Investigating the strength of alignment between Senior Phase mathematics content standards and workbook activities on number patterns

Abstract

The investigation of the strength of alignment ensures synergy between curriculum components’ main content standards, classroom instruction and assessment (Polikoff & Porter, 2014; Porter, 2002). The extent of agreement between these curriculum components is referred to as alignment (Roach, Niebling, & Kurz, 2008). The conceptualisation of alignment begins with common understanding of the educational components used in this discourse, content standards, classroom instruction and assessment. Kurtz, Elliott, Wehby and Smithson (2010) refer to these as follows: (1) the intended curriculum is reflective of the content standards as specified in the Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS) (Department of Basic Education [DBE], 2011); (2) the enacted curriculum refers to the content of instruction taught by teachers in classrooms; (3) the assessed curriculum is depicted by the content measured by the various forms of assessment or tests during the academic year. Hence, the conceptualisation between these three aspects of the curriculum in the alignment discourse is: the intended curriculum specifies content for instruction; the content taught by teachers during instruction portrays the enacted curriculum; the assessed curriculum depicts the assessed content that gauges levels of students’ achievement. The investigation of the strength of alignment normally begins with the determination of the content, the cognitive levels and representations of each of the documents (Porter, 2002; Webb, 1997). Frequent studies on alignment are necessary to improve the agreement of curricula expectations, classroom instruction and assessment (Russell & Moncaleano, 2020). Alignment is both horizontal and vertical. Horizontal is between curricula (intended and assessed) and assessments while vertical is between learning materials, classroom instruction, professional development and learner outcomes (enacted curriculum) (Webb, 1997). Hence, alignment has the potential to strengthen the connections between what is taught, what is tested and what is intended by the curriculum (Martone & Sireci, 2009).