International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education

In-service Teachers’ Geometry Content Knowledge: Implications for how Geometry is Taught in Teacher Training Institutions
AMA 10th edition
In-text citation: (1), (2), (3), etc.
Reference: Sunzuma G, Maharaj A. In-service Teachers’ Geometry Content Knowledge: Implications for how Geometry is Taught in Teacher Training Institutions. Int Elect J Math Ed. 2020;15(1), em00554. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/5776
APA 6th edition
In-text citation: (Sunzuma & Maharaj, 2020)
Reference: Sunzuma, G., & Maharaj, A. (2020). In-service Teachers’ Geometry Content Knowledge: Implications for how Geometry is Taught in Teacher Training Institutions. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 15(1), em00554. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/5776
Chicago
In-text citation: (Sunzuma and Maharaj, 2020)
Reference: Sunzuma, Gladys, and Aneshkumar Maharaj. "In-service Teachers’ Geometry Content Knowledge: Implications for how Geometry is Taught in Teacher Training Institutions". International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education 2020 15 no. 1 (2020): em00554. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/5776
Harvard
In-text citation: (Sunzuma and Maharaj, 2020)
Reference: Sunzuma, G., and Maharaj, A. (2020). In-service Teachers’ Geometry Content Knowledge: Implications for how Geometry is Taught in Teacher Training Institutions. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 15(1), em00554. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/5776
MLA
In-text citation: (Sunzuma and Maharaj, 2020)
Reference: Sunzuma, Gladys et al. "In-service Teachers’ Geometry Content Knowledge: Implications for how Geometry is Taught in Teacher Training Institutions". International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, vol. 15, no. 1, 2020, em00554. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/5776
Vancouver
In-text citation: (1), (2), (3), etc.
Reference: Sunzuma G, Maharaj A. In-service Teachers’ Geometry Content Knowledge: Implications for how Geometry is Taught in Teacher Training Institutions. Int Elect J Math Ed. 2020;15(1):em00554. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/5776

Abstract

The study intended to find out how in-service teachers were trained to teach geometry in Zimbabwe. Mixed method was employed in this study, in which qualitative and quantitative methods are concurrently used. While the questionnaire with closed ended questions constituted the quantitative aspect of the study, the open ended questionnaire questions and focus-group discussions were used for the qualitative aspect. The study participants consisted of 40 in-service teachers who completed the questionnaires and then participated in focus-group discussions. The findings reveal that 52.5 per cent of the teachers were adequately prepared to teach geometry and both teacher-centred and learner-centred approaches were used during their training. It emerged that teachers are likely to teach using the approaches that they experienced during their training. It is recommended that initial teacher training programs should adequately train teachers to teach geometry for them to be able to teach it effectively in schools.

References

  • Ball, D. L. (1990). The mathematical understandings that prospective teachers bring to teacher education. Elementary School Journal, 90 (4), 449-466. https://doi.org/10.1086/461626
  • Ball, D. L., Lubieski, S., & Mewborn, D. (2001). Research on teaching mathematics: The unresolved problem of teachers’ mathematical knowledge. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching. New York: Macmillan.
  • Barrantes, M., & Blanco, L., J. (2006). A study of prospective primary teachers’ conceptions of teaching and learning school geometry. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 9, 411-436. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-006-9016-6
  • Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Peterson, P. L., & Carey, D. A. (1988). Teachers’ Pedagogical Content Knowledge of Students’ Problem Solving in Elementary Arithmetic. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 19(5), 385-401. https://doi.org/10.2307/749173
  • Chiwiye, T. (2013). Assessment of mathematics and science subjects in Zimbabwe: ZIMSEC Perspective, ZimSEC, Harare.
  • Clements, D., & Sarama, J. (2011). Early childhood teacher education: The case of geometry. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 14, 133-148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-011-9173-0
  • Cochran, K. F., DeRuiter, J. A., & King, R. A. (1993). Pedagogical content knowing: An integrative model for teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 44(4), 263-272. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487193044004004
  • Creswell, J. W. (2015). A concise introduction to mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.
  • Ferner, B. R. (2013). Elementary Teacher Candidates’ Images of Mathematics, Diverse Students, and Teaching: An Exploratory Study With Implications for Culturally Responsive Mathematics Education. Dissertations and Theses. Paper 1097.
  • Healy, L., & Hoyles, C. (2000). A study of proof conceptions in algebra. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31 (4), 396-428. https://doi.org/10.2307/749651
  • Hennink, M. M. (2014). Focus-group discussions. Understanding qualitative research. New York: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199856169.001.0001
  • Hershkowitz, R., & Vinner, S. (1984). Children’s concepts in elementary geometry. A reflection of teacher’s concepts? In B. Southwell R. Eyland, M. Cooper, J. Conroy, and K. Collis (Eds.), Proceedings of the 8th PME International Conference 63-69. Darlinghurst, Australia: Mathematical Association of New South Wales.
  • Jones, K. (2000). Teacher Knowledge and professional development in geometry. Proceedings of the British Society for Research into Learning Mathematics, 20(3), 109-114.
  • Jones, K. (2002). Issues in the teaching and learning of geometry. In Linda Haggarty (Ed) Aspects of teaching secondary mathematics: perspectives on practice. London: Routledge Falmer
  • Mashingaidze, S. (2012). The Teaching of Geometric (Isometric) Transformations at Secondary. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v8n15p197
  • Noraini, I. (2006). Teaching and learning of mathematics: Making sense and developing cognitive abilities. Perak: Utusan Publication Sdn. Bhd.
  • Ponte, J. P., & Chapman, O. (2006). Mathematics teachers’ knowledge and practices. In A. Gutierrez and P. Boero (Eds), Handbook of research on the psychology of mathematics education: Past, present and future. Rotterdam: Sense.
  • Rollnick, M., Bennett, J., Rhemtula, M., Dharsey, N., & Ndlovu, T. (2008). The Place of Subject Matter Knowledge in PCK- A Case Study of South African Teachers Teaching the Amount of Substance and Equilibrium. International Journal of Science Education, 30(10): 1365-1387. Shulman, L. S. (1986.) Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching”. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690802187025
  • School Level: What Approach to Use and Why”? Asian Social Science, 8 (15), 197-210.
  • Strickland, S. (2008). Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University: USA.
  • Swafford, J. O., Jones, G. A., & Thornton, C. A. (1997). Increased knowledge in geometry and instructional practice. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28(4), 467-483. https://doi.org/10.2307/749683
  • Telima, A. (2011). Problems of teaching and learning geometry in secondary schools in Rivers State, Nigeria”. International Journal of Emerging Science, 1(2), 143-152.
  • Zimbabwe School Examination Council. (2013). ‘O’ level mathematics examiners’ Report 4008/4028: CDU: Harare.
  • Zimbabwe School Examination Council. (2015). ‘O’ level mathematics examiners’ Report 4008/4028: CDU: Harare.

License

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.