Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Exploring how teacher-related factors relate to student achievement in learning advanced algebra in technology-enhanced classrooms

  • Published:
Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this study, we examine the relationship between contextual variables related to teachers and student performance in Advanced Algebra classrooms in the USA. The data were gathered from a cluster-randomized study on the effects of SimCalc MathWorlds®, a curricular and technological intervention as a replacement for Algebra 2 curriculum, on student learning of Algebra 2 content. Conditional measures (teacher background characteristics) and instructional measures (self-reported instructional preferences, stances, and classroom practices) were subjected to a variety of empirical analyses to discern their relationship to student learning. Researchers examined both the overall effect of teacher contextual variables on student learning and the specific effect of SimCalc on both teacher instructional measures and student performance. There is evidence to support that teachers who use the SimCalc curriculum value classroom communication, deep understanding of math concepts, and support for both routine and non-routine problems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Coverage has been centered and is based on minutes (from length of class, and number of daily logs).

References

  • Akiba, M., LeTendre, G. K., & Scribner, J. P. (2007). Teacher quality, opportunity gap, and national achievement in 46 countries. Educational Researcher, 36(7), 369–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alliance for Excellent Education. (2002). Every child a graduate: A framework for an excellent education for all middle and high school students. Washington, DC: Joftus, S. E.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ares, N., Stroup, W. M., & Schademan, A. R. (2009). The power of mediating artifacts in group-level development of mathematical discourses. Cognition and Instruction, 27(1), 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ball, D. L., & Bass, H. (2002). Toward a practice-based theory of mathematical knowledge for teaching. In E. Simmt & B. Davis (Eds.), Proceedings of the annual meeting of the canadian mathematics education study group (pp. 3–14). Kingston: CMESG.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ball, D. L., Lubienski, S. T., & Mewborn, D. S. (2001). Research on teaching mathematics: The unsolved problem of teachers’ mathematical knowledge. In V. Richardson (Ed.) Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed., pp. 433–456). New York: Macmillan.

  • Becker, H., Ravitz, J., & Wong, Y. (1999). Teacher and teacher-directed student use of computers and software (Report No. 3). Irvine, CA: Center for Research on Information Technology and Organizations (CRITO). Retrieved from http://www.crito.uci.edu/tlc/html/findings.Html

  • Bitner, N., & Bitner, J. (2002). Integrating technology into the classroom: Eight keys to success. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 10(1), 95–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boaler, J. (2013). Experiencing school mathematics: Traditional and reform approaches to teaching and their impact on student learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cavanagh, S. (2006). Students double-dosing on reading and math. Education Week, 25(40), 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Choy, S. P., Horn, L. J., Nuñez, A. M., & Chen, X. (2000). Transition to college: What helps at-risk students and students whose parents did not attend college. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2000(107), 45–63. doi:10.1002/ir.10704.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, R. R. (1997). Effect of technology integration education on the attitudes of teachers and their students. Ph.D. thesis, University of North Texas, USA.

  • Clotfelter, C. T., Ladd, H. F., & Vigdor, J. L. (2007). Teacher credentials and student achievement: Longitudinal analysis with student fixed effects. Economics of Education Review, 26(6), 673–682.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clotfelter, C., Ladd, H. F., Vigdor, J., & Wheeler, J. (2006). High-poverty schools and the distribution of teachers and principals. North Carolina Law Review, 85(5), 1345–1380.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cobb, P., Yackel, E., & McClain, K. (2000). Symbolizing and communicating in mathematics classrooms: Perspectives on discourse, tools, and instructional design. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, J. S., Campbell, E. Q., Hobson, C., McPartland, J., Mood, A. M., Weinfeld, F. D., & York, R. L. (1966). Equality of educational opportunity (pp. 1–32). Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conley, D. T. (2007). The challenge of college readiness. Educational Leadership, 64(7), 23–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darling-Hammond, L. (1999). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy evidence. Seattle, WA: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy, University of Washington.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darling-Hammond, L., Bransford, J., & LePage, P. (2005). Introduction. In L. Darling-Hammond & J. Bransford (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do (pp. 1–39). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ertmer, P. A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration? Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 25–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fennema, E., & Franke, M. L. (1992). Teachers’ knowledge and its impact. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning: A project of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (pp. 147–164). New York, NY: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finn, J. D., Pannozzo, G. M., & Achilles, C. M. (2003). The “why’s” of class size: Student behavior in small classes. Review of Educational Research, 73(3), 321–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldhaber, D. (2002). The mystery of good teaching. Education Next, 2(1), 50–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldhaber, D., & Anthony, E. (2007). Can teacher quality be effectively assessed? National board certification as a signal of effective teaching. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 89(1), 134–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goos, M. (2005). A sociocultural analysis of the development of pre-service and beginning teachers’ pedagogical identities as users of technology. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 8(1), 35–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goos, M., Galbraith, P., Renshaw, P., & Geiger, V. (2003). Perspectives on technology mediated learning in secondary school mathematics classrooms. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 22(1), 73–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hawk, P., Coble, C. R., & Swanson, M. (1985). Certification: It does matter. Journal of Teacher Education, 36(3), 13–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heck, R. H. (2007). Examining the relationship between teacher quality as an organizational property of schools and students’ achievement and growth rates. Educational Administration Quarterly, 43(4), 399–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hegedus, S. J., Dalton, S. K., & Tapper, J. (2013a). The impact of technology-enhanced curriculum on learning advanced algebra in American high school classrooms. Manuscript submitted for publication.

  • Hegedus, S. J., & Penuel, W. R. (2008). Studying new forms of participation and identity in mathematics classrooms with integrated communication and representational infrastructures. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 68(2), 171–183.

  • Hegedus, S., & Roschelle, J. (Eds.). (2013). Democratizing access to important mathematics through dynamic representations: Contributions and visions from the SimCalc research program. Berlin: Springer.

  • Hegedus, S., Tapper, J., Dalton, S., & Sloane, F. (2013b). HLM in cluster-randomised trials–measuring efficacy across diverse populations of learners. Research in Mathematics Education, 15(2), 177–188.

  • Hennessy, S., Ruthven, K., & Brindley, S. (2005). Teacher perspectives on integrating ICT into subject teaching: Commitment, constraints, caution, and change. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37(2), 155–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hiebert, J., Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Fuson, K. C., Wearne, D., Murray, H., & Human, P. (1997). Making sense: Teaching and learning mathematics with understanding (Vol. 361, pp. 03801–3912). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, H. C., Rowan, B., & Ball, D. L. (2005). Effects of teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 42(2), 371–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horizons Research, Inc. (2002). The status of high school mathematics teaching. Chapel Hill, NC: D. Whittington.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoxby, C. M. (2000). The effects of class size on student achievement: New evidence from population variation. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 115(4), 1239–1285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang, J., Normandia, B., & Greer, S. (2005). Communicating mathematically: Comparison of knowledge structures in teacher and student discourse in a secondary math classroom. Communication Education, 54(1), 34–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, P., Soto, G., Maier, J., Müller, E., & Goetz, L. (2002). Collaborative teaming to support students with augmentative and alternative communication needs in general education classrooms. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 18(1), 20–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khisty, L. L. (2002). Pedagogic discourse and equity in mathematics: When teachers’ talk matters. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 14(3), 154–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klitgaard, R. E., & Hall, G. R. (1974). Are there unusually effective schools? Journal of Human Resources, 10(3), 90–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klopfenstein, K., & Thomas, M. K. (2009). The link between advanced placement experience and early college success. Southern Economic Journal, 75(3), 873–891.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuh, G. D. (2001). Assessing what really matters to student learning inside the National Survey of Student Engagement. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 33(3), 10–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuh, G. D. (2003). What we’re learning about student engagement from NSSE: Benchmarks for effective educational practices. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 35(2), 24–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ma, L. (1999). Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics: Teachers’ understanding of fundamental mathematics in China and the United States. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maris, E. (1998). Covariance adjustment versus gain scores—revisited. Psychological Methods, 3(3), 309–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Means, B. (2010). Technology and education change: Focus on student learning. Journal of Research on Teacher Education, 42(3), 285–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mishel, L., & Rothstein, R. (2002). The class size debate. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mislevy, R. J., Steinberg, L. S., Almond, R. G., Haertel, G. D., & Penuel, W. R. (2003). Improving educational assessment. In B. Means & G. D. Haertel (Eds.), Evaluating educational technology: Effective research designs for improving learning (pp. 149–180). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murnane, R. J., & Phillips, B. R. (1981). Learning by doing, vintage, and selection: Three pieces of the puzzle relating teaching experience and teaching performance. Economics of Education Review, 1(4), 453–465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Center for Education Statistics. (2006). The condition of education. NCES 2006-071. National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office: Rooney, P., Hussar, W., Planty, M., Choy, S., Hampden-Thompson, G., Provasnik, S., & Fox, M. A.

  • Papert, S., & Harel, I. (1991). Situating constructionism. Constructionism (pp. 1–11). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peske, H., & Haycock, K. (2006). Teaching inequality: How poor and minority students are shortchanged on teacher quality. Washington, DC: The Education Trust.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pianta, R. C., Belsky, J., Houts, R., & Morrison, F. (2007). Opportunities to learn in America’s elementary classrooms. Science, 315(5820), 1795–1796. doi:10.1126/science.1139719.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pierson, M. E. (2001). Technology integration practice as a function of pedagogical expertise. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33(4), 413–430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pitler, H., Hubbell, E. R., & Kuhn, M. (2012). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria: ASCD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, A. C. (2002). Measuring the content of instruction: Uses in research and practice. Educational Researcher, 31(7), 3–14. doi:10.3102/0013189X031007003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rockoff, J. E. (2004). The impact of individual teachers on student achievement: Evidence from panel data. The American Economic Review, 94(2), 247–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roschelle, J., & Shechtman, N. (2013). SimCalc at scale: Three studies examine the integration of technology, curriculum, and professional development for advancing middle school mathematics. In S. J. Hegedus & J. Roschelle (Eds.), Democratizing access to important mathematics through dynamic representations: Contributions and visions from the SimCalc research program (pp. 125–143). Netherlands: Springer.

  • Roschelle, J., Shechtman, N., Tatar, D., Hegedus, S., Hopkins, B., Empson, S., Knudsen, J., & Gallagher, L. (2010). Integration of technology, curriculum, and professional development for advancing middle school mathematics: Three large-scale studies. American Educational Research Journal, 47(4), 833–878.

  • Ryan, A. M., & Patrick, H. (2001). The classroom social environment and changes in adolescents’ motivation and engagement during middle school. American Educational Research Journal, 38(2), 437–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanders, W. L., & Rivers, J. C. (1996). Cumulative and residual effects of teachers on future student academic achievement. Knoxville, TN: University of Tennessee Value-Added Research and Assessment Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snjiders, T. A. B., & Bosker, R. J. (1999). Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Staples, M. (2007). Supporting whole-class collaborative inquiry in a secondary mathematics classroom. Cognition and Instruction, 25(2–3), 161–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tufte, E. (2006). Beautiful evidence. Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, J. C., Meyer, D. K., Midgley, C., & Patrick, H. (2003). Teacher discourse and sixth graders’ reported affect and achievement behaviors in two high-mastery/high-performance mathematics classrooms. The Elementary School Journal, 103(4), 357–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Virginia Department of Education. (2012). High school predictors of college readiness: Determinants of high school graduates’ enrollment and successful completion of first-year Mathematics and English college Courses in Virginia. Richmond, VA: Jonas, D., Dougherty, C., Herrera, A. W., LaTurner, J., Garland, M., & Ware, A.

  • Wenglinsky, H. (2000). How teaching matters: Bringing the classroom back into discussions of teacher quality. Princeton, NJ: Policy Information Center, Educational Testing Service.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work is based upon work supported by the Institute of Education Sciences at the US Department of Education under Grant R305B070430. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Institute of Education Sciences.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Kaput Center for Research and Innovation in STEM Education, University of Massachusetts Dartmouth, 200 Mill Rd., Suite 150B, Fairhaven, MA, 02719, USA

    Sara Dalton

  2. University of Hartford, West Hartford, CT, USA

    John Tapper

  3. Southern Connecticut State University, New Haven, CT, USA

    Stephen J. Hegedus

Authors
  1. Stephen J. Hegedus
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. John Tapper
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sara Dalton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephen J. Hegedus.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hegedus, S.J., Tapper, J. & Dalton, S. Exploring how teacher-related factors relate to student achievement in learning advanced algebra in technology-enhanced classrooms. J Math Teacher Educ 19, 7–32 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-014-9292-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-014-9292-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation