro Education, 71, 269-287.

26.

McGraw

Lubienski

S. T.

Strutchens

M. E.

(2006). A closer look at gender in NAEP mathematics achievement and affect data: Intersections with achievement, race/ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 37, 129-150.

27.

McLeod

D. B.

(2003). From consensus to controversy: The story of the NCTM standards. In Stanic

G. M. A.

Kilpatrick

(Eds.), A history of school mathematics (Vol. 1, pp. 753-818). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

28.

Mercer

Sams

(2006). Teaching children how to use language to solve maths problems. Language and Education, 20, 507-528.

29.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2009a). NAEP 2009 mathematics, reading, and science assessments restricted-use data files: Data companion. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

30.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2009b). NAEP 2009 national and state mathematics assessments (grades 4 and 8) restricted-use data files. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

31.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2014). NAEP question tool. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/mathematics

32.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.

33.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.

34.

Newton

(2009). The relationship between the written and enacted curricula: The mathematical routine of questioning. In Swars

S. L.

Stinson

D. W.

Lemons-Smith

(Eds.), Proceedings of the 31st annual meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 337-345). Atlanta: Georgia State University.

35.

Opdenakker

van Damme

de Fraine

van Landeghem

Onghena

(2002). The effect of schools and classes on mathematics achievement. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 13, 399-427.

36.

Porter

A. C.

(1994). National standards and school improvement in the 1990s: Issues and promise. American Journal of Education, 102, 421-449.

37.

Raudenbush

S. W.

Bryk

A. S.

(2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

38.

Staples

(2007). Supporting whole-class collaborative inquiry in a secondary mathematics classroom. Cognition and Instruction, 25, 161-217.

39.

Tate

W. F.

(1997). Race-ethnicity, SES, gender, and language proficiency trends in mathematics achievement: An update. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28, 652-679.

40.

Yackel

Cobb

(1996). Sociomathematical norms, argumentation, and autonomy in mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27, 458-477.

41.

Young

(2007). Determining teachers’ behaviors concerning the NCTM standards in low and high performing rural high schools in Kansas (Doctoral dissertation). Kansas State University, Manhattan.