• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

INFORMATION TO USERS This was produced from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed Is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they arc spliced Into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages to assure you of complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark it is an indication that the film inspector noticed cither blurred copy because of movement during exposure, or duplicate copy. Unless we meant to delete copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed, you will find a good image of the page In the adjacent frame. If copyrighted materials were deleted you will find a target note listing the pages in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photo­ graphed the photographer has followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It ts customary to begin filming at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue from left to right In equal sections with small overlaps. If necessary, sectioning is continued again-beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. For any illustrations that cannot be reproduced satisfactorily by xerography, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and tipped Into your xerographic copy. Requests can be made to our Dissertations Customer Services Department. 5. Some pages In any document may have indistinct print. In all cases we have filmed the best available copy. University M icnxilm s International 300 N. ZEEB RD.. ANN ARBOR. Mt 4B106 8121809 K a s t e n , M a r g a r e t Bl e d s u e MINIMUM COMPETENCY TESTING IN MATHEMATICS: A CHRONICLE OF AN EDUCATIONAL MOVEMENT OF THE 70S The Ohio Stale University PH.D, 1981 University Microfilms International300 N*. Zccb Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48106 Copyright 1980 by Kasten, Margaret Bledsue All Rights Reserved PLEASE NOTE: In alt cases this material has been filmed in the best possible way from the available copy. Problems encountered with this document have been identified here with a check mark V . 1. Glossy photographs or pages ______ 2. Colored illustrations, paper or print ______ 3. Photographs with dark background ______ 4. Illustrations are poor copy _______ 5. Pages with black marks, not original copy _______ 6. Print shows through as there Is text on both sides of page ______ 7. Indistinct, broken or small print on several pages / 8. Print exceeds margin requirements ______ 8. Tightly bound copy with print lost in spine _______ 10. Computer printout pages with indistinct print _______ 11. Page(s)____________ lacking when material received, and not available from school or author. 12. Page(s)____________ seem to be missing in numbering only as text follows. 13. Two pages numbered ____________ . Text follows. 14. Curling and wrinkled p a g e s _______ 15. Other _____________________________________________ _________ ___________________ University Microfilms International MINIMUM COMPETENCY TESTING IN MATHEMATICS: A CHRONICLE OF AN EDUCATIONAL MOVEMENT OF THE 70S DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of the Ohio State University By Margaret Bledsue Kasten, B.A., M.S. The Ohio S ta te U niversity 1981 Reading Committee: Approved by Elsie J. Alberty F. Joe CroBswhite M arilyn N. Suydam Joe Crosswhite Harold C. Trimble Adviser This dissertation is dedicated to ay parents who provided happy yesterdays, firmly set in loving discipline, to my husband, Donald, who makes each today richer and more exciting, and to my daughter, Sarah, who brightens all my tomorrows. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS No doctoral program la completed without the support and help of many Individuals. 1 wish to thank the many Individuals who provided this help and support. Special appreciation is extended to Dr. F. Joe Crosswhite, graduate advisor and dissertation chairman, for his encouragement, clear thinking, good humor, and faith. Sincere gratitude is extended to my disertation committee members Dr. E lsie A lberty, Dr. Alan Osborne, Dr. Harold Trim ble, and Dr. Marilyn Suydam for their Interest and continual support. To all of the sincere and talented professionals at the state departments of education who were so very helpful, a heartful thank you. I especially want to thank Dr. Thomas Fisher from Florida, Dr. Donald Egge from Oregon, Mr. Charles Foster from Missouri, and Mr. Roger Lulow from Ohio. To the teachers and principals who took time from the world's busiest jobs to answer the surveys, a sincere thank you. To Karen Storts and Katie McConnell for their invaluable assistance in preparing the manuscript I extend my slncerest thanks. Finally, I want to thank my friends and family, especially my husband and daughter for their encouagement, support, and patience. i l l VITA March 2, 1947 Bom - Jefferson City, Missouri 1969 B.S. in Education, University of Missouri Columbia, Missouri 1969-1970 Mathematics teacher, Monterey High School, Monterey, California September 1970- Substitute Teacher, Monterey, California December 1970 January 1971- T itle I Math Teacher in 6th grade, Mexico May 1972 M issouri 1973 M.S. in Mathematics Education, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri 1972-75 High School Mathematics Teacher, Mexico M issouri 1975-1976 Elementary Mathematics Consultant, Columbia, Public Schools, Columbia, Missouri 1976-1978 Graduate Teaching Assistant, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1977-1979 Graduate Research Assistant, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1979-1980 Analyst for Education Resources Information Center (ERIC), Columbus, Ohio 1980-present Mathematics Consultant, Ohio Department of Education, Columbus, Ohio PUBLICATIONS Changes needed in the current direction of minimal competency testing in mathematics, (with Robert E. Reys) Mathematics Teacher, 1978, 71, 108-112. Assistant Editor: Investigations in Mathematics Education. Columbus, Ohio: ERIC/SMEAC, 1979 to p resen t. iv Assessing mathematical achievement. (with Jon L* Higgins and M arilyn N. Suydam, Columbus, Ohio: ERIC/SMEAC, 1980. The Role of Problem Solving in the Curriculum: A Report of the NCTM PRISM Project, (with Alan Osborne) FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: Mathematics Education Studies in Mathematics Education. Professors F. Joe Crosswhite, Alan Osborne, and Marilyn N. Suydam Studies in Curriculum and Foundations. Professors Elsie J. Alberty and James K. Duncan v TABLE OF CONTENTS Page DEDICATION..................................................................................................................... l i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS......................................................................................................l i i VITA............................................................................................................... .iv LIST OF TABLES.......................................................................................................... .i x Chapter I INTRODUCTION Background and Significance of the Study . ..1 Problem Statement ............................................................ ,....5 Description of the Study ...........................................................9 I I REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE......................................................................13 Introduction ................................................................................................13 Background. ...................................... 14 Defining the Movement ......................................................................14 Assessment Movement ............................. 14 Accountability Movement ......................................................... 15 Competency Based Education Movement ........................... 17 B ack-to-B asics Movement ........................................18 Minimum Competency T esting Movement................................18 Antecendents and Precedents. ................................................ 21 Reasons for the Movement ............................................................. 25 Goals of Minimum Competency te s tin g ............................................33 Effects on Students ..........................................................................34 Effects on Schools ..........................................................................39 E ffe c ts on S o c i e t y ..........................................................................40 Defining Minimum Competency ..... ........................................41 Defining Mathematical Competencies ................................................ 46 Mandates (or Control) of Minimum Competency Testing . .49 Federal Policies ..............................................................................50 Federal A ctivities ..........................................................................53 Activity in the Fifty States .................................................... 55 Legal Issues Surrounding Minimum Competency Testing. .78 Implementation ............................

Load more

  398

Copy Link