Cognition and Policy Implementation: District Policymakers and the Reform of Mathematics Education

By James P. Spillane. 2000

384 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/16ef4e9d8b100627fdcf9231f31010fc9ef483df

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Education

Citations in the corpus

Improving mathematics instruction through lesson study: a theoretical model and North American case (2009, background): “As Lave (1991) writes, ‘‘Developing an identity as a member of a community and becoming knowledgeably skillful are part of the same process (p. 63).’’ Studies indicate that shared tools (such as curriculum and assessment) and individual and community characteristics (such as beliefs about students a”
The Cultural Myths and Realities of Classroom Teaching and Learning: A Personal Journey. (2005, background): “Research has shown that after initial changes, teachers will ‘‘gravitate’’ back toward their former practices (Spillane, 2000) or that teachers will attempt to graft changes onto their current practices without changing the standard norms and routines (Coburn, 2002).”
Reframing Teacher Professional Learning: An Alternative Policy Approach to Strengthening Valued Outcomes for Diverse Learners (2008, background): “The problem of overassimilation (Hammerness et al., 2005), where teachers believe they are enacting new practice but represent this practice in only superficial ways, however, is well documented (e.g., Firestone, Schorr, & Monfils, 2004; Spillane, 2000).”
Local Theories of Teacher Change: The Pedagogy of District Policies and Programs (2002, background): “It is in part a function of district officials’ interpretations of the policy message or messages ~Spillane, 2000!.”
School District Educational Infrastructure and Change at Scale: Teacher Peer Interactions and Their Beliefs About Mathematics Instruction (2017, background): “…research documents differences in the substance of teachers’ interactions about instruction and associates these differences with teachers’ success in adopting more reform-oriented mathematics instruction (Coburn, 2004; Spillane, 1999, 2000; Stein & Coburn, 2008; Stein, Grover, & Henningsen, 1996).”
Teacher Learning, Instructional Considerations and Principal Communication: Lessons from a Longitudinal Study of Collaborative Data Use by Teachers (2011, background): “…when it addresses the ‘deep underlying principles rather than superficial aspects’ (Spillane et al., 2002: 416) of reform work, provides sufficient elaboration, and both builds on and engages individuals prior understandings (Spillane, 2000; Hill, 2001; Spillane et al., 2002; Coburn 2005, 2006).”
Reading Coaches and the Relationship Between Policy and Practice (2012, neutral): “…surface features of their instruction (e.g., different materials, grouping arrangements) without changing underlying pedagogical features of their approach (Coburn, 2004, 2005b; McDonnell, 2004; McGill-Franzen, Ward, Goatley, & Machado, 2002; Sandholtz, Ogawa, & Scribner, 2004; Spillane, 2000).”
Developing Visions of High-Quality Mathematics Instruction. (2014, background): “In many instances, research that has identified important variations in form and function relationships within mathematics instructional reform efforts (Saxe, Gearhart, Franke, Howard, & Crockett, 1999; Spillane, 2000) proved useful in differentiating between less and more sophisticated responses an”
Promoting professional inquiry for improved outcomes for students in New Zealand (2009, background): “Typical responses by teachers include rejection of new information because it does not fit with prior beliefs (Coburn, 2001 ) or over‐assimilation whereby teachers believe that their changes in practice are consistent with what is proposed, when, in reality, the changes represent the new informatio”
Trust and improvement in schools (2007, background): “An powerful alternative perspective focuses on interpretations of change (Honig & Hatch, 2004; Spillane, 2000 ).”
Teachers’ Views of Students’ Mathematical Capabilities: Challenges and Possibilities for Ambitious Reform (2017, methodology): “In assigning a code for supports, we drew on the form-function distinction that Saxe, Gearhart, Franke, Howard, and Crockett (1999) and Spillane (2000) have made specific to teachers’ and district leaders’ un-derstandings of mathematics reform, respectively.”
The Role of Nonsystem Actors in the Relationship Between Policy and Practice: The Case of Reading Instruction in California (2005, background): “Previous researchers have noted that state policy is frequently reconstructed at lower levels of the formal policy system (McLaughlin, 1987; Pressman & Wildavsky, 1984), especially the district level (Hill, 2001; Spillane, 1996, 1998, 2000).”
Experience Counts: Career Stage and Teachers’ Responses to Mathematics Education Reform (2002, background): “However, researchers claim that although a policy will have multiple meanings, depending on both organizational and individual contexts, the number of meanings ascribed to any given policy is not infinite (Spillane, 1998, 2000; Weick, 1995).”
Sense-making and structure in teachers’ reception of educational reform. A case study on statistics in the mathematics curriculum (2013, background): “Over the last 20 years, substantial educational research has been devoted to the improvement of mathematics and statistics education (see Drake, 2006; Mills, 2002; Moore, 1997; Spillane, 2000).”