View in EDS

How Do Approaches to Curriculum Mapping Affect Comparability Claims? An Analysis of Mathematics Curriculum Content across Two Educational Jurisdictions

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
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
FullText Text:
  Availability: 0
CustomLinks:
  – Url: https://eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=EJ1421406
    Name: ERIC Full Text
    Category: fullText
    Text: Full Text from ERIC
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1421406
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: How Do Approaches to Curriculum Mapping Affect Comparability Claims? An Analysis of Mathematics Curriculum Content across Two Educational Jurisdictions
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Nicky+Rushton%22">Nicky Rushton</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Dominika+Majewska%22">Dominika Majewska</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Stuart+Shaw%22">Stuart Shaw</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Research+Matters%22"><i>Research Matters</i></searchLink>. 2024 (37):40-56.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: 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/
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: N
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 18
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2024
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Evaluative
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Curriculum+Development%22">Curriculum Development</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Mathematics+Curriculum%22">Mathematics Curriculum</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Concept+Mapping%22">Concept Mapping</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Common+Core+State+Standards%22">Common Core State Standards</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22National+Curriculum%22">National Curriculum</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Instructional+Program+Divisions%22">Instructional Program Divisions</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Comparative+Analysis%22">Comparative Analysis</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Curriculum+Design%22">Curriculum Design</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22United+Kingdom+%28England%29%22">United Kingdom (England)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22United+States%22">United States</searchLink>
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1755-6031
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: 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.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2024
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1421406
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1421406
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 18
        StartPage: 40
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Curriculum Development
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Mathematics Curriculum
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Concept Mapping
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Common Core State Standards
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: National Curriculum
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Instructional Program Divisions
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Comparative Analysis
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Curriculum Design
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: United Kingdom (England)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: United States
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: How Do Approaches to Curriculum Mapping Affect Comparability Claims? An Analysis of Mathematics Curriculum Content across Two Educational Jurisdictions
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Nicky Rushton
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Dominika Majewska
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Stuart Shaw
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2024
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1755-6031
          Numbering:
            – Type: issue
              Value: 37
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Research Matters
              Type: main
ResultId 1