| This case study research involves the tracking of a mathematics curriculum resource document from ideation, through creation and mediation, to provincial dissemination. Using a curriculum negotiation model (MacDonald & Walker, 1976; Pitman, 1981) as a point of departure, the researcher has applied the theoretical model to the life of an educational resource document, namely, Targeted Implementation and Planning Supports: Grade 7, 8, 9 Applied Mathematics (Consortium of Ontario School Boards, 2003). Interviews were conducted with 64 participants selected from the following levels of the curriculum negotiation process: Ontario Ministry of Education, Steering Committee, Writing Team, Workshop Developers, Mathematics Coordinators, Pilot Team Teachers, and Mathematics Teachers.;In Chapter 1, the reader is presented with an introductory overview of the research study context including a statement of purpose, guiding research questions, theoretical framework, several key definitions, and a brief sketch of research methodology, methods, and limitations. The Curriculum Negotiation Model (MacDonald & Walker, 1976) is introduced, as is the extended version (Pitman, 1981), and the applied TIPS Development and Implementation version (Jarvis, 2006). Chapter 2 begins with a broad discussion of educational reform as viewed from four distinct perspectives, namely, political, financial, socio-cultural, and pedagogical. The contemporary mathematics educator is then depicted as functioning within the prima facie polarized tenets of standardization and standards-based reform, the realities and challenges of which are further discussed. Descriptions of several related and more recent reform models (Dimmock & Walker, 2005; Earl et al., 2003) are provided for purpose of comparison. The chapter ends with a closer look at existing international and provincial research initiatives focused on the professional development of mathematics educators, as backdrop for the present study.;Chapter 3 provides further details regarding the methodology and methods used within the research, which included interviews, Internet-based survey/questionnaires, workshop observations, and field notes. Chapters 4 and 5 present the identification and consolidation of emergent themes, respectively, from the various forms of collected data. The research findings center on two major areas: the curriculum negotiation process and the professional development models used within three selected District School Boards. In the former case, issues discussed at length include the following: perceived key messages in TIPS (i.e., bridges within teacher practice, teacher planning, and teacher communication); the "gap between images" (i.e., difference between the idealised and implemented product); examples of responses to the conceptual conflict associated with the TIPS innovation (i.e., Berlyne's categories of disequalization, conciliation, suppression, and swamping); a newly-presented negotiation strategy, Parametric Creativity, shown to be exemplified by both Evgren, the Project Leader, and Valery, a Mathematics Coordinator; and perceptions regarding the necessity of TIPS development in Ontario. In the latter area of focus, three professional development models, designated as Participatory (Board 1), Differentiated (Board 2), and Sustained (Board 3), based on unique characteristics of the models examined, are compared and contrasted regarding aspects of perceived and observed effectiveness.;Possible implications from the research findings for policymakers, curriculum leaders, coordinators, administrators, mathematics teachers, faculty professors, and qualitative researchers, are posited in Chapter 6, as are considerations and recommendations for future related research in mathematics education.;Keywords. educational reform, educational leadership, curriculum negotiation, professional development, cognitive conflict, mathematics education. |
