A cross-site analysis of the extent of implementation of the California mathematics and science frameworks

School reform in California in the 1980s focused on changes in content and curriculum. This occurred in response to a national concern regarding the declining quality of education experienced by our students. Of particular interest were the areas of mathematics and science, due to the fact that, American students were achieving far below students of other countries.;William Honig, past state Superintendent of Education, has been a leader in guiding and becoming involved in California's school reform. For the first time in our state's history, we rejected textbooks from publishers that did not match with our new model curricula guides and frameworks.;Implementing the mathematics and science frameworks throughout schools in California represented a major challenge. The purpose of this study was to determine the extent that districts, schools, and teachers have implemented the California mathematics and science curricula and frameworks. This study also sought to examine patterns of implementation, similarities and differences, and to compare the extent of implementation of mathematics to science.;This study was composed of two phases. In phase one, case studies were developed as part of a major study of mathematics and science curricula implementation. Phase two, the focus of this dissertation, involved a cross-site analysis of the implementation of the mathematics and science frameworks across 12 districts, schools, and classrooms in California. They were analyzed in regard to the extent of implementation of various components in the model curricula guides and frameworks.;Selected findings include the strongest perceived implementation was in content at the district level for both mathematics and science. The strongest correlation, 0.990, was in science. This correlation was the relationship of district primary grades with district intermediate grades. Technology is a component that is perceived as needing further implementation in both mathematics and science.;The findings and conclusions of this cross-site analysis have produced some recommendations. School districts should continue to provide support and inservices to schools so that implementation may continue and become stronger. Principals should support teachers in their efforts to successfully implement the mathematics and science frameworks. Policies in California should provide for adequate time to implement frameworks in the future.;Further study should be done regarding the implementation process for other frameworks. Further study should be done regarding the impact of mathematics and science on student learning. And finally, further study should be done to investigate which instructional strategies are more successful and why.