Scaling Up Innovative Mathematics in the Middle Grades: Case Studies of “Good Enough” Enactments

This set of comparative case studies examined three teachers’ enactments of a mathematics replacement unit to teach concepts of rate and linear function using SimCalc. The cases were drawn from a larger set of 37 teachers in a randomized experimental study that documented a significant main effect on student achievement. The goal was to identify the learning resources that supported students’ opportunities to make conceptual connections and the various configurations of learning resources among classrooms. Content Maps of lessons were created to model the content that was expressed in whole-group recitations. Two of the teachers had high gains, but used different configurations of learning resources to realize them. In contrast, the third teacher had a mean class gain that was below average, despite an MKT score that was among the highest in the treatment sample. In any case, no teacher implemented the curriculum in ways that were completely consistent with SimCalc developers’ vision. Scaling up instructional innovations entails trade-offs. Understanding these trade-offs can help educators recognize successful, “good enough” enactments of curriculum.

[1]  W. Grubb,et al.  Multiple Resources, Multiple Outcomes: Testing the “Improved”School Finance With NELS88 , 2008 .

[2]  S. Raudenbush,et al.  Resources, Instruction, and Research , 2003 .

[3]  Melissa Sommerfeld Gresalfi,et al.  Taking Up Opportunities to Learn: Constructing Dispositions in Mathematics Classrooms , 2009 .

[4]  S. Barab,et al.  Proceedings of the 7th international conference on Learning sciences , 2006 .

[5]  Jeremy Roschelle,et al.  Getting to Scale with Innovations that Deeply Restructure How Students Come to Know Mathematics , 2008 .

[6]  Jeremy Roschelle,et al.  Investigating Links from Teacher Knowledge, to Classroom Practice, to Student Learning in the Instructional System of the Middle-School Mathematics Classroom , 2010 .

[7]  Jeremy Roschelle,et al.  Integration of Technology, Curriculum, and Professional Development for Advancing Middle School Mathematics , 2010 .

[8]  P. Winne,et al.  Handbook of educational psychology , 2015 .

[9]  Ann L. Brown,et al.  How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. , 1999 .

[10]  D. Winnicott.  Playing and Reality , 1971 .

[11]  Annemarie S. Palincsar,et al.  Group processes in the classroom. , 1996 .

[12]  J. Novak.  Concept mapping: A useful tool for science education , 1990 .

[13]  Heather C. Hill,et al.  Effects of Teachers’ Mathematical Knowledge for Teaching on Student Achievement , 2005 .

[14]  Douglas A. Grouws,et al.  Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning , 1992 .

[15]  Milbrey W. McLaughlin,et al.  Implementation as Mutual Adaptation: Change in Classroom Organization , 1976, Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education.

[16]  N. Mercer.  Words and minds , 2000 .

[17]  Neil Mercer,et al.  Words and Minds : How We Use Language to Think Together , 2000 .

[18]  Deborah G. Tatar,et al.  Equity in scaling up SimCalc: investigating differences in student learning and classroom implementation , 2010, ICLS.

[19]  Elizabeth G. Cohen,et al.  Designing Groupwork: Strategies for the Heterogeneous Classroom , 1986 .