Are we preparing teachers who can address the rigors of the Common Core State Standards in Mathematics (CCSSM)?

Theoretical Framework

Research suggests that it is both teachers’ skills and knowledge that are key determinants of students’ opportunities to learn (Ferguson, 1998; Haycock, 1998).  An analysis of National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) data illustrated that the strongest predictor of state level student achievement in reading and math was each states’ proportion of teachers with full certification and a major in the field they were teaching, which suggests the importance of both pedagogy and content knowledge (Darling-Hammond, 1999).  Teachers today must know and be able to teach to the standards that their students are expected to meet.  This study examines the data collected for a group of candidates nearing the completion of their preparation to become teachers of mathematics and compares their preparation in mathematics content knowledge and pedagogy to that of teachers in other countries that have consistently demonstrated high student achievement in mathematics on international assessments. 

The findings of the Teacher Education and Development Study in Mathematics (TEDS-M) from 16 countries  reveals that middle school mathematics teacher preparation in the United States (U.S.) is not sufficient for the task, especially in light of the more rigorous Common Core State Standards for Mathematics (CCSSM). This study also notes that the preparation of elementary teachers of mathematics in the U.S. is only “somewhat better”.  Recognizing that the performance of students in mathematics at both levels so closely parallels the teacher’s content knowledge, these findings support previous reports like the Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) that revealed average achievement at third and fourth grade for the U.S., but low achievement in mathematics compared to other countries at seventh and eighth grades.  As we move toward mathematics content standards that are more demanding and more rigorous, we need teachers who are prepared to meet these demands.

Methods and Sample

Twenty-three candidates nearing the end of their teacher preparation were the focus of the TEDS-M study at this site. They were part of a random sample of both teacher preparation institutions and randomly sampled teachers from these institutions. The TEDS-M study was carried out under the authority of the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA), an independent, international organization composed of representatives from national research institutions and governmental research institutions.  The TIMSS study was also sponsored by IEA. T EDS-M is a comparative study of the preparation of teachers at the primary lower secondary levels.  The study involved 16 participating countries, including the U.S.  The instrument administered to the candidates was the Future Teacher Survey and Assessment.  This assessment has four main parts in addition to a Section A that solicits background information.  They are Section B, Opportunity to Learn, Section C, Mathematics Content and Pedagogical Content Knowledge Assessment, Section D, Beliefs about Mathematics and Teaching, and Section E, General Pedagogy Knowledge Assessment. This study will focus on results from Section C, Mathematics Content and Pedagogical Content Knowledge Assessment, only.

Data

The data collected for study will show the mean values for the participating countries, and the sample of students in the areas of Mathematics Content and Pedagogical Content Knowledge from the TEDS-M assessment.  Comparisons will be made across countries, with respect to the scores on these assessments and the achievement of students in these countries on international assessments in mathematics.  The insight gained through these comparisons will be noted.

Results and Conclusions

The means values for the sample compare favorably with the mean values for those countries that consistently have students with high achievement on international assessment in mathematics. As we examine these results there are implications for teacher preparation in the U.S.

Importance of Research

Adopting of CCSSM by states required teachers who are prepared to handle the demands of the rigor set forth in these standards.  These competitive standards address the problems identified through TIMSS.  They challenge teachers of mathematics to have a deeper understanding of mathematics.  We need to determine if we are preparing teachers of mathematics for this challenge.

Organization of Session

In the session, the participants will be engaged in the analysis of the data and determine next steps.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References

 

Center for Research in Mathematics and Science Education (2010). Breaking the Cycle: An          International Comparison of U.S. Mathematics Teacher Preparation.  East Lansing:        Michigan State University.

Darling-Hammond, L. (1999). Solving the dilemmas of teacher supply, demand, and standards:   How we can ensure a competent, caring, and qualified teacher for every child? Retrieved           October 15, 2006, from http://nctaf.org/documents/supply-demand-standards.pdf

Ferguson, R. (1998). Can schools narrow the Black–White test score gap? In C. Jencks &

M. Phillips (Eds.), The Black–White test score gap. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.

 

Haycock, K. (1998). Good teaching matters: How well-qualified teachers can close the

gap.  Thinking K–16, 3(2), 1–2.

Mathematics and Science Study at the Fourth and Eighth Grade (pp. 465). Chestnut Hill,

            MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Lynch School of Education, Boston    College. National Commission on Teaching & America's Future. (1996). What matters            most: Teaching for America's future. Report of the National Commission on Teaching &   America's Future. Woodbridge, VA: National Commission on Teaching America’s    Future.

Schmidt, W. H., Tatto, M. T., Bankov, K., Blömeke, S., Cedillo, T., Cogan, L., et al. (2007). The

            preparation gap: Teacher education for middle school mathematics in six countries (p 47)

            East Lansing: Michigan State University. Available online at           http://usteds.msu.edu/mt21report.pdf