A Typology for Analyzing Digital Curricula in Mathematics Education

Jeffrey Choppin, Cynthia Carsons, Zenon Bory, Cathleen Cerosaletti, Rob Gillis
3.641 856


Digital content is increasingly present in U.S. K-12 classrooms, with a current push by federal officials to increase the rate at which digital textbooks are adopted. While some teachersâ use of electronic resources involves locating activities and lessons from various internet sites, textbook and educational software companies have begun to develop comprehensive programs that can supplement if not fully replace traditional paper textbooks. Digital platforms can be transformative, with possibilities for frequent updating, access to multimedia resources, connection to virtual communities, lower production and distribution costs, and customized instruction. However, there have been no attempts to analyze specific programs in mathematics education with respect to these and other features, a gap we seek to address. In this article, we developed and applied a framework to analyze a representative sample of digital curriculum programs in order to help educators better understand characteristics of these materials. We documented two distinct curriculum types, individualized learning programs and digitized versions of traditional textbooks. While the programs offered some of the features identified as transformative, particularly with respect to assessment systems that rapidly and visually report student performance, there were many features that did not take full advantage of the digital medium.


Digital Media, Mathematics Education, Curriculum

Full Text:

PDF (Türkçe)

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18404/ijemst.95334


Abell, M.. (2006). Individualizing learning using intelligent technology and universally designed curriculum. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 5(3), 21.

Anderson, T. (2005). Distance learning - Social software's killer ap? Paper presented at the ODLAA 2005 Conference. http://www.unisa.edu.au/odlaaconference/PPDF2s/13%20odlaa%20-%20Anderson.pdf Berg, C., & Smith, P. . (1994). Assessing students' abilities to construct and interpret line graphs: Disparities between multiple choice and free-response items. Science Education, 78, 527-554.

Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2010). Common Core State Standards for mathematics. Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org/assets/CCSSI_Math%20Standards.pdf

Daalsgard, C. (2006). Social software: E-learning beyond learning management systems. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning.

Davis, J., Choppin, J., Roth McDuffie, A., & Drake, C,. (2013). Common Core State Standards for Mathematics: Middle School Teachers’ Perceptions (pp. 16). Rochester, NY: Warner Center for Professional Development and Education Reform.

Dede, C.. (2000). Emerging influences of information technology on school curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 32(2), 281-303.

Devaney, L.. (2013, October 3, 2012). Education chief wants textbooks to go digital, eSchool News: Technology News for Today's K-12 Educator. Retrieved from http://www.eschoolnews.com/2012/10/03/educationchief-wants-textbooks-to-go-digital/

Fletcher, G., Scaffhauser, D,, & Levin, D. (2012). Out of Print: Reimagining the K-12 textbook in a digital age: State Educational Technology Directors Association.

Gray, L., Thomas, N., Lewis, L., & Tice, P. (2010). Teachers' use of educational technology in U.S. public schools: 2009. Washington, DC.: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education,.

Hutchins, E. (1995). Navigation as a context for learning. In Hutchins (Ed.), Cognition in the wild (pp. 263285). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Kraidy, U. (2002). Digital media and education: Cognitive impact of information visualization. Journal of Educational Media, 27(3), 95-106.

LEAD Commission. (2012). Leaders discuss transition to digital textbooks. Leading Education by Advancing Digital Retrieved from www.leadcommission.org website: Lonn, S., & Teasley, S. D. (2009). Saving time or innovating practice: Investigating perceptions and uses of Learning Management Systems. Computers & Education, 53, 686-694.

Mayer, R.. (2003). The promise of multimedia learning: Using the same instructional design methods across different media. Learning and Instruction, 13, 125-139.

Meyer, A., & Rose, D. (2000). Universal design for individual differences. Educational Leadership, 58(3), 39

Selwyn, N. (2007). Curriculum online? Exploring the political and commercial construction of the UK digital learning marketplace. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 28(2), 223-240.

Shapiro, T. R. (2012, December 12, 2012). Fairfax schools to buy paper textbooks after pixel predicament, The Washington Post.

Sporkin, A. (2013). Trade publishers' net revenue grows 6.2% for calendar year 2012. Association of American Publishers. http://www.publishers.org/press/101/ van Dijk, J. A.G.M. (2006). Digital divide research, achievements and shortcomings. Poetics, 34, 221-235.

Velan, G. M., Jones, P., McNeil, H. P., & Kumar, R. K. (2008). Integrated online formative assessments in the biomedical sciences for medical students: Benefits for learning. BMC Medical Education, 8(52), 11. Ward, K.. (2012). VA: Online math textbooks - worth $7.7M - don't add up for school distsrict. Retrieved from watchdog.org website: Usdan, J., & Gottheimer, J. (2012). FCC Chairman: Digital textbooks to all students in five years. Retrieved from http://www.fcc.gov/blog/fcc-chairman-digital-textbooks-all-students-five-years

Zhao, Y., Zhang, G. , & Lai, C. . (2010). Curriculum, digital resources and delivery. In P. Peterson, E. Baker & B. McGaw (Eds.), International Encyclopedia of Education (pp. 390-396). Oxford: United Kingdom: Elsevier Ltd.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.