Examining alignment : national and local assessments and the common core state standards in mathematics.

Abstract

To analyze the representation of the mathematical practices in the three assessments, the researcher used a method similar to that identified in the WAT to determine which practices each assessment item included. Thus, the mathematical practices were analyzed utilizing both qualitative and quantitative data and also included a meeting with content experts to discuss results of the data gathered.Findings of the study indicated that the JCPS interim assessments were considered well aligned to the 8 th -grade CCSSM content standards. However, the ACT EXPLORE and 2009 NAEP released items did not align with the 8 th -grade CCSSM.Further analyses of the two national exams revealed a higher level of alignment with the 7 th -grade CCSSM content but warrant further analysis. Due to a lack of methodological support for identifying the mathematical practices, no results were reported regarding the level of representation of the practices in each of the assessments.

Investigating the strength of alignment between Senior Phase mathematics content standards and workbook activities on number patterns

“…As a consequence, to learning, these outcomes might be regarded as less important by learners since they do not form part of the examination, which might conflate the course. Another alignment study was conducted between Common Core State Standards (CCSS) for mathematics Grade 8 and three assessments: the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), the American College Testing (ACT) EXPLORE and the Jefferson County Public School (JCPS) interim assessment (Higgins, 2013). The findings highlighted the fact that the CCSS for the Grade 8 mathematics were significantly aligned with the JCPS interim assessment.…”

“…Alignment studies on educational components have been conducted internationally in various disciplines (FitzPatrick, Hawboldt, Doyle, & Genge, 2015;Higgins, 2013). In South Africa, Ndlovu and Mji's (2012) alignment study was in mathematics, while Edwards's (2010) study was in physical sciences.…”

“…The range of knowledge correspondence covered on the SPMCS and the workbook activities on NGP were compared in this study to explore their status of alignment. In other studies, the model was employed to investigate alignment of content standards and assessments (Duke Escobar, 2016;FitzPatrick et al, 2015;Higgins, 2013;Smith, 2012).…”