Failure to Launch: Oklahoma’s Academic Standards in Mathematics

K. Raymond, S. Reeder
{"title":"Failure to Launch: Oklahoma’s Academic Standards in Mathematics","authors":"K. Raymond, S. Reeder","doi":"10.1080/19477503.2019.1630546","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Teachers’ perceptions of written curriculum influence the way in which they use the curriculum. As multiple states begin to implement state specific standards, understanding the perceptions teachers may have of these standards is critical. This study used quantitative and qualitative methods to investigate the perceptions teachers had of one state’s new standards a year after implementation. Data was themed and coded for factors that influenced teachers’ perceptions, reported changes in teachers’ practices, and perceived strengths and weaknesses of the state standards. Professional development emerged as a key factor that influenced teachers’ perceptions of the state standards. Lack of resources, uncertainty regard depth of knowledge required by the standards, a quick implementation process, and lack of alignment of standardized test emerged as weaknesses across all teachers. However, the perceived strength differed; teachers who had experienced professional development focused on the standards were more likely to view the included processes standards as strengths, and reported greater change in their focus on these process standards. While the findings show that ongoing professional development is needed, they also point to the influence of even minimal professional development and the need for systematic support for teachers as new standards are implemented.","PeriodicalId":36817,"journal":{"name":"Investigations in Mathematics Learning","volume":"12 1","pages":"82 - 95"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/19477503.2019.1630546","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Investigations in Mathematics Learning","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19477503.2019.1630546","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Mathematics","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

ABSTRACT Teachers’ perceptions of written curriculum influence the way in which they use the curriculum. As multiple states begin to implement state specific standards, understanding the perceptions teachers may have of these standards is critical. This study used quantitative and qualitative methods to investigate the perceptions teachers had of one state’s new standards a year after implementation. Data was themed and coded for factors that influenced teachers’ perceptions, reported changes in teachers’ practices, and perceived strengths and weaknesses of the state standards. Professional development emerged as a key factor that influenced teachers’ perceptions of the state standards. Lack of resources, uncertainty regard depth of knowledge required by the standards, a quick implementation process, and lack of alignment of standardized test emerged as weaknesses across all teachers. However, the perceived strength differed; teachers who had experienced professional development focused on the standards were more likely to view the included processes standards as strengths, and reported greater change in their focus on these process standards. While the findings show that ongoing professional development is needed, they also point to the influence of even minimal professional development and the need for systematic support for teachers as new standards are implemented.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
失败的启动:俄克拉荷马州的数学学术标准
教师对书面课程的看法影响他们使用课程的方式。随着多个州开始实施州特有的标准,了解教师对这些标准的看法是至关重要的。本研究采用定量和定性的方法来调查教师对一个州新标准实施一年后的看法。对影响教师观念的因素、报告的教师实践变化以及国家标准的优点和缺点的因素进行了主题化和编码。专业发展成为影响教师对国家标准看法的关键因素。缺乏资源、标准所要求的知识深度的不确定性、快速的实施过程以及标准化测试缺乏一致性成为所有教师的弱点。然而,感知强度不同;经历过专注于这些标准的专业发展的教师更有可能将包含的过程标准视为优势,并报告他们对这些过程标准的关注发生了更大的变化。虽然调查结果表明,持续的专业发展是必要的,但它们也指出,即使是最低限度的专业发展也会产生影响,并且需要在实施新标准时为教师提供系统的支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Investigations in Mathematics Learning
Investigations in Mathematics Learning Mathematics-Mathematics (all)
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
期刊最新文献
Connections within the Multiplicative Field: A Case Study of Adán’s Mathematical Thinking Investigating the Complexity in Elementary Teachers’ Noticing of Children’s Mathematical Thinking in Written Work Preservice Secondary Teachers’ Mathematical Knowledge for Teaching: Focus on Reflective Practice The Role of Units Coordination in Preservice Elementary Teachers' Mathematical Knowledge for Teaching Units Construction and Coordination: Past, Present, and Future
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1