Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information on Research and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 3e

Click here for more information on Research and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 3e

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Educational Policy
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hill, H. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Content Across Communities: Validating Measures of Elementary Mathematics Instruction

Heather C. Hill

University of Michigan

In recent years, scholars have problematized terms used to describe instruction on teacher survey instruments. When scholars, observers, and teachers employ terms like discuss and investigate, they often mean to describe quite different events. This article problematizes another set of terms often found on survey instruments, those describing mathematical content. To do so, it examines terms such as geometry, number patterns, and ordering fractions for rates of agreement and disagreement between teachers and observers participating in a field pilot of an elementary mathematics daily log. Using interviews, written observations, and reflections on disagreements, this article also asks why disagreements occurred. Sources of disagreement included problems with instrument design, memory/perception, and, notably, differences in the way subject matter terms are used in different communities—university mathematicians, elementary teachers, and mathematics educators. Finally, implications of these sources of disagreement are explored.

Key Words: mathematics instruction • survey research

Educational Policy, Vol. 19, No. 3, 447-475 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/0895904805276142
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Am Educ Res JHome page
P. Grossman and M. McDonald
Back to the Future: Directions for Research in Teaching and Teacher Education
American Educational Research Journal, March 1, 2008; 45(1): 184 - 205.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 EDUCATIONAL EVALUATION AND POLICY ANALYSISHome page
B. Stecher, V.-N. Le, L. Hamilton, G. Ryan, A. Robyn, and J. R. Lockwood
Using Structured Classroom Vignettes to Measure Instructional Practices in Mathematics
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, January 1, 2006; 28(2): 101 - 130.
[Abstract] [PDF]