Abstract
In this study, we examine the relationship between contextual variables related to teachers and student performance in Advanced Algebra classrooms in the USA. The data were gathered from a cluster-randomized study on the effects of SimCalc MathWorlds®, a curricular and technological intervention as a replacement for Algebra 2 curriculum, on student learning of Algebra 2 content. Conditional measures (teacher background characteristics) and instructional measures (self-reported instructional preferences, stances, and classroom practices) were subjected to a variety of empirical analyses to discern their relationship to student learning. Researchers examined both the overall effect of teacher contextual variables on student learning and the specific effect of SimCalc on both teacher instructional measures and student performance. There is evidence to support that teachers who use the SimCalc curriculum value classroom communication, deep understanding of math concepts, and support for both routine and non-routine problems.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Coverage has been centered and is based on minutes (from length of class, and number of daily logs).
References
Akiba, M., LeTendre, G. K., & Scribner, J. P. (2007). Teacher quality, opportunity gap, and national achievement in 46 countries. Educational Researcher, 36(7), 369–387.
Alliance for Excellent Education. (2002). Every child a graduate: A framework for an excellent education for all middle and high school students. Washington, DC: Joftus, S. E.
Ares, N., Stroup, W. M., & Schademan, A. R. (2009). The power of mediating artifacts in group-level development of mathematical discourses. Cognition and Instruction, 27(1), 1–24.
Ball, D. L., & Bass, H. (2002). Toward a practice-based theory of mathematical knowledge for teaching. In E. Simmt & B. Davis (Eds.), Proceedings of the annual meeting of the canadian mathematics education study group (pp. 3–14). Kingston: CMESG.
Ball, D. L., Lubienski, S. T., & Mewborn, D. S. (2001). Research on teaching mathematics: The unsolved problem of teachers’ mathematical knowledge. In V. Richardson (Ed.) Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed., pp. 433–456). New York: Macmillan.
Becker, H., Ravitz, J., & Wong, Y. (1999). Teacher and teacher-directed student use of computers and software (Report No. 3). Irvine, CA: Center for Research on Information Technology and Organizations (CRITO). Retrieved from http://www.crito.uci.edu/tlc/html/findings.Html
Bitner, N., & Bitner, J. (2002). Integrating technology into the classroom: Eight keys to success. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 10(1), 95–100.
Boaler, J. (2013). Experiencing school mathematics: Traditional and reform approaches to teaching and their impact on student learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Cavanagh, S. (2006). Students double-dosing on reading and math. Education Week, 25(40), 1–12.
Choy, S. P., Horn, L. J., Nuñez, A. M., & Chen, X. (2000). Transition to college: What helps at-risk students and students whose parents did not attend college. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2000(107), 45–63. doi:10.1002/ir.10704.
Christensen, R. R. (1997). Effect of technology integration education on the attitudes of teachers and their students. Ph.D. thesis, University of North Texas, USA.
Clotfelter, C. T., Ladd, H. F., & Vigdor, J. L. (2007). Teacher credentials and student achievement: Longitudinal analysis with student fixed effects. Economics of Education Review, 26(6), 673–682.
Clotfelter, C., Ladd, H. F., Vigdor, J., & Wheeler, J. (2006). High-poverty schools and the distribution of teachers and principals. North Carolina Law Review, 85(5), 1345–1380.
Cobb, P., Yackel, E., & McClain, K. (2000). Symbolizing and communicating in mathematics classrooms: Perspectives on discourse, tools, and instructional design. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Coleman, J. S., Campbell, E. Q., Hobson, C., McPartland, J., Mood, A. M., Weinfeld, F. D., & York, R. L. (1966). Equality of educational opportunity (pp. 1–32). Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.
Conley, D. T. (2007). The challenge of college readiness. Educational Leadership, 64(7), 23–29.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1999). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy evidence. Seattle, WA: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy, University of Washington.
Darling-Hammond, L., Bransford, J., & LePage, P. (2005). Introduction. In L. Darling-Hammond & J. Bransford (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do (pp. 1–39). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Ertmer, P. A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration? Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 25–39.
Fennema, E., & Franke, M. L. (1992). Teachers’ knowledge and its impact. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning: A project of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (pp. 147–164). New York, NY: Macmillan.
Finn, J. D., Pannozzo, G. M., & Achilles, C. M. (2003). The “why’s” of class size: Student behavior in small classes. Review of Educational Research, 73(3), 321–368.
Goldhaber, D. (2002). The mystery of good teaching. Education Next, 2(1), 50–55.
Goldhaber, D., & Anthony, E. (2007). Can teacher quality be effectively assessed? National board certification as a signal of effective teaching. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 89(1), 134–150.
Goos, M. (2005). A sociocultural analysis of the development of pre-service and beginning teachers’ pedagogical identities as users of technology. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 8(1), 35–59.
Goos, M., Galbraith, P., Renshaw, P., & Geiger, V. (2003). Perspectives on technology mediated learning in secondary school mathematics classrooms. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 22(1), 73–89.
Hawk, P., Coble, C. R., & Swanson, M. (1985). Certification: It does matter. Journal of Teacher Education, 36(3), 13–15.
Heck, R. H. (2007). Examining the relationship between teacher quality as an organizational property of schools and students’ achievement and growth rates. Educational Administration Quarterly, 43(4), 399–432.
Hegedus, S. J., Dalton, S. K., & Tapper, J. (2013a). The impact of technology-enhanced curriculum on learning advanced algebra in American high school classrooms. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Hegedus, S. J., & Penuel, W. R. (2008). Studying new forms of participation and identity in mathematics classrooms with integrated communication and representational infrastructures. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 68(2), 171–183.
Hegedus, S., & Roschelle, J. (Eds.). (2013). Democratizing access to important mathematics through dynamic representations: Contributions and visions from the SimCalc research program. Berlin: Springer.
Hegedus, S., Tapper, J., Dalton, S., & Sloane, F. (2013b). HLM in cluster-randomised trials–measuring efficacy across diverse populations of learners. Research in Mathematics Education, 15(2), 177–188.
Hennessy, S., Ruthven, K., & Brindley, S. (2005). Teacher perspectives on integrating ICT into subject teaching: Commitment, constraints, caution, and change. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37(2), 155–192.
Hiebert, J., Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Fuson, K. C., Wearne, D., Murray, H., & Human, P. (1997). Making sense: Teaching and learning mathematics with understanding (Vol. 361, pp. 03801–3912). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Hill, H. C., Rowan, B., & Ball, D. L. (2005). Effects of teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 42(2), 371–406.
Horizons Research, Inc. (2002). The status of high school mathematics teaching. Chapel Hill, NC: D. Whittington.
Hoxby, C. M. (2000). The effects of class size on student achievement: New evidence from population variation. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 115(4), 1239–1285.
Huang, J., Normandia, B., & Greer, S. (2005). Communicating mathematically: Comparison of knowledge structures in teacher and student discourse in a secondary math classroom. Communication Education, 54(1), 34–51.
Hunt, P., Soto, G., Maier, J., Müller, E., & Goetz, L. (2002). Collaborative teaming to support students with augmentative and alternative communication needs in general education classrooms. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 18(1), 20–35.
Khisty, L. L. (2002). Pedagogic discourse and equity in mathematics: When teachers’ talk matters. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 14(3), 154–168.
Klitgaard, R. E., & Hall, G. R. (1974). Are there unusually effective schools? Journal of Human Resources, 10(3), 90–106.
Klopfenstein, K., & Thomas, M. K. (2009). The link between advanced placement experience and early college success. Southern Economic Journal, 75(3), 873–891.
Kuh, G. D. (2001). Assessing what really matters to student learning inside the National Survey of Student Engagement. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 33(3), 10–17.
Kuh, G. D. (2003). What we’re learning about student engagement from NSSE: Benchmarks for effective educational practices. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 35(2), 24–32.
Ma, L. (1999). Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics: Teachers’ understanding of fundamental mathematics in China and the United States. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Maris, E. (1998). Covariance adjustment versus gain scores—revisited. Psychological Methods, 3(3), 309–327.
Means, B. (2010). Technology and education change: Focus on student learning. Journal of Research on Teacher Education, 42(3), 285–307.
Mishel, L., & Rothstein, R. (2002). The class size debate. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute.
Mislevy, R. J., Steinberg, L. S., Almond, R. G., Haertel, G. D., & Penuel, W. R. (2003). Improving educational assessment. In B. Means & G. D. Haertel (Eds.), Evaluating educational technology: Effective research designs for improving learning (pp. 149–180). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Murnane, R. J., & Phillips, B. R. (1981). Learning by doing, vintage, and selection: Three pieces of the puzzle relating teaching experience and teaching performance. Economics of Education Review, 1(4), 453–465.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2006). The condition of education. NCES 2006-071. National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office: Rooney, P., Hussar, W., Planty, M., Choy, S., Hampden-Thompson, G., Provasnik, S., & Fox, M. A.
Papert, S., & Harel, I. (1991). Situating constructionism. Constructionism (pp. 1–11). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Peske, H., & Haycock, K. (2006). Teaching inequality: How poor and minority students are shortchanged on teacher quality. Washington, DC: The Education Trust.
Pianta, R. C., Belsky, J., Houts, R., & Morrison, F. (2007). Opportunities to learn in America’s elementary classrooms. Science, 315(5820), 1795–1796. doi:10.1126/science.1139719.
Pierson, M. E. (2001). Technology integration practice as a function of pedagogical expertise. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33(4), 413–430.
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E. R., & Kuhn, M. (2012). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria: ASCD.
Porter, A. C. (2002). Measuring the content of instruction: Uses in research and practice. Educational Researcher, 31(7), 3–14. doi:10.3102/0013189X031007003.
Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223–231.
Rockoff, J. E. (2004). The impact of individual teachers on student achievement: Evidence from panel data. The American Economic Review, 94(2), 247–252.
Roschelle, J., & Shechtman, N. (2013). SimCalc at scale: Three studies examine the integration of technology, curriculum, and professional development for advancing middle school mathematics. In S. J. Hegedus & J. Roschelle (Eds.), Democratizing access to important mathematics through dynamic representations: Contributions and visions from the SimCalc research program (pp. 125–143). Netherlands: Springer.
Roschelle, J., Shechtman, N., Tatar, D., Hegedus, S., Hopkins, B., Empson, S., Knudsen, J., & Gallagher, L. (2010). Integration of technology, curriculum, and professional development for advancing middle school mathematics: Three large-scale studies. American Educational Research Journal, 47(4), 833–878.
Ryan, A. M., & Patrick, H. (2001). The classroom social environment and changes in adolescents’ motivation and engagement during middle school. American Educational Research Journal, 38(2), 437–460.
Sanders, W. L., & Rivers, J. C. (1996). Cumulative and residual effects of teachers on future student academic achievement. Knoxville, TN: University of Tennessee Value-Added Research and Assessment Center.
Snjiders, T. A. B., & Bosker, R. J. (1999). Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling. London: Sage.
Staples, M. (2007). Supporting whole-class collaborative inquiry in a secondary mathematics classroom. Cognition and Instruction, 25(2–3), 161–217.
Tufte, E. (2006). Beautiful evidence. Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press.
Turner, J. C., Meyer, D. K., Midgley, C., & Patrick, H. (2003). Teacher discourse and sixth graders’ reported affect and achievement behaviors in two high-mastery/high-performance mathematics classrooms. The Elementary School Journal, 103(4), 357–382.
Virginia Department of Education. (2012). High school predictors of college readiness: Determinants of high school graduates’ enrollment and successful completion of first-year Mathematics and English college Courses in Virginia. Richmond, VA: Jonas, D., Dougherty, C., Herrera, A. W., LaTurner, J., Garland, M., & Ware, A.
Wenglinsky, H. (2000). How teaching matters: Bringing the classroom back into discussions of teacher quality. Princeton, NJ: Policy Information Center, Educational Testing Service.
Acknowledgments
This work is based upon work supported by the Institute of Education Sciences at the US Department of Education under Grant R305B070430. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Institute of Education Sciences.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hegedus, S.J., Tapper, J. & Dalton, S. Exploring how teacher-related factors relate to student achievement in learning advanced algebra in technology-enhanced classrooms. J Math Teacher Educ 19, 7–32 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-014-9292-5
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-014-9292-5