The Study

Leland Cogan, Richard Houang, and HsingChi Wang, researchers with the U.S. National Research Center for the Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) at MSU, analyzed curriculum and teacher data from the more than 40 countries that participated in the study. TIMSS is the most comprehensive international study of education every undertaken, and extensive curriculum data and teacher surveys were gathered in addition to the student assessments that have been widely reported in the press.

Findings

This article draws on TIMSS teacher and curriculum data collected to document cultural differences in what constitutes the mathematics and science studied in schools. The researchers adapt the tripartite model introduced in the First International Mathematics Study and discuss three expressions of curriculum: the intended curriculum as found in official content standards, the potentially implemented curriculum represented by textbooks, and the implemented curriculum as measured by teachers’ reports of the amount of time they taught specific topics. Considering those topics included on the TIMSS eighth grade mathematics assessment, all countries intended the study of “equations & formulas” and nearly all (97 percent) intended study of “patterns, relations, & functions” and “polygons & circles.” Far fewer intended eighth grade students to study the arithmetic topics that often preoccupy U.S. students such as “common fractions” (53 percent), “estimating quantity & size” (36 percent), and “measurement estimations & errors” (53 percent). Considering textbooks, out of the possible 44 TIMSS Mathematics Framework topics, the number of topics found in textbooks ranged from around 15 (Bulgaria, Cyprus, Germany, Japan, and Korea) to around 40 (Canada, Switzerland, and USA) to all 44 (Latvia). For each country, the percent of teachers teaching each topic and the average amount of time devoted to teaching each topic was analyzed. Here, again, TIMSS researchers found evidence of the “mile wide, inch deep” nature of the U.S. mathematics curriculum. For example, a typical topic in the U.S. had over three-fourths of the teachers teaching it. In contrast, only about one-third of Israeli teachers taught a typical topic. In addition, cultural differences were demonstrated in how curriculum policy, as indicated through official standards and reflected however imperfectly in textbooks, related to what students were taught in the classroom. The many differences make it clear that there is more than one way to teach eighth grade mathematics. The authors conclude that reform efforts may profit from thoughtful consideration of the many different cultural approaches to school mathematics.

What it Means to You

The findings again point to a U.S. mathematics curriculum that is unfocused. Nonetheless, the authors warn against the inclination to simply appropriate any other country’s curriculum without taking into careful consideration the cultural contexts within which schools and their curriculum operate.

For More Information

Cogan, L. S., Houang, R. T., & Wang, H. A. (2000, April). The conceptualization and measurement of curriculum. In L. E. Suter (Chair), Cultural Context of Curriculum Policy and Its Relationship to Learning: Empirical Studies from the Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). Symposium conducted at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.

< back to 2001 ed-research reports