Search

Instruments designed to measure teachers' knowledge for teaching mathematics have been widely used to evaluate the impact of professional development and to investigate the role of teachers' knowledge in teaching and student learning. These instruments assess a mixture of content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge. However, little attention has been given to the content alignment between such instruments and curricular standards, particularly in regard to how content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge items are distributed across mathematical topics. This article provides content maps for two widely used teacher assessment instruments in the USA relative to the widely adopted Common Core State Standards. This common reference enables comparisons of content alignment both between the instruments and between parallel forms within each instrument. The findings indicate that only a small number of items on both instruments are designed to capture teachers' pedagogical content knowledge and that the majority of these items are focused on curricular topics in the later grades rather than in the early grades. Furthermore, some forms designed for use as pre- and post-assessment of professional development or teacher education are not parallel in terms of curricular topics, so estimates of teachers' knowledge growth based on these forms may not mean what users assume. The implications of these findings for teacher educators and researchers who use teacher knowledge instruments are discussed.

Past studies have suggested that in light of recent curriculum standards, many US teachers make limited use of drawn models in their mathematics instruction. To gain insight into this phenomenon, we investigated relationships between US teachers' opportunities to learn about, knowledge of, motivation for, and instructional use of drawn models for representing multiplication and division of fractions. A national sample of 990 practicing middle-grade teachers was administered a three-part survey that contained a knowledge assessment; a professional history and teaching practices questionnaire that included questions about opportunities to learn to use drawn models; and a motivation questionnaire that measured teachers' value, anxiety, and self-concept of ability for using such models in instruction. In regression models without motivation, opportunity to learn significantly predicted the teachers' knowledge, frequency of use, and purpose for use of drawn models. In structural equation models that included motivation, knowledge and motivation substantially accounted for relationships between the teachers' opportunity to learn and their self-reported use of drawn models in instruction. These findings are consistent with the general hypothesis that teacher' opportunities to learn teaching practices indirectly affect their instructional practices. Teachers' knowledge and motivation also play a central role.