Curriculum evaluation questions to ask

Stein, Kinder, Zapp & Feuerborn’s (2010) recent chapter on Promoting Positive Math Outcomes in NASP’s Interventions for Achievement and Behavior Problems in a Three-Tier Model including RTI provides a problem solving approach to educational challenges.  While the authors’ development of the Mathematics Problem Solving Inventory is still ongoing, their chapter details some very helpful questions we should be asking about potential alternative curricula under consideration in SCASD.

Regarding the evaluation of curriculum and instruction needs, specifically with regard to materials, textbooks, and organization: Are materials and instruction structured sufficiently to meet the needs of Tier 1  students?  They note that “improving mathematics performance requires attention to both content coverage and content mastery” (p. 534).

Their recommendations for mathematics curriculum evaluation (p. 538):

General program design

1. Do the lessons include objectives with measurable student behaviors?
2. Are newly taught strategies integrated with those previously taught?
3. Is there a balance between computation instruction and problem-solving instruction?
4. Is the program organized using a spiral or strand design?

Instructional Strategies

1. Are strategies explicitly taught in the program?
2. Are the strategies appropriately generalizable – neither too narrow nor too broad?
3. Are critical component skills taught prior to the strategy?
4. Are there adequate examples provided for instruction?
5. Are discrimination examples included?

Assessment

1. Does the program include a placement test with options for various starting points?
2. Do in-program assessments include recommendations for accelerations or remediation?
3. Are the in-program assessments carefully aligned with instruction?

Notably, constructivist, “reform” curricula typically are spiral in design and are common in the U.S.  Alas, spirally designed programs often lack adequate initial instruction and review to promote student mastery of skills.

According to the National Math Advisory Panel (2008), “A focused, coherent progression of mathematics learning, with an emphasis on proficiency with key topics, should become the norm in elementary and middle school mathematics curricula. Any approach that continually revisits topics year after year without closure is to be avoided.” (p. 22).