We further acknowledge other purposes for evaluation, including program improvement, accountability, cost-effectiveness, and public relations, but do not address these purposes within our defined scope of work.
Furthermore, we recognize that at the local level, decisions are often made by weighing the “best available evidence” and considering the likelihood of producing positive outcomes in the particulars of context, time pressures, economic feasibility, and resources.
The framework’s purpose is also to provide various readers with a consistent and standard frame of reference for defining what is meant by a scientifically valid evaluation study for reviewing mathematics curriculum effectiveness.When a publisher or a government organization supports the development of a set of materials, they often use the term “curriculum” to refer to the physical set of materials developed across grade levels.Finally, the mathematics education community often finds it useful to distinguish among the intended curriculum, the enacted curriculum, and the achieved curriculum (Mc Knight et al., 1987).The curricula reviewed in this report are written by a single author or set of authors and published by a single publisher.
They usually include a listing or mapping of the curricular objectives addressed in the materials in relation to national, state, or local standards or curricular frameworks.
Before discussing the framework, we define the terms used in the study.