Julia H. Kaufman

Supporting Sustainability: Teachers' Advice Networks and Ambitious Instructional Reform.

Scaling up instructional improvement remains a central challenge for school systems. While existing research suggests that teachers’ social networks play a crucial role, we know little about what dimensions of teachers’ social networks matter for sustainability. Drawing from a longitudinal study of the scale-up of mathematics reform, we use qualitative social network analysis and qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) to investigate the relationship between teachers’ social networks and sustainability. Teachers’ social networks in the first 2 years of the initiative influenced their ability to sustain reform-related instructional approaches after supports for reform were withdrawn. Social networks with combinations of strong ties, high-depth interaction, and high expertise enabled teachers to adjust instruction to new conditions while maintaining the core pedagogical approach. This research contributes to our understanding of the dynamics of sustainability and to social network theory and research.

Algebra A Challenge at the Crossroads of Policy and Practice

The authors review what is known about early and universal algebra, including who is getting access to algebra and student outcomes associated with algebra course taking in general and specifically with universal algebra policies. The findings indicate that increasing numbers of students, some of whom are underprepared, are taking algebra earlier. At the same time, other students with requisite skills are not given access to algebra. Although studies using nationally representative data indicate strong positive outcomes for students who take algebra early, studies conducted only in contexts where all students are mandated to take algebra in eighth or ninth grade provide mixed evidence of positive outcomes, with increased achievement when policies include strong supports for struggling students. The authors conclude with a call for studies that examine the relationship among algebra policies, instruction, and student outcomes to understand the mechanisms by which policies can lead to success for all students.

Selecting and Supporting the Use of Mathematics Curricula at Scale

This article begins to unravel the question, “What curricular materials work best under what kinds of conditions?” The authors address this question from the point of view of teachers and their ability to implement mathematics curricula that place varying demands and provide varying levels of support for their learning. Specifically, the authors focus on how teacher capacity (their level of education, experience, and knowledge) and their use of curriculum influence instruction. The study sample is 48 teachers implementing two standards-based mathematics curricula—Everyday Mathematics and Investigations—in two school districts. The data include interviews and surveys with teachers, as well as observations of instruction, over a 2-year period. Findings indicate that teachers’ implementation of Investigations was considerably better than teachers’ implementation of Everyday Mathematics in terms of maintaining high levels of cognitive demand, attention to student thinking, and mathematical reasoning. These implementation measures were not correlated to measures of teacher capacity across school districts. However, implementation measures were significantly correlated with teachers’ lesson preparation that took into account the big mathematical ideas within curriculum. Further qualitative analysis indicated that the Investigations curriculum provided more support to teachers for locating and understanding the big mathematical ideas within lessons compared to Everyday Mathematics.

Teacher Learning Opportunities in a Shifting Policy Environment for Instruction

We bring together education research on factors shaping teacher learning with institutional research on policy shifts and conflicts to explore an instructional policy shift in one school district. Specifically, we compare mathematics teacher learning opportunities in three elementary schools over a three-year period during which a district policy shift toward English as a Second Language (ESL) instruction diverted attention from mathematics curriculum reform efforts. Findings demonstrate that while the policy shift led to significant decreases in mathematics teacher learning opportunities across the district and in two of the case study schools, mathematics teacher learning opportunities were sustained in one case study school due to two school-level strategies: a common, articulated vision for mathematics instruction and a high number of mathematics-focused teachers in the school. Together, these two strategies supported the creation of coherence between mathematics and ESL policies in the school, which encouraged the maintenance of mathematics teacher learning opportunities.

Mathematics Teacher Development in the Context of District Managed Curriculum

The purpose of this study was to develop and test the viability of a conceptual framework for analyzing mathematics instruction and mathematics teacher development within the context of policies regarding district-wide adoption of curriculum. The framework takes three dimensions of curriculum-based instruction into account independently: use, congruence (the extent to which instruction aligns with district and curricular guidelines), and quality (the extent to which instruction maintains the cognitive demand of appropriately challenging tasks, takes account of and builds on student thinking, and situates intellectual authority in mathematical reasoning). Based on analyses of multiple observations of 36 teachers across two districts, teachers were classified into one of four implementation profiles (flounderer, mechanical, canonical, maverick) that were created by crossing the three dimensions; in addition, their trajectory through those profiles was traced over a two-year period. Results suggest teachers were more likely to use the district-adopted curricula as the source of their lessons than to align their practice with curricular and district guidelines. Teachers’ demonstration of high-quality lessons was less frequent. Differences across the two districts in the percentages of teachers falling into each of the implementation profiles suggests that district actions may have shaped teachers’ uptake of the curriculum. Finally, results suggest a more uneven pathway toward high-quality instruction than had been initially conjectured.

What Supports Do Teachers Need to Help Students Meet Common Core State Standards for Mathematics? Findings from the American Teacher and American School Leader Panels

Mathematics teachers across the United States have been working to adjust their instruction in response to states’ adoption of the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics (CCSS-M) or other standards adapted from CCSS-M. In this report, we document the extent to which U.S. teachers are expected to address new mathematics standards in their instruction, teachers’ familiarity with these standards, the professional development (PD) opportunities that teachers report receiving, and the PD opportunities they feel they need to help them implement standards effectively. Our findings draw on RAND’s American Teacher Panel (ATP) and American School Leader Panel (ASLP). The ATP and ASLP are new survey tools that take the pulse of the nation’s educators on key issues of education policy and practice through periodic surveys of a representative sample of teachers and principals across the United States. Through these unique panels, RAND collects accurate, longitudinal data regarding educators’ perspectives on and implementation of major federal, state, and district policies put in place over the past several years, including those related to standards, assessment, and evaluation. C O R P O R A T I O N

What Teachers Know and Do in the Common Core Era: Findings from the 2015–2017 American Teacher Panel

This brief describes work derived from five reports in RAND Education, which summarize some changes in what teachers know about Common Core standards and what they do in the classroom, based on RAND American Teacher Panel surveys.

Aligned Curricula and Implementation of Common Core State Mathematics Standards: Findings from the American Teacher Panel

T his report pres ents findings from a survey of the American Teacher Panel (ATP) teachers conducted in the spring of 2016 and follows up on a previous survey of teachers conducted in the spring of 2015. It specifically examines responses from mathe matics teachers across the United States in regard to their understanding of their standards and standardsaligned practices. We also consider how teachers’ instructional materials might support their understanding of their standards and practice. This report is primarily intended to provide data to support decisionmaking regarding policies and related to state standards and teachers’ instructional practice. As with our previous research, we specifically focus on three key “instructional shifts” that teachers must undertake to align their instruction with the Common Core:

Changes in What Teachers Know and Do in the Common Core Era: American Teacher Panel Findings from 2015 to 2017

H ow much and how soon should we expect any federal or state education policy to improve student learning? The answer likely depends on the demands that the policy places on those who are expected to implement it and their capacity for change to meet those demands. The Common Core State Standards have been judged by many to be more challenging and ambitious than previous state standards (Porter et al., 2011; Shanahan, 2013; Brown and Kappes, 2012; Schmidt and Houang, 2012). Since the Common Core State Standards were developed and launched by a group of state school chiefs and governors in 2009, nearly all states have voluntarily adopted them. While some states have since made changes to their standards, analyses suggest that most of these states have retained standards closely aligned with key tenets of the Common Core (Korn, Gamboa, and Polikoff, 2016; Achieve, 2017; Norton, Ash, and Ballinger, 2017). Furthermore, most states that never adopted the Common Core State KEY FINDINGS

What Are Teachers' and School Leaders' Major Concerns About New K--12 State Tests? Findings from the American Teacher and American School Leader Panels

Many states have recently made major changes to their K–12 student testing programs. The media have reported growing dissatisfaction with the amount of testing happening in schools and the use of tests for high-stakes decisionmaking about schools, principals, and teachers.1 However, there is little systematically gathered information on the perspectives of U.S. educators who have firsthand knowledge about testing and its effects on teaching and learning. In this report, we share U.S. principals’ and teachers’ main concerns about testing, drawing upon new survey tools for understanding educators’ perspectives on the implementation of major education policies: RAND’s American Teacher Panel (ATP) and American School Leader Panel (ASLP). The ATP and ASLP take the pulse of the nation’s educators on key issues of educational policy and practice through periodic surveys of a representative sample of teachers and principals across the United States.2 This report focuses on educator perspectives about state testing programs; upcoming reports will also address teacher capacity and the supports provided to teachers to implement standards and assessments. C O R P O R A T I O N