THE TOP TEN LIST

TEN EVALUATION “FINDINGS” THAT ILLUMINATE IMPORTANT

REALITIES OF CURRICULUM IMPLEMENTATION

(HIGH SCHOOL MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE)

Inverness Research Associates

AUGUST 2001

NUMBER 10

MOST SCHOOLS AND DISTRICTSARE SATISFIED WITH THEIRCURRENT HIGH SCHOOL MATH AND SCIENCE PROGRAMS

Satisfaction with Current Program

10 %

30 %

60 %

19 %

31 %

50 %

Dissatisfied Somewhat satisfied Satisfied

Science

Math

NUMBER 9

THERE IS NOT STRONG AGREEMENT ABOUT THE NATURE ORDIRECTION OF CHANGE THAT IS NEEDED IN HIGH SCHOOL MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE

Agreement about nature and direction of change needed

4 %

59 %

36 %

21 %

52 %

27 %

There is little agreement Mixed opinions There is agreeement

Science

Math

NUMBER 8

THERE IS A MINORITY GROUP OF SCHOOLS AND DISTRICTS THAT HAVE A STRONG INTEREST IN CHANGING HIGH SCHOOL MATHEMATICS TEXTS AND INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS

M A R C H 2 0 0 1 I N V E R N E S S R E S E A R C H

A S S O C I A T E S

I n t e r e s t i n t h e h i g h s c h o o l o r d i s t r i c t i n c h a n g i n g t e x t b o o k s

a n d r e l a t e d m a t e r i a l s

32 % 29 % 39 %

20 %

46 % 34 %

Little interest Some interest Strong interest

Science

Math

General change dynamic

20 % 27 %

53 %

20 % 31 %

49 %

Unrealistic Possible Realistic

Science Math

How realistic or likely is change

in the next 5 years?

Current effort to change the high school texts and related materials

37 % 31 % 32 % 26 % 36 % 38 %

Almost none Some Strong effort

NUMBER 7

INCREMENTAL CHANGE IS SEEN AS MORE LIKELY THAN WHOLE-SCALE COURSE OR PROGRAM CHANGE

79 %

15 % 6 %

58 %

18 % 24 %

Unlikely Possible Probable or certain

Changing entire courses

Adding new units or activities to

the current curriculum

Replacement of units

19 % 35 %

46 %

0 % 0 % 0 %

4 % 16 %

80 %

7 % 16 %

77 %

Science

Math

15 % 34 %

51 %

16 %

47 % 37 %

Replacing the entire program

27 % 42 %

31 % 30 % 36 % 34 %

NA NA NA

Incrementally, infusing new ideas

or activities

Likelihood of various scenarios for introducing new instructional

materials

NUMBER 6

SELECTING CURRICULUM IS A COMPLEX POLITICAL PROCESS

Influence of standards and tests on the selection and use of instructional

materials

81 %

69 %

68 %

67 %

53 %

39 %

35 %

31 %

19 %

79 %

52 %

62 %

68 %

47 %

55 %

44 %

45 %

31 %

State standards

State framework or syllabus

District or state standardized tests

District framework or syllabus

School department guidelines

College/univ entrance req'ts

AP exams

College SAT, ACT

College placement exams

0 % 25 % 50 % 75 % 100 %

"an important factor"Science survey

Math survey

Major decision makers in selecting high school texts and related materials

76 %

58 %

47 %

43 %

27 %

22 %

17 %

16 %

9 %

3 %

1 %

60 %

36 %

41 %

62 %

55 %

56 %

48 %

0 %

32 %

4 %

0 %

Committees of teachers

Individual teachers

HS Dept. Chair

Local school board

District Supervisor

Superintendent

Asst. Superintendent

Principal(s)

State Dept. of Ed.

Parents

Students

0 % 25 % 50 % 75 % 100 %

Science

Math

Comparison of selection considerations in high school science and math

92 %

89 %

85 %

84 %

78 %

69 %

69 %

53 %

25 %

20 %

76 %

93 %

90 %

52 %

81 %

70 %

87 %

71 %

34 %

30 %

Potential for high student interest

Content rigor

"Inquiry" or "problem-solving"

Accessibility for all students

Addressing real-world issues

Consistency with general reform efforts

Alignment with national standards

Availability of professional development

Innovativeness

Integration of other subjects

0 % 50 % 100 %

Science

Math

NUMBER 5

THERE ARE TRADE-OFFS TO CONSIDER BETWEEN INNOVATIVENESS ANDWIDESPREAD USAGEWHEN SELECTING SPECIFIC CURRICULA

DEVELOPER’S CHOICES

• DIMENSIONS AND DEGREE AND NATURE OF INNOVATION

– TOPICS/COVERAGE– INQUIRY– CONTEXTUALIZATION– TECHNOLOGY– INTEGRATION– ASSESSMENT– STRUCTURE/APPROACH

MARCH 2001 INVERNESS RESEARCH

ASSOCIATES

DEGREE OF ACCEPTANCE ANDUSAGE

DEG

REE O

F I

NN

OV

ATIO

N

This graphrepresents the

trade-off that existsbetween the degree

to which acurriculum is

innovative and thelikelihood that it willbe widely acceptedand implemented

Highly I nnovative;Low acceptance and

usage

Low ininnovativeness;

high inacceptance and

usage

MARCH 2001 INVERNESS RESEARCH

ASSOCIATES

DEGREE OF ACCEPTANCE ANDUSAGE

DEG

REE O

F I

NN

OV

ATIO

N

THE DOMAIN OFHHMI, NSF ANDOTHER FUNDED

CURRICULA

Highly Innovative; Lowacceptance and usage

Low ininnovativeness; high

in acceptance andusage

MAINSTREAM PUBLISHEDCURRICULA

NUMBER 4

THERE ARE ALSO TRADE-OFFS TO CONSIDER BETWEEN INNOVATIVENESS, USAGE, AND FIDELITY TO DESIGN

IN

NO

VA

TIO

N

ACCEPTANCE ACCEPTANCE

This surfacerepresents the

possible trade-offsof innovativeness,

quality, andwidespread usage

of a curriculum

Relatively highacceptance andusage; low ininnovativeness

and quality

Equal trade-offsof

innovativeness,quality andacceptance

Relatively high ininnovativeness;

low in acceptance;medium in quality

NUMBER 3

CURRICULUM “IMPLEMENTATION” IS A PROCESS REQUIRING LONG-TERM STEADY WORK

“IMPLEMENTATION”COMES FROM

THE LATIN

“IM+PLENARE”

… TO FILL IN

The Nature and Stages of Curricular Work

High Fidelity and High Quality Usage of Materials

System support for and wide Spread Usage of Materials

Selection and Adoption of Materials

Development of High Quality Materials

Awareness of and Interest in Materials In

crea

sin

g co

st,

com

plex

ity,

tim

e, e

xper

tise

NUMBER 2

WELL-DESIGNED CURRICULUM IS A NECESSARY…BUT NOT SUFFICIENT CONDITION FOR ACHIEVING HIGH QUALITY INSTRUCTION…

The Foundations of Student Achievement

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT

HIGH QUALITY INSTRUCTION

INSTRUCTIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE

IMPROVEMENT INFRASTRUCTURE

The Instructional Infrastructure

CompetentAnd

Well-prepared Teachers

Well – DesignedCurriculum and

Instructional Materials

Appropriate,Well-designedAssessments

Supportive Policies

Financial Support

Safe andSane

Environment

The Requisite Curricular Capacities of Schools and

Districts• Vision

– Of teaching and learning– Of “curriculum”– Of a curricular change process

• Leadership Expertise– in math/science– In curricular implementation– In all aspects of reform

• Materials and Resources• Professional Development Capacities• Finances• Support Systems

NUMBER 1

THE DRIVING VISION AND MOTIVATION FOR CURRICULAR REFORM…MUST RESIDE IN A DEEP PERSONAL COMMITMENT TO IMPROVING FOR ALL STUDENTS…THE QUALITY OF THE OPPORTUNITY TO LEARN MATHEMATICS…