2013 Conference Proceedings - University of Nevada, Las Vegas

as well as the alignment between the standards and teachers’ beliefs (LaBerge, Sons, & Zollman,1999; Markward, 1996; Mudge 1993; Perrin, 2012; Zollman & Mason, 1992). These studiesindicate a range of teachers’ familiarity and awareness of the NCTM standards documents. Theyalso highlight varying degrees of alignment between teachers’ beliefs and the philosophiesimplied by the standards. As highlighted by Heck, et al. (2011), however, given the recentpublication of the CCSSM, similar studies are likely only emerging with regard to the CCSSM.Consequently, questions arise as to what mathematics teachers obtain from initial readings of theSMP regarding how they believe they can implement, or are implementing the ideas therein.Specifically, the research reported in this paper addresses the following two research questions:1) When teachers initially read the SMP, what do they report as noteworthy?2) When teachers initially read the SMP, what aspects of each standard do teachers identifyas influencing their intentions to address the SMP in their instruction?Framework and Related LiteratureOur formulation of the research questions and associated analysis of teacher’s responses wereframed primarily by timely policy oriented discussions regarding research on the CCSSM. Inparticular, a recent report of a national meeting to examine the impact of the CCSSM, and tooutline a priority research agenda for understanding their influence identified five research areaswas published (Heck et al., 2011). The Priority Case Study Focus #5 of the document, Teacherresponses to the CCSSM, is stated as follows:Since teachers’ knowledge, interpretations, self-efficacy, beliefs, dispositions, and skill,as well as their specific intentions and plans, affect what transpires in classrooms, it iscritical to understand how teachers respond to the CCSSM, and what kinds of classroomlearning opportunities for their students result. (Heck et al., p. 13)Within this priority case study focus, Heck et al. (2011) articulate four broad areas ofquestions that should provide a focus for studies undertaken to investigate teacher responses tothe CCSSM. Our paper focuses on the questions used to describe and explain studies that addressthe second set of such questions, “What implications do teachers see for their mathematicsinstruction? What aspects of their mathematics instruction do they see as validated by theCCSSM, and what aspects do they consider in need of change based on the CCSSM?” (p.13).Additionally, the research reported in this paper addresses the call by Heck et al. (2011) forresearch “status studies” that report the current status of CCSSM adoption and implementation.Proceedings of the 40 th Annual Meeting of the Research Council on Mathematics Learning 2013 94