[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-590087-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-590087-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","improvements-in-math-instruction-and-student-achievement-through-professional-learning-around-the-common-core-state-standards-in-chicago","Improvements in Math Instruction and Student Achievement Through Professional Learning Around the Common Core State Standards in Chicago","","Article examining how professional learning around the Common Core State Standards in Mathematics (CCSS-M) relates to student outcomes in Chicago. Prior research shows limited benefits and rarely tests implementation variation, subgroup differences, or outcomes beyond test scores. Using a difference-in-differences approach with school fixed effects, the study compares pre- and poststandards years across Chicago schools with differing participation levels in standards-focused professional learning.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/improvements-in-math-instruction-and-student-achievement-through-professional-learning-around-the-common-core-state-standards-in-chicago/590087/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/improvements-in-math-instruction-and-student-achievement-through-professional-learning-around-the-common-core-state-standards-in-chicago/590087.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Adam","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-01","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",7,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What research gap does the study address about CCSS-M in mathematics?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"It examines implementation-driven variation in outcomes, tests effects across student subgroups and achievement levels, and considers multiple outcomes beyond test scores.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"How does the study measure the impact of professional learning around CCSS-M?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"It uses a difference-in-differences design with school fixed effects to compare outcomes before and after CCSS-M across schools with different levels of participation in standards-related professional learning.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"Which students benefited most after CCSS-M implementation in Chicago?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"Schools with more extensive professional learning saw significantly greater improvements for students with low and average initial achievement, while relationships were largely not significant for students with high initial achievement.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},590087,1792210163,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,106,110,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":102,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":103,"show_sort_weight":104,"slug":105},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":107,"show_sort_weight":108,"slug":109},"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":111,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},8,30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":111,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":127,"language":139,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":143,"read_time":144,"preview_page_count":4},1374404737137,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_155a257f0dc6eb9ab79c44ca47cae57d","AERA Open  \nJanuary-December 2021, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 1–19 DOI: 10. 1177/2332858420986872  \nArticle reuse guidelines: [sagepub.com/journals-permissions](sagepub.com/journals-permissions)[ ](sagepub.com/journals-permissions)© The Author(s) 2021. [http://journals.sagepub.com/home/ero](http://journals.sagepub.com/home/ero)  \nImprovements in Math Instruction and Student Achievement Through Professional Learning Around the Common Core State Standards in  \nChicago  \nElaine Allensworth  \nSarah Cashdollar  \nJulia Gwynne  \nUniversity of Chicago  \nExisting literature on the impact of Common Core State Standards in Math has shown little benefit, but it has not examined variation in outcomes based on implementation strategies, student subgroups, or outcomes other than test scores. We use a difference-in-differences approach with school fixed effects to compare outcomes in pre- and poststandards years across schools with different levels of participation in professional learning around the standards in the middle grades in Chicago.  \nPostimplementation, there were significantly greater improvements in student reports of standards-aligned instructional practices, math grades, pass rates, and test scores in schools with more extensive professional learning around the standards, among students with low and average initial achievement. Relationships were largely not significant for students with high initial achievement. We discuss why Chicago might have seen positive results, including the district emphasis on professional learning around the practice standards and differential impacts based on student prior achievement.  \nKeywords: educational policy, instructional practices, longitudinal studies, mathematics education, middle schools, policy analysis, professional development, quasi-experimental analysis  \nThe adoption of the Common Core State Standards in Mathematics (CCSS-M) by most states across the country brought ambitious new targets for what students should learn and be able to demonstrate in school, and significant new demands on teachers. Almost 10 years after states began implementing the CCSS-M, there is only limited research on how student outcomes have changed in response to the new standards. The studies that exist focus exclusively on test scores and do not differentiate effects for students with different achievement levels. They also tell us little about which strategies for implementing the standards might be effective,  \nas they examine average changes across entire states.  \nNew standards by themselves cannot raise student achievement—they depend on the work of districts, schools, and teachers to interpret the standards and effectively shift instructional practice (Toch, 1991; Tyack & Cuban, 1995) . Because the CCSS-M were intentionally constructed to allow flexibility in implementation across districts and schools, we can expect that the extent to which new standards led to improved student achievement varied widely depending on district implementation strategies. After reviewing the literature on CCSS-M implementation, we identify teacher professional learning (PL) around instructional practices as a particularly promising standards implementation strategy. We then examine changes in student outcomes across schools in Chicago based on their use of  \nsupports for PL around the standards, asking the following questions:  \n1. How did students’ reports of instructional practices, their test scores, grades, and pass rates in math change with implementation of the CCSS-M, based on their schools’ level of participation in standardsrelated PL?  \n2. How did changes in math outcomes differ for students with low, average, and high prior math achievement?  \nThe CCSS-M Transition: Research on Implementation and  \nStudent Outcomes  \nThe CCSS-M contain two different types of standards. Content standards describe what students should learn at each grade level, whereas practice standards call for learning “processes and proficiencies” ","cbCaiqZSqXZmistP","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaiqZSqXZmistP","pdf",671335,"English","# Article overview\n## Research gap and study approach\n## Main findings\n## Standards framework: content and practice","[{\"question\":\"What research gap does the study address about CCSS-M in mathematics?\",\"answer\":\"It examines implementation-driven variation in outcomes, tests effects across student subgroups and achievement levels, and considers multiple outcomes beyond test scores.\"},{\"question\":\"How does the study measure the impact of professional learning around CCSS-M?\",\"answer\":\"It uses a difference-in-differences design with school fixed effects to compare outcomes before and after CCSS-M across schools with different levels of participation in standards-related professional learning.\"},{\"question\":\"Which students benefited most after CCSS-M implementation in Chicago?\",\"answer\":\"Schools with more extensive professional learning saw significantly greater improvements for students with low and average initial achievement, while relationships were largely not significant for students with high initial achievement.\"}]","Improvements in Math Instruction and Student Achievement Through Professional Learning Around the Common Core State Standards in Chicago | PDF",1792068765,48]