How Do Approaches to Curriculum Mapping Affect Comparability Claims? An Analysis of Mathematics Curriculum Content across Two Educational Jurisdictions
Saved in:
| Title: | How Do Approaches to Curriculum Mapping Affect Comparability Claims? An Analysis of Mathematics Curriculum Content across Two Educational Jurisdictions |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Nicky Rushton, Dominika Majewska, Stuart Shaw |
| Source: | Research Matters. 2024 (37):40-56. |
| Availability: | Cambridge University Press & Assessment. Shaftesbury Road Cambridge CB2 8EA. Tel: 44-1223-553311; e-mail: directcs@cambridge.org; Web site: https://www.cambridgeassessment.org.uk/our-research/all-published-resources/research-matters/ |
| Peer Reviewed: | N |
| Page Count: | 18 |
| Publication Date: | 2024 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Evaluative |
| Descriptors: | Curriculum Development, Mathematics Curriculum, Concept Mapping, Common Core State Standards, National Curriculum, Foreign Countries, Instructional Program Divisions, Comparative Analysis, Curriculum Design |
| Geographic Terms: | United Kingdom (England), United States |
| ISSN: | 1755-6031 |
| Abstract: | Curriculum mapping is a comparability method that facilitates comparisons of content within multiple settings (usually multiple jurisdictions or specifications) and enables claims to be made about those curriculums/jurisdictions. Although curriculum maps have been published, there is little academic literature about the process of constructing and using them. Our study extends the literature by considering the different types of comparisons that can be made from curriculum maps: content coverage, placement, depth, and breadth. We also consider how these comparisons are affected by structural differences in the curricula or using a subset of the content. We use our mapping of mathematics in the US Common Core State Standards (CCSS) and the national curriculum in England to explore this. The CCSS for mathematical practice are common to all grades; we mapped these standards against the content for individual years in the national curriculum. The CCSS for mathematical content are set out by grade; we mapped a subset of this content to the national curriculum. Our mapping shows that it is possible to map curricula and make meaningful comparisons despite structural differences and content limitations. However, this affected the types of comparisons that we could carry out and the claims that we could make. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2024 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1421406 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| Abstract: | Curriculum mapping is a comparability method that facilitates comparisons of content within multiple settings (usually multiple jurisdictions or specifications) and enables claims to be made about those curriculums/jurisdictions. Although curriculum maps have been published, there is little academic literature about the process of constructing and using them. Our study extends the literature by considering the different types of comparisons that can be made from curriculum maps: content coverage, placement, depth, and breadth. We also consider how these comparisons are affected by structural differences in the curricula or using a subset of the content. We use our mapping of mathematics in the US Common Core State Standards (CCSS) and the national curriculum in England to explore this. The CCSS for mathematical practice are common to all grades; we mapped these standards against the content for individual years in the national curriculum. The CCSS for mathematical content are set out by grade; we mapped a subset of this content to the national curriculum. Our mapping shows that it is possible to map curricula and make meaningful comparisons despite structural differences and content limitations. However, this affected the types of comparisons that we could carry out and the claims that we could make. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1755-6031 |
