Patterns and Predictors of PreK Teachers’ Implementation of a Math Curriculum

• In Event: Person-centered approaches to understanding school readiness

Abstract

Abstract:Evaluation research demonstrates that curriculum combined with training and coaching can improve teacher practice in early childhood education (e.g., Morris, Mattera, & Maier, 2016; Whittaker, Kinzie, Williford, & DeCoster, 2015). Yet, comparatively little work has focused on how these results inform real-world implementation of curricula at scale and how best to support teachers to implement evidence-based curricula with fidelity. Curriculum implementation is inherently a dynamic process (Zvoch, 2009). A deeper understanding of how implementation changes over time and what predicts implementation can inform the design and practical application of curricular and professional development models at scale.
Building on the implementation work of others (e.g., Odom et al., 2010; Zvoch, 2009), we explored two dimensions of fidelity of implementation – adherence to curriculum activity directions and quality of implementation – in the delivery of a preschool math curriculum. The current study aims to answer two research questions: (1) Can distinct teacher “profiles” be identified in terms of the adherence and quality of math curriculum implementation? and (2) what teacher characteristics (e.g., experience, readiness, beliefs) are associated with these profiles?

Sample. This study is a secondary analysis of Making Pre-K Count, a cluster-randomized control trial evaluating the effect of an evidence-based preschool math curriculum with teacher training and coaching on children’s outcomes. The sample consists of 106 lead teachers across 35 public and community-based centers, including Head Start, serving low-income populations in New York City. See Table 1 for key constructs related to fidelity and teacher characteristics.

Methods. Latent profile analysis was conducted in Mplus to empirically identify latent profiles (e.g., Magnusson, 2003) and describe patterns of math curriculum implementation based on curriculum adherence and quality of implementation. To investigate how implementation varies across the year, we included levels of adherence and quality at the beginning and end of the year. The three-step approach was used (Asparouhov & Muthen, 2014) to examine predictors of the latent profiles.

Results. We found that a four-profile solution was the best fit for the data, suggesting four patterns of curriculum implementation over time (see Figure 1): moderate fidelity/low change (39% of sample), high fidelity/high change (14%), low fidelity/no change (31%), high fidelity/no change (25%). Preliminary work examining which teacher characteristics predict profile membership show some significant differences across profiles. For example, in comparison to teachers in the Low Fidelity/No Change profile: (1) teachers in the Moderate Fidelity/Low Change profile had higher openness to change scores and more non-traditional math beliefs; (2) teachers in the High Fidelity/High Change profile had more non-traditional math beliefs and were more likely to have a master’s degree; and (3) teachers in the High Fidelity/No Change profile had higher openness to change scores and non-traditional math beliefs, and were more likely to be using the curriculum for a second year. This presentation will also explore how profiles link with child outcomes. By identifying and describing variation in math curriculum implementation, this work helps inform the field’s understanding of how teachers take-up a new curriculum and the targeted design of professional development models.

Authors

• Michelle F. Maier, MDRC (Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation) - New York City
  Presenting Author

• Anne Kou
  Non-Presenting Author

• Shira Kolnik Mattera, MDRC (Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation) - New York City
  Non-Presenting Author