cpm mathematics homework help

cpm mathematics homework help

The Effectiveness of CPM Mathematics in Improving Student Learning

1. Introduction to CPM Mathematics

CPM in the Classroom: Theoretical Foundation describes the theoretical foundation and approach that has been used to develop the CPM program. However, being based on sound theory and research does not always mean that a program is effective in practice. This section will explain what CPM’s approach to instructional improvement is and what tools it uses to bring instruction toward CPM’s vision of effective instruction: taking into account what is known about student learning, math instruction, and adult learning. The development phase highlighted the need for an empirical study to demonstrate the effectiveness of CPM. The study was a demand of both the Mathematics and Science Partnership Grant and the ING grant. The reviewers of the second failed grant submission specifically asked for first-year research as a condition for funding in the future.

CPM (College Preparatory Mathematics) Mathematics is a program that teaches mathematics using the belief that students can and should be empowered to first ask questions, then follow a more investigative and cooperative approach to learning. CPM was created due to the collaboration of 9 research grants made between 1984 and 1994 by The National Science Foundation. It was first implemented in 1992 in three public high schools in Redwood City, California. Since then, the organization has grown and now offers full-year mathematics programs for grades 6 through 12, as well as intervention (study hall) and college readiness (empowering students to succeed in developmental mathematics courses) courses. Currently, CPM has their curriculum in 50 states, one territory, and thirty-one countries around the world.

2. Research on the Impact of CPM Mathematics on Student Learning

The populations studied in research on the impact and effectiveness of CPM mathematical programs is broad-ranging. Some studies compare academic growth rates between students in “CPM 1-to-1 Implementation Schools versus AYP Similar Schools” and note that neither implementation of programs nor the level of implementation could be the sole cause of academic growth for the students. The AYP schools acted as a control group for the study to account for the many variables which have the potential to impact student learning. CPM schools were found to grow at high rates “despite” the high number of students living in poverty, speaking English as a second language, or needing special education services. Two surveys were employed as data collection tools by J. Rodzon and M. Densmore in their 2014 study to measure CPM and non-CPM teacher views on technology, formative assessment, and learning disabilities.

Research has demonstrated that utilizing CPM mathematical programs can lead students to develop clear and connected understanding of mathematical concepts. The CPM teaching model effectively engages students in both conceptual and procedural learning. CPM programs are also successful in increasing student achievement on standardized measures of mathematics achievement. When schools have implemented the CPM teaching model, many students have shown increased understanding of both algebraic and statistical concepts such as functions, the concept of a variable, transformations, and bivariate data.

3. Best Practices for Implementing CPM Mathematics in the Classroom

– CPM is based on standards-based pedagogy that focuses on developing problem solving and conceptual reasoning for all students. – In order to get high quality implementation of the CPM curriculum consistently, professional development is an essential component of the effective implementation of CPM. Successful professional development should be three years. This would allow teachers to get through the entire three-year sequence and have the PD align with the topics being taught, as well as the strategies being used. CPM has developed a sequential program of Professional Development that parallels the three years of full implementation of a new program. Such a program has been found to enable teachers to learn the curriculum quickly and effectively.

Best Practices for the Implementation of CPM Mathematics in Classrooms:

One important principle that should guide the general practice of teaching with CPM is to focus on helping students to be critical thinkers while they are learning and contemplating mathematics, rather than simply concentrating on “covering material”. The pedagogical stance and general instructional practices discussed in previous sections of this report articulate what these instructional practices are likely to include. Starting at the top of this section with a reiteration of general priorities, we offer some counsel to those who are using or planning to use CPM in the classroom. Also contained in this section are best practices in the implementation of CPM mathematics.

4. Challenges and Solutions in Using CPM Mathematics

There are many flavors of challenge. One that was often addressed in the design of CPM textbooks is the challenge of value across schools and districts with every kind of resource constraint. It shouldn’t need to be so hard and time-consuming to get a bunch of kids to notice a pattern or explore for a bit. This is where professional support with years of implementing experience is especially valuable. We should always look for ways to make teaching a bit more exploratory and a lot less factory-work. While exercises are a great place for kids to apply their learning, the most important part of learning usually comes from being stuck and figuring your way forward. Students don’t like doing math. This is real! We can get better and better at helping them change their minds about that. Help make it clear what learning goals we envision for many students across many experiences, even as we acknowledge diversity. Put systems in place for monitoring whether educational dreams are realized, and apply what’s learned to make those dreams even more likely.

Using CPM Mathematics to teach students in the grade 6–12 range offers great potential to improve students’ learning. But CPM Mathematics has not fulfilled its promise for all, and not without challenges to implementation. Solving educational problems at scale often presents implementing barriers. A small example isn’t really effective unless the challenges faced are representative of those larger numbers deal with. CPM mathematics, in any grade range, isn’t a perfect fit for every setting or every educator – and the areas educators might really struggle with is where their local challenges lie.

5. Conclusion and Recommendations for Future Research

One key recommendation for future research is to explore beyond causal estimates of the impact of CPM alone; instead, measures should more precisely indicate what feature(s) of CPM (or other coursework), if any, contribute(s) to such success. This could be useful for determining which aspect of instruction works for which students – and contribute to preserving the most positive components of CPM approaches. Combining, comparing and contrasting methodological and analytic approaches, such as interplay of administrative records and teacher/school surveys, across studies in order to derive a whole-cloth perspective of CPM impacts, implementation supports and hurdles, and materials, is also important, and would be useful for environmental intervention strategies, for planning and proposing new evaluations, and for generalization of findings beyond the set of students in the estimated population. Similar links to research addressing college and workforce readiness might also be informative in gauging the resultant impact of CPM-induced gains at the high school level, further shedding light on the worth of CPM materials. So, our final conclusion is that work focused on these topics would be most fruitful in discerning the full range of CPM’s impact upon our educational systems and our society as a whole.

The findings reported above add to a limited literature in mathematics education focusing on the effectiveness of specific curriculum materials. In this report, we present evidence that CPM materials appear to be effective tools for teaching mathematics to typically achieving students in grade 6 mathematics and for teaching pre-algebra to average achieving 7th graders. Importantly, our results suggest that the CPM curriculum improvements could benefit many California students in grades 9-11. This is exciting, given that many other attempts to alter instructional materials appear not to have had similar impacts on student learning. Although we have a relatively large analysis of grade 6 CPM students and their outcomes, the ability to draw conclusions about the efficacy of CPM materials based on our statistical work would be increased significantly by more replications and confirmations from research using alternate approaches. We would also hope that future work could delve more deeply into the mechanisms that make CPM materials more successful.