Using curriculum-specific tools for measuring fidelity of implementation is an essential yet often overlooked aspect of examining relationships among textbooks, teaching, and student learning. This “Brief Report” describes the variety of ways that curriculum implementation is measured and argues that there is an urgent need to develop curriculum-sensitive tools for analyzing classroom practice. The report outlines the use of the Concerns-Based Adoption Model (CBAM) theory to develop analytical tools for measuring implementation of two middle-grades reform mathematics curricula: Connected Mathematics and MathThematics. The report also presents next steps in this program of research.
Mary Ann Huntley
Jennifer M. Mayer, Mary Ann Huntley, Nicole L. Fonger and Maria S. Terrell
In a recent Mathematics Teacher article, Fonger and her colleagues explain why teachers should engage in research studies: Researchers working alone lack the information needed to effectively address problems of practice that matter most-problems that are highly contextual and based on teachers' day-to-day experience. (2017, p. 462)
Mary Ann Huntley, Chris L. Rasmussen, Roberto S. Villarubi, Jaruwan Sangtong and James T. Fey
To test the vision of Standards–based mathematics education, we conducted a comparative study of the effects of the Core-Plus Mathematics Project (CPMP) curriculum and more conventional curricula on growth of student understanding, skill, and problem-solving ability in algebra. Results indicate that the CPMP curriculum is more effective than conventional curricula in developing student ability to solve algebraic problems when those problems are presented in realistic contexts and when students are allowed to use graphing calculators. Conventional curricula are more effective than the CPMP curriculum in developing student skills in manipulation of symbolic expressions in algebra when those expressions are presented free of application context and when students are not allowed to use graphing calculators.