Opportunity to learn and mathematics achievement: The roles of content coverage and instructional time in TIMSS 2023
Xinzhu Zhang
None
DOI: https://doi.org/10.59429/bam.v8i3.15439
Keywords: opportunity to learn; mathematics achievement; TIMSS 2023; curriculum coverage; instructional time; secondary data analysis
Abstract
Opportunity to learn (OTL) is often introduced through curriculum policy, but students meet it in a more practical form: The mathematics topics their teacher covers and the time set aside for those topics. This paper examines how these two classroom indicators are related to Grade 8 mathematics achievement in TIMSS 2023. Public-use student, mathematics-teacher, and student-teacher linkage files were brought together for the 47 education systems that supplied all three files. The final analytic sample contained 112,827 complete student-mathematics-teacher links, representing 111,954 individual students in 46 systems and 8,259 schools. Mathematics achievement was represented by five TIMSS plausible values. Content coverage was calculated as the mean percentage of students taught number, algebra, geometry/measurement, and data/probability topics. Instructional time was the teacher-reported number of mathematics hours per week. The weighted least-squares models adjusted for home educational resources, student sex, and education-system fixed effects. Each system received the same total analytic weight. Estimates were first calculated for each of the five plausible values and were then combined with Rubin's rules; standard errors were clustered by school. Average coverage was 79.67%, while mean weekly mathematics time was 3.87 hours. A one-standard-deviation increase in composite content coverage (16.27 percentage points) was associated with a 4.06-point higher mathematics score (SE = 1.06, p < .001). Instructional time did not show a clear linear association at the mean, although the small negative quadratic term was statistically distinguishable from zero. In the domain model, the clearest positive association was for number coverage. Algebra was weaker, and geometry/measurement and data/probability were not statistically clear. Overall, the results suggest that a reasonably broad coverage of content may tell us more about OTL than simply adding lesson time. The data are cross-sectional and coverage is partly based on teacher reports, so the findings are adjusted associations rather than causal effects.
References
[1] Akiba, M., LeTendre, G. K., & Scribner, J. P. (2007). Teacher quality, opportunity gap, and national achievement in 46 countries. Educational Researcher, 36(7), 369-387. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X07308739.
[2] Blömeke, S., Olsen, R. V., & Suhl, U. (2016). Relation of student achievement to the quality of their teachers and instructional quality. In N. Nilsen & J.-E. Gustafsson (Eds.), Teacher quality, instructional quality and student outcomes (pp. 21-50). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-41252-8_2.
[3] Bokhove, C. (2022). Are instructional practices different between East and West? An analysis of Grade 8 TIMSS 2019 data. Asian Journal for Mathematics Education , 1(2), 221-241. https://doi.org/10.1177/27527263221109752.
[4] Daus, S., & Braeken, J. (2018). The sensitivity of TIMSS country rankings in science achievement to differences in opportunity to learn at classroom level. Large-scale Assessments in Education , 6, Article 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-018-0054-1.
[5] Drent, M., Meelissen, M. R. M., & van der Kleij, F. M. (2013). The contribution of TIMSS to the link between school and classroom factors and student achievement. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 45(2), 198-224. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2012.727872.
[6] Fishbein, B., Taneva, M., & Kowolik, K. (2025). TIMSS 2023 user guide for the international database. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College. https://timss2023.org/data.
[7] Guo, S., & Liao, S. (2022). The role of opportunity to learn on student mathematics anxiety, problem-solving performance, and mathematics performance. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 829032. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.829032.
[8] Hwang, J., & Ham, Y. (2021). Relationship between mathematical literacy and opportunity to learn with different types of mathematical tasks. Journal on Mathematics Education , 12(2), 199-222. https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.12.2.13625.199-222.
[9] Johansson, S., & Yang Hansen, K. (2018). Are mathematics curricula harmonizing globally over time? Evidence from TIMSS National Research Coordinator data. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education , 15(2), Article em1665. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/99516.
[10] Liu, X., Yang Hansen, K., Valcke, M., & De Neve, J. (2024). A decade of PISA: Student perceived instructional quality and mathematics achievement across European countries. ZDM - Mathematics Education , 56(5), 859-891. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-024-01630-7.
[11] Törnroos, J. (2005). Mathematics textbooks, opportunity to learn and student achievement. Studies in Educational Evaluation , 31(4), 315-327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2005.11.005.
[12] Wang, F., Liu, Y., & Leung, S. O. (2022). Disciplinary climate, opportunity to learn, and mathematics achievement: An analysis using doubly latent multilevel structural equation modeling. School Effectiveness and School Improvement , 33(3), 479-496. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2022.2043393.
[13] Wang, X. S., Perry, L. B., Malpique, A., & Ide, T. (2023). Factors predicting mathematics achievement in PISA: A systematic review. Large-scale Assessments in Education , 11, Article 16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-023-00174-8.
[14] Wijaya, A., van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M., & Doorman, M. (2015). Opportunity-to-learn context-based tasks provided by mathematics textbooks. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 89(1), 41-65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-015-9595-1.