Bypass, Augment, or Integrate How Secondary Mathematics Teachers Address the Literacy Demands of Standards-Based Curriculum Materials

• Published in: Journal of literacy research Vol. 47; no. 4; pp. 439 - 472
• Main Authors: Chandler-Olcott, Kelly, Doerr, Helen M., Hinchman, Kathleen A., Masingila, Joanna O.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Los Angeles, CA SAGE Publications 01.12.2015; SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC
• Subjects: Academic Standards; Curricula; Curriculum Design; Curriculum development; Difficulty Level; Educational standards; Graduate students; High Schools; Instructional Materials; Literacy; Mathematics; Mathematics Curriculum; Mathematics Education; Mathematics Teachers; Middle Schools; National Standards; Qualitative Research; Secondary education; Secondary School Mathematics; Secondary School Teachers; Secondary schools; Semi Structured Interviews; Teacher attitudes; Teacher Response; United States (Northeast); Urban Schools; Use Studies; United States > US; secondary mathematics curriculum; teachers’ curriculum use; mathematics communication; content-area literacy; mathematics literacy
• ISSN: 1086-296X; 1554-8430
• DOI: 10.1177/1086296X16632040

This 3-year qualitative study examined how 26 teachers in four U.S. secondary schools addressed the literacy demands of curriculum materials based on standards from the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. It was grounded in sociocultural perspectives that encourage study of language in local contexts, including classrooms, communities, and disciplines. The research question asked, “How do secondary mathematics teachers in a teacher–researcher collaboration understand and address the literacy demands of standards-based curriculum materials?” An interdisciplinary team of literacy and mathematics education researchers and graduate students worked with teachers to examine required curriculum materials, plan lessons, and share resources, while collecting qualitative data to capture teachers’ understandings and actions. Findings indicated that teachers responded in three ways to the materials’ literacy demands: (a) they used the materials selectively to bypass or reduce the literacy demands, (b) they augmented use of the materials with literacy support, or (c) they integrated use of the materials into long-term frameworks to develop mathematics and literacy learning simultaneously. The study suggests the value of using insights from mathematics and literacy to inform mathematics curriculum design and reminds us to take teachers’ perspectives toward such materials seriously, particularly when they collaborate to address issues about the materials’ use in their own school contexts.