Recent calls to action focus on using educational tools that promote mathematics learning through evidence-based and equity-forward practices (NCTM, 2018). These practices may be derived from scholarship that examines factors related to mathematics teaching and learning using quantitative measures. A purpose of this presentation is to highlight areas of strength and opportunity related to the use of quantitative measures in scholarship examining K-12 mathematics settings. One outcome from this research-in progress is that scholars may become more aware of quantitative assessments for use in their research. A second outcome from this research is to foster conversations among colleagues around collaborative scholarship as well as areas for growth within mathematics education assessment. As a result, scholars may be better equipped to engage in quantitative research within mathematics contexts. Recognizing what is available and relevant to a desired area of study has potential to address contexts connected to topics described in Catalyzing Change (NCTM, 2018, 2020, 2020). That is, scholars cannot quantitatively measure constructs described in Catalyzing Change until it is known what measures are available and what they assess. This research-in progress aims to engage researchers in ongoing research and promote discussions across attendees. 
                        more » 
                        « less   
                    
                            
                            QUANTITATIVE INSTRUMENT REPOSITORY FOR MATHEMATICS EDUCATION RESEARCH WITH VALIDITY EVIDENCE
                        
                    
    
            The paper reports on the developments of a repository of quantitative assessments used in mathematics education contexts. This repository centralizes assessments and the associated validity evidence. The repository is public and freely available and has potential to inform future quantitative mathematics education scholarship. 
        more » 
        « less   
        
    
                            - Award ID(s):
- 1920621
- PAR ID:
- 10519467
- Editor(s):
- Lamberg, T; Moss, D
- Publisher / Repository:
- PMENA
- Date Published:
- Volume:
- 1
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 347-351
- Subject(s) / Keyword(s):
- Assessment Measurement
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Location:
- Reno, NV
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
- 
            
- 
            Miller, B; Martin, C (Ed.)Assessment continues to be an important conversation point within Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) education scholarship and practice (Krupa et al., 2019; National Research Council, 2001). There are guidelines for developing and evaluating assess- ments (e.g., AERA et al., 2014; Carney et al., 2022; Lavery et al., 2019; Wilson & Wilmot, 2019). There are also Standards for Educational & Psychological Testing (Standards; AERA et al., 2014) that discuss important rele- vant frameworks and information about using assessment results and interpretations. Quantitative assessments are used as part of daily STEM instruction, STEM research, and STEM evaluation; therefore, having robust assess- ments is necessary (National Research Council, 2001). An aim of this editorial is to give readers a few relevant ideas about modern assessment research, some guidance for the use of quantitative assessments, and framing validation and assessment research as equity-forward work.more » « less
- 
            Miller, B; Martin, C (Ed.)Quantitative measures in mathematics education have informed policies and practices for over a century. Thus, it is critical that such measures in mathematics education have sufficient validity evidence to improve mathematics experiences for students. This article provides a systematic review of the validity evidence related to measures used in elementary mathematics education. The review includes measures that focus on elementary students as the unit of analyses and attends to validity as defined by current conceptions of measurement. Findings suggest that one in ten measures in mathematics education include rigorous evidence to support intended uses. Recommendations are made to support mathematics education researchers to continue to take steps to improve validity evidence in the design and use of quantitative measures.more » « less
- 
            Abstract Quantitative measures in mathematics education have informed policies and practices for over a century. Thus, it is critical that such measures in mathematics education have sufficient validity evidence to improve mathematics experiences for students. This article provides a systematic review of the validity evidence related to measures used in elementary mathematics education. The review includes measures that focus on elementary students as the unit of analyses and attends to validity as defined by current conceptions of measurement. Findings suggest that one in ten measures in mathematics education include rigorous evidence to support intended uses. Recommendations are made to support mathematics education researchers to continue to take steps to improve validity evidence in the design and use of quantitative measures.more » « less
- 
            Although the paradigm wars between quantitative and qualitative research methods and the associated epistemologies may have settled down in recent years within the mathematics education research community, the high value placed on quantitative methods and randomized control trials remain as the gold standard at the policy-making level (USDOE, 2008). Although diverse methods are valued in the mathematics education community, if mathematics educators hope to influence policy to cultivate more equitable education systems, then we must engage in rigorous quantitative research. However, quantitative research is limited in what it can measure by the quantitative tools that exist. In mathematics education, it seems as though the development of quantitative tools and studying their associated validity and reliability evidence has lagged behind the important constructs that rich qualitative research has uncovered. The purpose of this study is to describe quantitative instruments related to mathematics teacher behavior and affect in order to better understand what currently exists in the field, what validity and reliability evidence has been published for such instruments, and what constructs each measure. 1. How many and what types of instruments of mathematics teacher behavior and affect exist? 2. What types of validity and reliability evidence are published for these instruments? 3. What constructs do these instruments measure? 4. To what extent have issues of equity been the focus of the instruments found?more » « less
 An official website of the United States government
An official website of the United States government 
				
			 
					 
					
 
                                    