This study concentrated on word problems in Grades Kindergarten-3 and the application of the Standards for Mathematical Practice and the Content Standards. The study also included an analysis of focus, coherence, and rigor in the materials. The textbooks used were among the first editions to be published after the acceptance of the Common Core State Standards in more than 40 states. The study analyzed the presence of the Common Core Standards in each series and how the three textbook series compared to each other in their word problem solving. The correlation of materials in the three textbook series relied on publishers’ descriptions in the Lesson Openers where the usages of the Standards for Mathematical Practice and the Content Standards and the principles of focus, coherence, and rigor are listed. The publishers’ descriptions were analyzed and compared to the individual evaluation criteria. Using an evaluation criterion, the study examined how Standards for Mathematical Practice were implemented in the textbooks. With the exception of a few grades in two textbook series, the texts displayed low percentages in their adherence to the Standards. The textbook series were similar in their development of word problems labeled with Standards for Mathematical Practice and word problems not labeled with the Standards. In this comparison, the only difference between the two types of word problems was in the verbiage. The Content Standards were used to determine the textbook series alignment with the Standards. The three textbook series showed low implementation of word problem Content Standards when compared to the total number of Standards. In two series, only one Content Standard was listed multiple times rather than a combination of comparable Standards. Relying on the publishers’ descriptions, the study showed how publishers implemented focus, coherence, and rigor in their materials. Of the three publishers, one publisher did not list coherence and rigor in its materials. The other two publishers adhered to focus and coherence in most or all of their materials. All of the publishers fell short in the application of rigor in their textbook series.

Thesis (Ed.D.)--Georgia Southern University, 2007. / "A dissertation submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Georgia Southern University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Education." Curriculum Studies, under the direction of Grigory Dmitriyev. ETD. Electronic version approved: December 2007. Includes bibliographical references (p. 143-164) and appendices.

The past two decades of research on how students develop their science understandings as they make sense of phenomena that occur in the natural world has culminated in a movement to redefine science educational standards. The so-called Next Generation Science Standards (or NGSS) codify this new definition into a set of distinct performance expectations, which outline how students might reveal to what extent they have sufficient understanding of disciplinary core ideas (DCIs), science practices (SEPs), and crosscutting concepts (CCCs). The latter of these three dimensions is unique both in being the most recent to the field and in being the least supported by prior science education research. More crucially, as a policy document, the NGSS alone does not provide the supports teachers need to bring reforms to their classrooms, particularly not summative assessments. This dissertation addresses both of these gaps using a combination of quantitative and qualitative techniques. First, I analyze differential categorization of problems that require respondents to engage with their CCC understandings via confirmatory factor analysis inference. Second, I use a set of Rasch models to measure preliminary learning progressions for CCCs evident in student activity within a computer-assisted assessment experience. Third, I analyze student artifacts, think-aloud interviews, and post-task reflective interviews via activity theory to adapt the progression into a task model in which students explain and predict aspects of Earth systems. The culmination of these three endeavors not only sets forth a methodology for researching CCCs in a way that is more integrative to the other dimensions of the NGSS, but also provides a framework for developing assessments that are aligned to the goals of these new standards.

Student achievement in mathematics continues to be compared internationally, with the results indicating that students in other developed countries are outperforming students from the United States. Mathematical modeling is an expectation in both the new Common Core State Standards and the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). This study seeks to find the differences in expectations for students in mathematical modeling between the United States and Singapore, which is one country that regularly outperforms the U.S. on international assessments. Since teachers and students regularly use textbooks for curriculum, homework, and other resources, this study compares two textbooks from the U.S. with the high school series adopted in Singapore. More specifically, the aim of this study is to compare frameworks of mathematical modeling and code to-be-solved problems in algebra textbooks using characteristics common to all frameworks. While the U.S. textbooks explicitly state which word problems address the expectation of mathematical modeling, the Singapore program does not have this attribute. So, an equivalent chapter (in objective and number of to-be-solved problems) in all three textbooks will be coded for evidence of the expectations of mathematical modeling. The results of this study indicate that no standard framework for mathematical modeling exists, but there are multiple areas of overlap. This study found that the ratio of word problems to numerical problems was comparable in the three textbooks, although the U.S. algebra textbooks used in a one-year course had the same number of to-be-solved problems as the four-year Singapore series. Results also indicate that to-be-solved problems in the Singapore textbook series do not provide students with more explicit mathematical modeling instructions than do the U.S. textbooks. This study also found that the interpretation of to-be-solved problems differed according to the experience of the rater. None of the textbooks in this study provided to-be-solved problems that asked students to engage in the mathematical modeling cycle as delineated by any of the four frameworks.

Applying mathematics to real world problems, mathematical modeling, has risen in priority with the adoption of the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics (National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers, 2010). Teachers are at the core of the implementation of the standards, but resources to help them teach modeling are relatively undeveloped. This multicase study explored the perspectives of teachers regarding mathematical modeling pedagogy (the modeling cycle), instructional materials, and professional collaboration, with the assumption that understanding teachers’ views will assist authors, publishers, teacher educators, and administrators to develop better support for modeling instruction. A purposeful sample of six high school mathematics teachers from a variety of school settings across the country was interviewed using a semi-structured protocol. A conceptual framework developed by applying the theories of Guy Brousseau (1997) to the modeling literature guided the analysis. Qualitative methods including elements of grounded theory were used to analyze the data and synthesize the study’s results. The research showed that teachers structure their instruction consistently with the modeling cycle framework, but it also uncovered the need for additional detail and structure, particularly in the initial steps when students make sense of the problem and formulate an approach. Presenting a modeling problem is particularly important and challenging, but there is inadequate guidance and support for this teaching responsibility. The study recommends the development of additional materials and training to help teachers with these steps of the modeling cycle. Furthermore, teachers find that modeling problems are engaging, and they help students make sense of mathematical concepts. Teachers would employ modeling problems more often if they were more available and convenient to use. The study recommends that features for an online depository of modeling materials be researched and developed, including a course-based, chronological organization, a diverse variety of materials and formats, and tapping teachers to contribute their lessons.

The Common Core State Standards are a set of challenging learning goals in English language arts/literacy and math and their use in special education has been a controversial topic. On the one hand, many special education advocates have been pleased that the standards were written for all students, including students with disabilities. On the other hand, many special education teachers have been concerned that an overemphasis on the Common Core State Standards is limiting their students’ access to the full benefits of an Individualized Education Program, which is the central component of special education that makes it so special. Recent research conducted on teachers across the United States has shown that, overall, they believe that the Common Core State Standards are beneficial for students. However, there is a gap in the research documenting the specific views of special education teachers. It is important to understand their experiences because they have the unique task of balancing the general education curriculum with individualized instruction that may include skills not covered by the Common Core. This study aims to address this gap by answering several key questions about the experiences of special education teachers who use the Common Core State Standards with students with disabilities. A total of 476 special education teachers from across the United States were surveyed. This study found that they have a moderately strong understanding of the standards and they frequently used them to guide their teaching. The results of this study showed that while the majority of these teachers echoed the general belief that the Common Core State Standards are beneficial for students without disabilities, they did not believe that they are beneficial for students with disabilities. Strikingly, 86.9% did not believe that the standards provide adequate information about their application to students with disabilities. Of concern, 70.9% reported that, when using these standards, they are unable to address their students’ individualized goals—especially in the areas of social and functional skills. Moreover, when asked if they believed that the Common Core State Standards would help their students to be prepared for independent life, 79.1% said “no.” These results yield important information regarding current practice using the Common Core State Standards in special education and suggest important implications for teacher training courses related to the Common Core State Standards and students with disabilities as well as how the Common Core State Standards document and guidance materials may be revised to better meet the needs of students with disabilities.

With the recent adoption of the Next Generation Science Standards in Oregon, there is a great need for teachers to be trained to effectively implement the three dimensions of the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) in their teaching. Time and location are the largest constraining factors that affect teacher participation in professional development trainings. To address this constraint, Tryon Creek State Park offered a NGSS professional development training opportunity for teachers that was integrated within a field trip that they took their students on. Before the field trip, teachers were introduced to the NGSS through a set of NGSS pre-field trip materials which informed them about the NGSS and how aspects of it would be integrated into their students' field trip. Teachers accompanied their students on a two-hour long field trip at Tryon Creek State Park where teachers observed nature guides model NGSS-aligned activities for the students. My research aimed to answer the following question: How will an informal science education program at Tryon Creek State Park affect K-2 teachers' awareness of the Next Generation Science Standards? Outcomes were measured through a pre/post retrospective survey and follow-up interviews. On the survey teachers reported little awareness of the three dimensions of the NGSS and very few of the teachers increased their understanding after the treatment. On the other hand, most had a high level of awareness and confidence in teaching factual information supporting the NGSS prior to treatment, resulting in a ceiling effect. Interviews suggested that few teachers read the materials sent in advance of the field trip, but teachers who did read the materials indicated increases in understanding of the NGSS. During the field trip several of the nature guides were effective in modeling science and engineering practices. These findings suggest that this method of professional development is promising, but needs further refinement.

This study examined the impact of an inquiry based Next Generation Science Standard aligned science unit on elementary students' understanding and application of the eight Science and Engineering Practices and their relation in building student problem solving skills. The study involved 44 second grade students and three participating classroom teachers. The treatment consisted of a school district developed Second Grade Earth Science unit: What is happening to our playground? that was taught at the beginning of the school year. Quantitative results from a Likert type scale pre and post survey and from student content knowledge assessments showed growth in student belief of their own abilities in the science classroom. Qualitative data gathered from student observations and interviews performed at the conclusion of the Earth Science unit further show gains in student understanding and attitudes. This study adds to the existing literature on the importance of standard aligned, inquiry based science curriculum that provides time for students to engage in science practices.

Outdoor School is a cherished educational tradition in the Portland, OR region. This program's success is attributed to its presumed ability to positively impact affective and cognitive student outcomes. Residential programs such as Outdoor School are considered to be an important supplement to the classroom model of learning because they offer an authentic, contextually rich learning environment. References to relevant literature support the idea that student gains in affective and cognitive domains occur as a result of the multi-sensory, enjoyable, hands-on nature of outdoor learning. The sample population for this study was 115 sixth graders from a demographically diverse Portland, OR school district. This study used an instrument developed by the Common Measures System that was administered to students as part of Outdoor School's professional and program development project. The affective student outcome data measured by the Common Measures instrument was complemented by a formative assessment probe ascertaining prior knowledge of the definition of plants and field notes detailing Field Study instructor lesson content. This first part of this study examined the changes that take place in students' attitudes toward science as a result of attending Outdoor School. The second part took a look at how Outdoor School instruction in the Plants field study aligned with NGSS MS-LS Disciplinary Core Ideas and Practices. The third section of the study compared how Outdoor School instruction in the Plants Field Study and students' prior knowledge of what defines a plant aligned with NGSS MS-LS DCIs. The intent of the research was to arrive at a more nuanced understanding of how students' attitudes toward science are influenced by participating in an outdoor education program and contribute to the development of a continuum between classroom and outdoor school learning using Next Generation Science Standards Disciplinary Core Ideas and Practices as a framework. Results of this study were intended to inform outdoor education program development, add to the existing body of research, and inform future research projects.

The state of Oregon has adopted the Next Generation Science Standards as well as the English Language Proficiency standards, both of which affect elementary school teachers. These standards adoptions challenge teachers and professional developers to rethink how they approach science conceptual understanding and language acquisition. The Math Science Partnership K-6 Instructional Specialist Grant made the decision to incorporate a Task Analysis process, which asks the participant to analyze the demands of a content-based task in the domains of content knowledge, analytical skills and language, into six eight-week summer courses focused on the Next Generation Science Standards. A pre and post-assessment was created to determine if any growth in teacher understanding of the demands of a science task could be observed as a result of engaging in the Task Analysis process. A four point rubric was created to score participant responses. Two research questions were developed: 1. How well does the ELPA21 Task Analysis tool help participants understand the language demands of a science task when used as part of an NGSS summer professional development course? 2. How effective is a work sample and scoring rubric protocol for measuring the impact of the Task Analysis process? Participants showed statistically significant growth in their analysis of a science task from pre to post-assessment responses, with particularly strong growth demonstrated in the domains of content and language. Further coding of responses revealed that participants frequently discussed vocabulary as both a language and content knowledge demand of a science task.