NotesFAQContact Us
Search Tips
ERIC Number: ED342633
Record Type: Non-Journal
Publication Date: 1991-Jun
Pages: 72
Abstractor: N/A
Reference Count: N/A
1990 National Assessment of Educational Progress in Mathematics: Analysis and Interpretive Remarks of the State of Mathematics Achievement.
Pisapia, John; Gross, Ena
The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) Report on Mathematics Achievement released on June 6, 1991 confronts educators' professional knowledge regarding mathematics education. In many instances it confirms much of what research has already described, and what many have feared, regarding mathematics education. This analysis provided interpretative comments on the important findings in the 1990 NAEP report on mathematics. The analysis was guided by four questions: (1) What important findings were confirmed?; (2) What assumptions were challenged?; (3) How effective has the reform agenda been?; and (4) What new directions do the findings point toward? Thoughts responding to these questions were framed through the use of three concepts: Rhetoric, referring to policy statements and research findings regarding mathematics education; Reality, referring to the findings of the NAEP 1990 math results; and Remarks, referring to the interpretive comments and conclusions regarding the structure, emphasis, delivery and broader impact of mathematics education. The analysis confined its attention to 3 major categories and formed 12 conclusions. The category "The Report Confirms" formed conclusions regarding the performance levels of the nation's youth, at-risk students resistant to educational opportunities, the modest improvement due to the 80's reform agenda, and the home environment. The category "The Report Points to New Directions" formed conclusions regarding the need for new directions in curricular structure and emphasis, in teacher education and training, and in instructional approaches. The category "The Report Challenges" challenged assumptions regarding student expectations, tracking and ability grouping, educational resources, private education superiority, and teacher empowerment. The appendixes include descriptions of NAEP proficiency levels, mathematics content areas, and mathematical abilities. (25 references) (MDH)
Publication Type: Information Analyses
Education Level: N/A
Audience: N/A
Language: English
Sponsor: N/A
Authoring Institution: Virginia Commonwealth Univ., Richmond.
Identifiers - Assessments and Surveys: National Assessment of Educational Progress