The Impact of Advanced Geometry and Measurement Curriculum Units on the Mathematics Achievement of First-Grade Students

Abstract

The goal of Project M2 was to develop and field-test challenging geometry and measurement units for K-2 students. The units were developed using recommendations from gifted, mathematics, and early childhood education. This article reports on achievement results for students in Grade 1 at 12 diverse sites in four states using the Iowa Tests of Basic Skills (ITBS) mathematics concepts subtest and an open-response assessment. Using HLM, as expected there were no statistical differences between the experimental (n = 186) and comparison (n = 174) groups on the ITBS (91% of the items focused on number). Statistically significant differences (p < .001) favoring the experimental group were found on the open-response assessment with a large effect size (d = 1.88). Thus the experimental group exhibited a deeper understanding of geometry and measurement concepts on the open-response assessment while performing as well on a traditional measure that covered all Grade 1 mathematics.

Research On and Activities For Mathematically Gifted Students

“…One purpose of the M 2 program was to determine whether using the same "talk moves", questioning strategies, open heuristic and challenging tasks described earlier could increase the numbers and levels of mathematically talented students. Following participation in the program, results showed a significant difference at the 0.001 level in favor of M 2 students in the percent of students performing one and two standard deviations above the mean between students in the M 2 program and students in the comparison groups even though groups were not significantly different before the beginning of the program (Gavin et al 2009(Gavin et al , 2013Sheffield et al 2012). …”

Searching for Evidence-Based Practice

“…Nevertheless, the nature and quality of the methods used to measure FOI, the degree to which fidelity data were reported, if reported at all, as well as the degree to which fidelity data were tied to measured outcomes varied widely among the studies included Gavin, Casa, Firmender, and Carroll, (2013 in this survey. First, the majority of studies included described the critical components of the curriculum being evaluated by providing the theoretical underpinnings of the interventions, as well as the curriculum materials and instructional strategies used.…”

Providing Services for Students With Gifts and Talents Within a Response-to-Intervention Framework

“…• • Elimination of 40% to 50% of previously mastered general education curriculum for advanced students resulted in no differences between students whose work was compacted and students who did all the work in reading, math computation, social studies, and spelling (Reis, Westberg, Kulikowich & Purcell, 1998). • • Students who received a challenging math curriculum that focused on problem solving outperformed a comparison group of students of like ability from the same schools (Gavin et al, 2007;Gavin, Casa, Firmender, & Carroll, 2013).…”