Evaluation of the Dwight D. Eisenhower Mathematics and Science State Curriculum Frameworks Projects: First Interim Report (State Curriculum Frameworks) describes progress by grantee States in developing curriculum frameworks in math and science education, guidelines for teacher education and certification, criteria for recertification, and model inservice professional development in alignment with State standards. The findings presented are based on the first phase of an on-going evaluation conducted by SRI International for the U.S. Department of Education, with Policy Studies Associates, Inc., and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) as subcontractors. Subsequent reports will examine the projects in later stages, as well as the quality of the curriculum frameworks and related products in professional development and licensing. The final report will be available in early 1998.
This study is part of a larger evaluation effort by the Department to examine the contributions of both the Eisenhower Mathematics and Science Education State Curriculum Frameworks Projects and Eisenhower Regional Consortiums Program to systemic reform and improvement in math and science education. The Eisenhower evaluation is being conducted in collaboration with the National Science Foundation's (NSF's) evaluation of its Statewide Systemic Initiatives (SSI) Program and the study of State curriculum frameworks in math and science by CCSSO. The purpose of this collaboration is to develop a more comprehensive perspective across education reform efforts, as well as to avoid duplication of efforts.
The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), as amended by the Dwight D. Eisenhower Mathematics and Science Education Act (Title II, Part A, Subpart 1), authorized the Eisenhower National Program for the improvement of teachers' skills and the quality of instruction in mathematics and science. Under the Eisenhower National Program, the Department awarded State curriculum frameworks grants for 1992-95 to the District of Columbia, Florida, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, and Rhode Island. The Department awarded grants for 1993-96 to Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Delaware, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Oregon, and Wisconsin. To examine results of the Eisenhower State Curriculum Frameworks Projects, the four-year evaluation continues into the beginning of 1997, several months beyond the end of the second cohort of grants.
Curriculum Frameworks. The projects have made substantial progress developing curriculum frameworks. Typically, State departments of education led the planning of the project, consulting with key stakeholders and involving thousands of teachers, other professionals, and the public in discussions about what students should know and be able to do.
Grantee States conceptualized the frameworks as a bridge between national standards and local classroom practice to help educators improve content and instruction aligned with national standards:
Most framework documents have multiple audiences, but nearly all documents include teachers as a key audience...The reference to teachers as a key audience for the curriculum framework documents should not be read too literally--that is, states do not necessarily believe that classroom teachers will take the framework document and use it in their classrooms...Other mechanisms for reaching the teachers are often--though not always---used, such as conducting a series of workshops directly based on the frameworks (pp. 13-14).
Because of local control, Oregon was a notable exception to the more common pattern of framework development. Instead of adopting a single State framework, Oregon was supporting the development of individual frameworks by 14 school districts. The State planned to collect portfolios from each of the 14 projects and place them on CD-ROM for distribution throughout Oregon.
In collaboration with CCSSO's study of frameworks, funded by NSF, the evaluation assembled a joint working group of nationally recognized experts to establish criteria and review the 23 State curriculum frameworks documents available, including six from Eisenhower grantee States. Complete findings are reported in Blank, R. K., and Pechman, E. M. (1995), State Curriculum Frameworks in Mathematics and Science: How Are They Changing Across the States?, Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers. The following are a few of the findings from the expert review of the 23 frameworks, provided in the evaluation report:
The interim evaluation report also discusses approaches taken by individual grantee States on specific issues, such as whether to integrate frameworks for math and science or present them as separate disciplines, whether to treat technology as a discipline or as a tool within math and science, and whether to present the new frameworks as updated revisions that build on earlier curriculum documents or as a major change from the earlier approach.
Teacher Education, Licensing, and Professional Development. In contrast to the development of curriculum frameworks by Eisenhower grantees, the evaluation found little progress in the development of guidelines for teacher education and certification, criteria for recertification, and model inservice professional development. States expressed the need for more time, up to an additional two years, to complete the Eisenhower projects. Progress varied across projects, depending on the status of State reforms at the start of the project, extensiveness of participation in the development and review processes, extent to which new approaches were used, such as integration of disciplines, and other factors.
Most States were still working on initial drafts of the guidelines for teacher education and certification by Spring 1995, although Delaware and New York had completed their drafts. Only Massachusetts had completed a concrete plan for the development of criteria for teacher recertification. Similarly, most states were still in the early stages of developing the model professional development.
Approaches varied among States. Michigan and New York focused on piloting models of professional development in selected schools. Louisiana coordinated with NSF's SSI and Teacher Collaboratives on teacher education and model professional development. Other grantee States used the frameworks themselves to address professional development. For example, Maine made model professional development part of its framework. New Jersey disseminated the framework document to teacher education institutions. Florida addressed teacher education in Science for All Educators, a companion piece to the framework document.
Collaboration Across Reform Efforts. The evaluation examined collaboration between the Eisenhower frameworks projects and related reform efforts. In nearly every one of the 10 states with both Eisenhower State curriculum frameworks and SSI grants, the evaluation found regular communication between the Eisenhower projects and SSI, sometimes through formal coordinating committees or overlapping leadership. In fact, SSI seemed to have an effect on the Eisenhower projects even in States without an SSI grant. Of the six curriculum framework project states without SSI grants, all had applied at least once, and five had applied at least twice. The very process of preparing an SSI grant application had helped States form coalitions and develop a direction and strategies for reform.
The Eisenhower Regional Consortia contributed to framework development in many grantee states, as well as in states without Eisenhower curriculum frameworks projects. Linkages with the Eisenhower State Grant Program were only beginning to emerge during the initial phase of the evaluation. However, in general, Eisenhower State coordinators were involved the framework projects and expected the frameworks to help guide their own Eisenhower programs.
Copies of the report, as well as the Evaluation of the Dwight D. Eisenhower Mathematics and Science Regional Consortiums Program: First Interim Report Regional Consortiums Program , can be obtained from the Planning and Evaluation Service, Office of the Under Secretary, U.S. Department of Education, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Room 4162, Washington, DC 20202-8240.
-###-
Return to Elementary and Secondary Education Page
mail to esed@ed.gov
Last update September 1996 (swz).