Classroom Implementation Indicators for K–12 Common Core State Standards in Mathematics

• In Event: Developing National Indicators for K–12 STEM Curriculum and Instruction

Abstract

This project encompasses research and development around indicator four, regarding instructional materials that embody the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics (CCSSM), and indicator five, classroom coverage of content and practices as specified in the CCSSM. Towards the identification and development of such indicators three types of activities are included: 1) meetings convened with STEM educators to work towards developing a consensus around the identification of appropriate concepts and their operational definitions; 2) a thorough review, evaluation, and synthesis of the current evidence base for such indicators; and 3) the drafting of specific recommendations towards the implementation of the measurement of such indicators. The project builds upon and extends the knowledge and expertise gained from previous NSF-funded projects including the Survey of Mathematics and Science Opportunities (SMSO) that resulted in the indicators and instrumentation used in the 1995 Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) and the Promoting Rigorous Outcomes in Mathematics/Science Education (PROMSE) MSP.

Following-up on PROMSE, our research team secured private foundation funding to study classroom implementation of the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics (CCSSM). Based on this research, the team’s current focus has been to address the major impediments to successful classroom implementation of the CCSSM: a) teachers’ use of the standards in planning and conducting classroom instruction; b) the presence of instructional materials that can support instruction of all CCSSM standards; and, c) teachers’ understanding of and use of the CCSSM’s mathematical practices. These efforts yielded a substantial database that has been used to identify and inform the development of indicators both for instructional materials, as specified in indicator four, and for teachers’ classroom practices, as specified in indicator five.

The project has held two working Advisory Board meetings in which the above data has been reviewed and discussed towards development of new indicators. These meetings have used the discourse methodology developed in the SMSO work in which informed experts wrestle together with data to develop consensus around important fundamental and operational definitions (Schmidt et al, 1996). Future meetings are planned to bring together measurement experts together with mathematics educators and policy experts to draft recommendations towards the creation and feasible measurement of these indicators.

Authors

• Leland S. Cogan, Michigan State University

• William H. Schmidt, Michigan State University

• Richard T. Houang, Michigan State University