Curriculum Alignment: Performance Types in the Intended, Enacted, and Assessed Curriculum in Primary Mathematics and Science Classrooms

Natasha Ziebell, David Clarke


This study examined the process of curricular alignment in primary school mathematics and science. Six performance type categories were used to define the cognitive-demand levels evident in the mandated curriculum and elicited through classroom practice. The purpose of this comparative case study is to understand how the intended goals of the mandated curriculum are interpreted for planning, instruction, and assessment purposes. The data includes video-recorded lessons, interviews, planning documents, and work samples from units of work. The results revealed that interpreting the intended goals of the mandated curriculum at the classroom level is a complex and dynamic process. The process is one of iterative interpretation at various levels of curriculum planning. The alignment of performance type expectations are influenced by the "sources of authority" that are accessed, such as standardized testing programs, textbooks, and curriculum consultants. The types of performances that were privileged in assessment practices were reflected in planning and instruction at the school level, indicating that, among other factors, assessment has a critical role in determining how the curriculum is enacted.

Klíčová slova

alignment; assessment; curriculum; planning; science; mathematics

Celý článek:



Zobrazit literaturu Skrýt literaturu

Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (2013). ACARA Annual report 2012–2013. Retrieved from

Barnes, M., Clarke, D., & Stephens, M. (2000). Assessment: The engine of systematic reform? Journal of Curriculum Studies, 32(5), 623–650.

Beck, M. D. (2007). Review and other views: "Alignment" as a psychometric issue. Applied Measurement in Education, 20(1), 127–135.

Bhola, D. S, Impara, J. C., & Buckendahl, C. W. (2003). Aligning tests with states' content standards: Methods and issues. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 22(3), 21–29. | DOI 10.1111/j.1745-3992.2003.tb00134.x

Clements, D. H. (2006). Curriculum research: Toward a framework for ‘research based curricula'. Journal of Research in Mathematics, 38(1), 35–70.

Cohen, A. S. (1987). Instructional alignment: Searching for a magic bullet. Educational Researcher, 16(8), 16–20. | DOI 10.3102/0013189X016008016

Council of Australian Governments. (2008). National Numeracy Review Report. Retrieved from

Education Queensland (2000). A guide to productive pedagogies. Retrieved from

Field, J. C. (1991). Educators perspectives on assessment: Tensions, contradictions and dilemmas. Canadian Journal of Education, 16(2), 210–214. | DOI 10.2307/1494973

Garden, R. (Ed). (1997). Mathematics and science performance in middle primary school. Wellington: Ministry of Education.

Herman, J. (1997). Assessing new assessment: How do they measure up? Theory into Practice, 36(4), 196–204. | DOI 10.1080/00405849709543769

Krathwohl, D. (2002). A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 212–218. | DOI 10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2

La Marca, P. M., Redfield, D., Winter, P. C., Bailey, A., & Despriet, L. H. (2000). State standards and state assessment systems: A guide to alignment. Washington: Council of Chief State School Officers.

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.

Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA). (2008). The Melbourne declaration on educational goals for young Australians. Retrieved from

OECD. (2009). PISA 2009 assessment framework: Key competencies. Retrieved from

Porter, A. C. (2002). Measuring the content of instruction: Uses in research and practice. Educational Researcher, 31(7), 3–14. | DOI 10.3102/0013189X031007003

Porter, A. C. (2004). Curriculum assessment. Nashville: Vanderbilt University. Retrieved from

Porter, A. C., & Smithson, J. (2001). Defining, developing, and using curriculum indicators (Research report RR-048). Philadelphia: Consortium for Policy Research in Education, University of Pennsylvania.

Porter, A. C., Smithson J., Blank, R., & Zeider T. (2007). Alignment as a teacher variable. Applied Measurement in Education, 20(1), 27–51. | DOI 10.1080/08957340709336729

Posner, G. J. (1994). The role of student assessment in curriculum reform. Peabody Journal of Education, 69(4), 91–99. | DOI 10.1080/01619569409538788

Rothman, R. (2003). Imperfect matches: The alignment of standards and tests. Washington: National Research Council.

Schoenfeld, A. H. (1999). Looking towards the 21st century: Challenges of educational theory and practice. Educational Research, 28(7), 4–14. | DOI 10.3102/0013189X028007004

Squires, D. A. (2009). Curriculum alignment: Research based strategies for increasing student achievement. California: Sage Publications.

Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Stein, M. K., & Lane, S. (1996). Instructional tasks and the development of student capacity to think and reason: An analysis of the relationship between teaching and learning in a reform mathematics project. Educational Research and Evaluation, 2(1), 50–80. | DOI 10.1080/1380361960020103

Stiggins, R. (2005). Student-involved assessment for learning. New Jersey: Pearson Education.

Stiggins, R., & Chappuis, J. (2012). Introduction to student-involved assessment for learning. New Jersey: Pearson Education.

Sullivan, P., Clarke, D. J., Clarke, D. M., Farrell, L., & Garrard, J. (2013). Processes and priorities in planning mathematics teaching. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 25(4), 457–480. | DOI 10.1007/s13394-012-0066-z

Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority. (2007). Victorian Essential Learning Standards. Retrieved from

Webb, N. (1997). Criteria for alignment of expectations and assessments in mathematics and science education. Washington: National Institute for Science Education Publications.

Webb, N. (2005). Webb alignment tool training manual (Draft). Madison: Wisconsin Centre for Educational Research.

Woodward, J., Beckmann, S., Driscoll, M., Franke, M., Herzig, P., Jitendra, A., Koedinger, K. R., & Ogbuehi, P. (2012). Improving mathematical problem solving in grades 4 through 8: A practice guide. Retrieved from

Xu, L., Kang, Y., & Clarke, D. J. (2011). A comparative investigation of mathematics curricula from Australia, China and Finland. Research report presented at the combined conference of the Australian Association for Mathematics Teachers and the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (AAMT/MERGA), July 3–7, 2011, Alice Springs, Australia.

Ziebell, N., Ong, A., Clarke, D. (2017). Aligning curriculum, instruction and assessment. In T. Bentley & G. Savage (Eds.), Educating Australia: Challenges for the decade ahead (pp. 257–276). Carlton: MUP Publishing.


Časopis Ústavu pedagogických věd FF MU.

Výkonná redakce: Klára Šeďová, Roman Švaříček, Zuzana Šalamounová, Martin Sedláček, Karla Brücknerová, Petr Hlaďo.

Redakční rada: Milan Pol (předseda redakční rady), Gunnar Berg, Michael Bottery, Hana Cervinkova, Theo van Dellen, Eve Eisenschmidt, Peter Gavora, Yin Cheong Cheng, Miloš Kučera, Adam Lefstein, Sami Lehesvuori, Jan Mareš, Jiří Mareš, Jiří Němec, Angelika Paseka, Jana Poláchová Vašťatková, Milada Rabušicová, Alina Reznitskaya, Michael Schratz, Martin Strouhal, Petr Svojanovský, António Teodoro, Tony Townsend, Anita Trnavčevič, Jan Vanhoof, Arnošt Veselý, Kateřina Vlčková, Eliška Walterová.

Časopis vydává čtyři čísla ročně.

ISSN 1803-7437 (print), ISSN 2336-4521 (online)