[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-589943-105":59,"doc-detail-589943-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","mathematics-teacher-and-curriculum-quality-2005-and-2016","Mathematics Teacher and Curriculum Quality, 2005 and 2016","","Examines how mathematics reforms affected middle school teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching (MKT) and curriculum use across 2005 and 2016. Using surveys from a nationally representative sample, the study finds growth in teachers’ MKT comparable to a five-percentile improvement, while policy mechanisms tied to encouraging mathematics degrees do not explain the change. Results show weaker associations between teacher MKT and student demographics over time, persistent equity gaps, and a modest shift toward standards-based curriculum materials.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/mathematics-teacher-and-curriculum-quality-2005-and-2016/589943/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/mathematics-teacher-and-curriculum-quality-2005-and-2016/589943.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Cart","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-06","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":29},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What does the study compare between 2005 and 2016?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"It compares middle school teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching (MKT) and their use of curriculum materials across the two years using nationally representative surveys.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"How did teachers’ MKT change from 2005 to 2016?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"Teachers’ MKT increased, equivalent to an average teacher in the 2005 sample improving five percentile points by 2016.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"What explanation does the study reject for the MKT increase?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"It argues that attempts under No Child Left Behind to encourage mathematics degrees do not explain the increase, since teachers were less likely in 2016 than in 2005 to possess such a degree.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},589943,1792189592,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":29,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145,"preview_page_count":4},18829141979164,"https://eur-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_6f874abed73319feea01a86fa6f0fab8","AERA Open  \nOctober-December 2019, Vol. 5, No. 4, pp. 1–13 DOI: 10. 1177/2332858419880521  \nArticle reuse guidelines: [sagepub.com/journals-permissions](sagepub.com/journals-permissions)[ ](sagepub.com/journals-permissions)© The Author(s) 2019. [http://journals.sagepub.com/home/ero](http://journals.sagepub.com/home/ero)  \nMathematics Teacher and Curriculum Quality, 2005 and 2016  \nHeather C. Hill  \nVirginia Lovison  \nThomas Kelley-Kemple  \nHarvard University  \nEfforts to improve teachers’ knowledge and to change the nature of curriculum materials have dominated mathematics reforms since the late 1990s. In this article, we compared middle school teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching (MKT) and curriculum use between 2005 and 2016 to assess progress toward these key goals. We found teachers’MKT increased an amount equal to the average teacher in the 2005 sample improving five percentile points. However, No Child Left Behind’s attempts to encourage mathematics degrees in this population do not explain this increase, as teachers were less likely in 2016 than in 2005 to possess such a degree. Instead, our data are consistent with schools hiring more knowledgeable individuals during the Great Recession. Between surveys, the strength of the association between teacher MKT and student demographic characteristics decreased, although equity gaps still persist. Finally, our data suggest a modest movement toward standards-based curriculum materials over this period.  \nKeywords: No Child Left Behind, teacher quality, curriculum, teaching mathematics  \nThe past two decades have seen two major efforts to improve mathematics teacher and teaching quality. In the first, reformers sought to improve teachers’ subject matter knowledge by requiring secondary mathematics teachers to possess a stronger mathematical background, by providing professional development focused on mathematics, and by reducing barriers to teaching in order to attract more qualified candidates. As part of this first effort, reformers also hoped to improve the distribution of teacher knowledge across student populations by ensuring that low-income students and students of color have equal access to qualified teachers. In the second major effort, reformers sought to improve instructional quality through learning standards, beginning with state-based reforms in the 1990s and continuing through the widespread adoption of the Common Core State Standards in the 2010s. As part of this second effort, states and districts sought to align instruction to these standards, often by encouraging teachers to use standardsbased curriculum materials.  \nTo date, however, few studies have assessed whether reformers’ goals have been met. To this end, we administered surveys to a nationally representative sample of middle school mathematics teachers, a major target of reformer’s efforts, in the years 2005 and 2016. Both surveys assessed key indicators targeted by policies and programs, including teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching (MKT),  \neducational background, and use of curriculum materials. While we cannot attribute observed changes to specific policies, these data allow us to track progress on reformers’goals after over a decade of effort.  \nBackground  \nU.S. students generally perform poorly in mathematics, with only 34% of eighth graders scoring at or above proficiency on the most recent National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) administration (NAEP, 2017) . Many trace lackluster student performance in part to U.S. policies and practices surrounding teacher and instructional quality. For instance, cross-national studies suggest that U.S. primary and lower secondary teachers are weaker in content knowledge than comparable teachers in European and Pacific Rim countries (Ma, 1999; Schmidt, Houang, & Cogan, 2011) . These studies also suggest that compared with our developed-nation peers, U.S. mathematics lessons are characterized by more routine problems, more emphas","cbCaiptwqCNzDkPt","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaiptwqCNzDkPt","pdf",537767,13,"English","# Mathematics Teacher and Curriculum Quality, 2005 and 2016\n## Policy efforts and reform background\n## Teacher Subject Matter Knowledge","[{\"question\":\"What does the study compare between 2005 and 2016?\",\"answer\":\"It compares middle school teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching (MKT) and their use of curriculum materials across the two years using nationally representative surveys.\"},{\"question\":\"How did teachers’ MKT change from 2005 to 2016?\",\"answer\":\"Teachers’ MKT increased, equivalent to an average teacher in the 2005 sample improving five percentile points by 2016.\"},{\"question\":\"What explanation does the study reject for the MKT increase?\",\"answer\":\"It argues that attempts under No Child Left Behind to encourage mathematics degrees do not explain the increase, since teachers were less likely in 2016 than in 2005 to possess such a degree.\"}]","Mathematics Teacher and Curriculum Quality, 2005 and 2016 | PDF",1792068449,33]