The Impact of Middle-Grades Mathematics Curricula and the Classroom Learning Environment on Student Achievement.

By James E. Tarr, Robert E. Reys, Barbara J. Reys, Óscar Chávez, Jeffrey C. Shih, S. Osterlind. 2008

298 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f6d2837370f5f391047048cdee402ded01ac482d

How researchers see this paper

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

Citations in the corpus

Influence of Curriculum Reform: An Analysis of Student Mathematics Achievement in Mainland China. (2011, background): “Tarr et al. (2008) examined curricular influences on mathematics achievement in middle school students.”
Teacher knowledge, curriculum materials, and quality of instruction: Unpacking a complex relationship (2012, background): “Such studies (e.g. Arbaugh et al. 2006, Tarr et al. 2006, 2008) have documented that simply inserting Standards-based curricula into classrooms cannot on its own improve instructional quality, and that what matters is how these curricula are enacted.”
The Effects of Content Organization and Curriculum Implementation on Students' Mathematics Learning in Second-Year High School Courses (2013, result): “The positive effect of CLE is consistent with findings of earlier studies (e.g., Romberg & Shafer, 2008; Tarr et al., 2008) of curricular effectiveness.”
Mathematics Learned by Young Children in an Intervention Based on Learning Trajectories: A Large-Scale Cluster Randomized Trial (2011, background): “Students learning in those environments do as well on tests of basic number and computational skills and outperform conventional curricula on assessments of thinking, reasoning, problem solving and conceptual understanding (e.g., Boaler & Staples, 2008; Senk & Thompson, 2003; Tarr et al., 2008).”
Mathematical Knowledge for Teaching and Task Unfolding: An Exploratory Study* (2010, background): “Even supplying teachers with curriculum materials that include cognitively demanding tasks does not alone ensure that these tasks are implemented at their intended level of challenge (see Arbaugh, Lannin, Jones, & ParkRogers, 2006; Tarr et al., 2008).”
Connecting changes in secondary mathematics teachers’ knowledge to their experiences in a professional development workshop (2013, background): “…results across more than a decade of classroom research indicate that the nature of instructional tasks and the way tasks are implemented during instruction significantly influence students’ opportunities to learn mathematics (e.g., Stein et al. 2007; Stigler and Hiebert 2004; Tarr et al. 2008).”
The influence of curriculum material design on opportunities for student learning (2014, background): “however, suggests that significant variation exists in how teachers use these resources (c.f. Remillard 2005; Stein, Remillard, & Smith 2007; Tarr et al. 2008).”
Learning to See Teaching in New Ways (2015, methodology): “…were used and their high cognitive demand levels were maintained during their enactment were much more conducive to students’ learning than were classrooms in which the demand declined (Boaler & Staples, 2008; Hiebert & Wearne, 1993; Stein & Lane 1996; Stigler & Hiebert, 2004; Tarr et al., 2008).”
Examining How Learner-Centered Professional Development Influences Teachers’ Espoused and Enacted Practices (2011, background): “…extensive learning opportunities to acquire and internalize relevant knowledge and skills (Borko, 2004; Loucks-Horsley, Love, Stiles, Mundry, & Hewson 2003) as well as school environments that support the adoption of these instructional practices (Cuban, 1990; Tarr et al., 2008; Westbury, 1973).”