International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education

International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education Indexed in ESCI
Relational equity: Adapting an elementary mathematics teaching methods course to online contexts
APA
In-text citation: (Ruef & Shepard, 2022)
Reference: Ruef, J. L., & Shepard, R. (2022). Relational equity: Adapting an elementary mathematics teaching methods course to online contexts. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 17(4), em0699. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/12224
AMA
In-text citation: (1), (2), (3), etc.
Reference: Ruef JL, Shepard R. Relational equity: Adapting an elementary mathematics teaching methods course to online contexts. INT ELECT J MATH ED. 2022;17(4), em0699. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/12224
Chicago
In-text citation: (Ruef and Shepard, 2022)
Reference: Ruef, Jennifer L., and Reid Shepard. "Relational equity: Adapting an elementary mathematics teaching methods course to online contexts". International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education 2022 17 no. 4 (2022): em0699. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/12224
Harvard
In-text citation: (Ruef and Shepard, 2022)
Reference: Ruef, J. L., and Shepard, R. (2022). Relational equity: Adapting an elementary mathematics teaching methods course to online contexts. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 17(4), em0699. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/12224
MLA
In-text citation: (Ruef and Shepard, 2022)
Reference: Ruef, Jennifer L. et al. "Relational equity: Adapting an elementary mathematics teaching methods course to online contexts". International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, vol. 17, no. 4, 2022, em0699. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/12224
Vancouver
In-text citation: (1), (2), (3), etc.
Reference: Ruef JL, Shepard R. Relational equity: Adapting an elementary mathematics teaching methods course to online contexts. INT ELECT J MATH ED. 2022;17(4):em0699. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/12224

Abstract

Background. This article describes the redesign, implementation, and students’ experiences with an elementary mathematics teaching methods course in the Pacific Northwest of the United States that was forced online due to COVID-19 restrictions. We share course design principles, changes to reflect online teaching, and students’ experiences of relational equity, “the care and consideration students and teachers must take with each other to establish and maintain a culture of equitable learning.”
Methods: This study took place online. 50 out of a cohort of 54 pre-service elementary teacher candidates participated. Our methods included analysis of course documents, analytic memoing, and analysis of students’ responses to online open response surveys. We qualitatively analyzed the responses from the surveys, coding for a priori and emergent themes (Charmaz, 1995; Emerson et al., 2011; Miles et al., 2019).
Findings: The results share the ways the instructors modified the course for online instruction and indicate that our participants experienced successes or challenges to enacting relational equity in the following: (i) curriculum and assessments, (ii) instructors, (iii) generic reference to the course, (iv) technology limits, and (v) future teaching.
Contribution: This work sheds light on how two mathematics teacher educators redesigned their course for online instruction while centering and modeling relational equity teaching practices.

References

  • AMTE. (2017). Standards for preparing teachers of mathematics. Association of Mathematics Teacher Educators. https://amte.net/standards
  • Ball, D. L. (1993). With an eye on the mathematical horizon: Dilemmas of teaching elementary school mathematics. The Elementary School Journal, 93(4), 373-397. https://doi.org/10.1086/461730
  • Ball, D. L., Hill, H., C., & Bass, H. (2005). Knowing mathematics for teaching. American Educator, 14-46.
  • Ball, D. L., Thames, M. H., & Phelps, G. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special? Journal of Teacher Education, 59(5), 389-407. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487108324554
  • Beghetto, R. A. (2009). Correlates of intellectual risk taking in elementary school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 46(2), 210-223. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20270
  • Boaler, J., & Staples, M. (2008). Creating mathematical futures through an equitable teaching approach: The case of Railside School. Teachers College Record, 110(3), 608-645. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146810811000302
  • Borba, M. C., Engelbrecht, J., & Llinares, S. (2021). Using digital technology and blending to change the mathematics classroom and mathematics teacher education. In K. Hollebrands, R. Anderson, & K. Oliver (Eds.), Online learning in mathematics education (pp. 21-42). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80230-1_2
  • Calder, N., Jafri, M., & Guo, L. (2021). Mathematics education students’ experiences during lockdown: Managing collaboration in eLearning. Education Sciences, 11(4), 191. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11040191
  • Chapin, S. H., O’Connor, M. C., & Anderson, N. C. (2009). Classroom discussions: Using math talk to help students learn, grades K-6. Math Solutions.
  • Charmaz, K. (1995). Grounded theory. In J. A. Smith, R. Harre, & L. Van Langenhove (Eds.), Rethinking methods in psychology (pp. 27-49). SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446221792.n3
  • Cohen, E., & Lotan, R. (2014). Designing groupwork: Strategies for the heterogeneous classroom. Teachers College Press.
  • Emerson, R., Fretz, R., & Shaw, L. (2011). Writing ethnographic field notes. University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226206868.001.0001
  • Engelbrecht, J., & Harding, A. (2005). Teaching undergraduate mathematics on the internet. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 58(2), 253-276. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-005-6457-2
  • Goins, E. (2017). Why I’m leaving a research I university for a liberal arts college. American mathematical society ‘blog on inclusion/exclusion. https://blogs.ams.org/inclusionexclusion/2017/09/15/why-im-leaving-a-research-i-university-for-a-liberal-arts-college/
  • Gutiérrez, R. (2016). Strategies for creative insubordination in mathematics teaching. Teaching for Excellence and Equity in Mathematics, 7(1), 52-62. https://www.todos-math.org/assets/documents/TEEM/teem7_final1.pdf#page=52
  • Gutiérrez, R. (2017). Political conocimiento for teaching mathematics: Why teachers need it and how to develop it. In S. E. Kastberg, A. M. Tyminski, A. E. Lischka, & W. B. Sanchez (Eds.), Building support for scholarly practices in mathematics methods (pp. 11-38). IAP.
  • Hand, V. M. (2010). The co-construction of opposition in a low-track mathematics classroom. American Educational Research Journal, 47(1), 97-132. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831209344216
  • Horn, I. S. (2012). Strength in numbers. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
  • Hufferd-Ackles, K., Fuson, K. C., & Sherin, M. G. (2004). Describing levels and components of a math-talk learning community. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 35(2), 81-116. https://doi.org/10.2307/30034933
  • Inside Mathematics. (n. d.). Inside mathematics. https://www.insidemathematics.org/
  • Jackson, K. J., Shahan, E., Gibbons, L., & Cobb, P. (2012). Setting up complex tasks. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, (January), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.5951/mathteacmiddscho.18.1.0024
  • Jansen, A. (2020). Rough draft math: Revising to learn. Stenhouse Publishers.
  • Jilk, L. M. (2016). Supporting teacher noticing of students’ mathematical strengths. Mathematics Teacher Educator, 4(2), 188-199. https://doi.org/10.5951/mathteaceduc.4.2.0188
  • Jones, S., & Long, V. (2013). Learning equity between online and on-site mathematics courses. Journal of Online Learning & Teaching, 9(1), 1-12. https://jolt.merlot.org/vol9no1/jones_0313.pdf
  • Jordaan, T., & Havenga, M. (2021). The show must go on: Active online collaboration during COVID-19–Mathematics students solving real-world problems. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Project Approaches in Engineering Education; Active Learning in Engineering Education Workshop; International Conference on Active Learning in Engineering Education. Braga, Portugal. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5095292
  • Kazemi, E. (1998). Discourse that promotes conceptual understanding. Teaching Children Mathematics, 4(7), 410-414. https://doi.org/10.5951/TCM.4.7.0410
  • Lampert, M. (2010). Learning teaching in, from, and for practice: What do we mean? Journal of Teacher Education, 61(1-2), 21-34. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487109347321
  • Langer-Osuna, J. M. (2011). How Brianna became bossy and Kofi came out smart: Understanding the trajectories of identity and engagement for two group leaders in a project-based mathematics classroom. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 11(3), 207-225. https://doi.org/10.1080/14926156.2011.595881
  • Lo, M., & Ruef, J. (2020). Student or teacher? A look at how students facilitate public sensemaking during collaborative groupwork. Journal of Urban Mathematics Education, 13(1), 15-33. https://journals.tdl.org/jume
  • Lubienski, S. T. (2002). Research, reform, and equity in US mathematics education. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 4(2-3), 103-125. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327833MTL04023_2
  • Martin, D. B., Gholson, M. L., & Leonard, J. (2010). Mathematics as gatekeeper: Power and privilege in the production of knowledge. Journal of Urban Mathematics Education, 3(2), 12-24. https://doi.org/10.21423/jume-v3i2a95
  • Miles, M. B., Huberman, M. A., & Saldana, J. (2019). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. SAGE.
  • Moschkovich, J. (2013). Principles and guidelines for equitable mathematics teaching practices and materials for English language learners. Journal of Urban Mathematics Education, 6(1), 45-57. https://doi.org/10.21423/jume-v6i1a204
  • National Research Council. (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. National Academies Press.
  • National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2014). Principles to actions: ensuring mathematical success for all. NCTM.
  • National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2018). Catalyzing change in high school mathematics: initiating critical conversations. NCTM.
  • NCTM. (2018). Catalyzing change in high school mathematics: Initiating critical conversations. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
  • NGACBP & CCSSO. (2010). Common core state standards for mathematics. National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. http://www.corestandards.org/assets/CCSSI_Math%20Standards.pdf
  • Parker, R. E., & Humphreys, C. (2018). Digging deeper: Making number talks matter even more, grades 3-10. Stenhouse Publishers.
  • Pope, H., & Mangram, C. (2015). Wuzzit trouble: The influence of a digital math game on student number sense. International Journal of Serious Games, 2(4), 5-21. https://doi.org/10.17083/ijsg.v2i4.88
  • Ruef, J. (2021). How Ms. Mayen and her students co-constructed "good at math." Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 52(2), 152-188. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc-2020-0264
  • Ruef, J., & Torres, A. (2020). A menu of risk-taking Scaffolds. Mathematics Teacher: Teaching and Learning PK-12, 113(9), 723-730. https://doi.org/10.5951/MTLT.2019.0091
  • Ruef, J., Jacob, M., Walker, G. K., & Beavert, V. (2020) Why Indigenous languages matter for mathematics education: A case study of Ichishkíin. Education Studies in Mathematics, 104(3), 313-332. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-020-09957-0
  • Smith, M., & Stein, M. K. (2018). 5 practices for orchestrating productive mathematics discussions. NCTM.
  • Sun, K. L. (2018). Brief report: The role of mathematics teaching in fostering student growth mindset. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 49(3), 330-335. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.49.3.0330
  • Sun, K. L., & Evans, L. (2016). Intellectual risk taking in the mathematics classroom. New England Mathematics Journal, 49(1), 47-57.
  • Sun, K. L., Ruef, J., Stoehr, K. J., Ahearn, M. (2022). Teaching preservice mathematics teachers in the time of COVID: What’s worth keeping? Journal of Humanistic Mathematics, 12(1), 187-209. https://scholarship.claremont.edu/jhm/vol12/iss1/14
  • Tate, W. F., Anderson, C. R., & Tate, D. A. (2018). 2018--” SUM” is better than nothing: Toward a sociology of urban mathematics education. Journal of Urban Mathematics Education, 11(1-2), 31-44.
  • Thanheiser, E., Jones, D., & Amidon, J. (Hosts). (2020-present). Teaching math teaching [Audio podcast]. Episode 10: Equity in synchronous online teaching, with de Araujo, Z. https://www.teachingmathteachingpodcast.com/10?fbclid=IwAR33orrFLaIgABUIoKO-cqq4uYrdMBk9FYp_Xu2ghpGN9zd-azuyiEwdEBA
  • TODOS. (2020). The mo(ve)ment to prioritize antiracist mathematics: Planning for this and every school year. TODOS. https://www.todos-math.org/assets/The%20Movement%20to%20Prioritize%20Antiracist%20Mathematics%20Ed%20by%20TODOS%20June%202020.edited.pdf
  • Turner, E., Dominguez, H., Maldonado, L., & Empson, S. (2013). English learners’ participation in mathematical discussion: Shifting positionings and dynamic identities. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 44(1), 199-234. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.44.1.0199
  • Uegatani, Y., Nakawa, N., & Kosaka, M. (2021). Changes to tenth-grade Japanese students’ identities in mathematics learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 16(2), em0638. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/10905
  • Van de Walle, J. A., Karp, K. S., & Bay-Williams, J. M. (2019). Elementary and middle school mathematics: Teaching developmentally. Pearson.
  • van Es, E. A., Stockero, S. L., Sherin, M. G., Van Zoest, L. R., & Dyer, E. (2015). Making the most of teacher self-captured video. Mathematics Teacher Educator, 4(1), 6-19. https://doi.org/10.5951/mathteaceduc.4.1.0006
  • Yackel, E., & Cobb, P. (1996). Sociomathematical norms, argumentation, and autonomy in mathematics. Journal for research in mathematics education, 27(4), 458-477. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.27.4.0458

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.