Person:

Hill, Heather

Background: For nearly three decades, policy makers and researchers in the United States have promoted more intellectually rigorous standards for mathematics teaching and learning. Yet, to date, we have limited descriptive evidence on the extent to which reform-oriented instruction has been enacted at scale.

Purpose: The purpose of the study is to examine the prevalence of reform-aligned mathematics instructional practices in five U.S. school districts. We also seek to describe the range of instruction students experience by presenting case studies of teachers at high, medium, and low levels of reform alignment.

Participants: We draw on 1,735 video-recorded lessons from 329 elementary teachers in these five U.S. urban districts.

Research Design: We present descriptive analyses of lesson scores on a mathematics-focused classroom observation instrument. We also draw on interviews with district personnel, rater-written lesson summaries, and lesson video to develop case studies of instructional practice.

Findings: We find that teachers in our sample do use reform-aligned instructional practices, but they do so within the confines of traditional lesson formats. We also find that the implementation of these instructional practices varies in quality. Furthermore, the prevalence and strength of these practices corresponds to the coherence of district efforts at instructional reform.

Conclusions: Our findings suggest that, unlike other studies in which reform-oriented instruction rarely occurred, reform practices do appear to some degree in study classrooms. In addition, our analyses suggest that implementation of these reform practices corresponds to the strength and coherence of district efforts to change instruction.

Student mastery of elementary mathematical procedures is foundational to learning in the discipline and to success in more advanced mathematics. Prior studies suggest that classroom instruction often focuses on the steps of procedures without also providing support for their meaning, for instance by emphasizing place value or justifying steps. However, studies on this topic are either outdated or limited in scale. In response, we analyze 324 teachers’ spoken instructional explanations in reaction to 6 animated teaching simulations covering 3 teaching tasks—explaining a procedure, addressing student confusion, and summarizing a nonstandard student method. An analysis of these data reveals that teachers primarily focus on the steps of procedures except when summarizing nonstandard student methods. Results provide clues about the nature of US classroom instruction and offer a new tool for evaluating the impact of efforts to change that instruction.