International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education

International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education
The Development of Prospective Middle Level Teachers’ Mathematical Knowledge in a Multi-site Educational Setting
AMA 10th edition
In-text citation: (1), (2), (3), etc.
Reference: Slavit D, deVincenzi AT. The Development of Prospective Middle Level Teachers’ Mathematical Knowledge in a Multi-site Educational Setting. INT ELECT J MATH ED. 2020;15(3), em0612. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/9131
APA 6th edition
In-text citation: (Slavit & deVincenzi, 2020)
Reference: Slavit, D., & deVincenzi, A. T. (2020). The Development of Prospective Middle Level Teachers’ Mathematical Knowledge in a Multi-site Educational Setting. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 15(3), em0612. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/9131
Chicago
In-text citation: (Slavit and deVincenzi, 2020)
Reference: Slavit, David, and Allison Therese deVincenzi. "The Development of Prospective Middle Level Teachers’ Mathematical Knowledge in a Multi-site Educational Setting". International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education 2020 15 no. 3 (2020): em0612. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/9131
Harvard
In-text citation: (Slavit and deVincenzi, 2020)
Reference: Slavit, D., and deVincenzi, A. T. (2020). The Development of Prospective Middle Level Teachers’ Mathematical Knowledge in a Multi-site Educational Setting. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 15(3), em0612. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/9131
MLA
In-text citation: (Slavit and deVincenzi, 2020)
Reference: Slavit, David et al. "The Development of Prospective Middle Level Teachers’ Mathematical Knowledge in a Multi-site Educational Setting". International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, vol. 15, no. 3, 2020, em0612. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/9131
Vancouver
In-text citation: (1), (2), (3), etc.
Reference: Slavit D, deVincenzi AT. The Development of Prospective Middle Level Teachers’ Mathematical Knowledge in a Multi-site Educational Setting. INT ELECT J MATH ED. 2020;15(3):em0612. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/9131

Abstract

This case study explores the degree to which mathematical knowledge for teaching can be developed by prospective teachers in a multi-site teacher education context. The majority of the article focuses on a description of the target middle level mathematics endorsement program, including distance-based instructional norms, community building efforts, and tasks and activities intended to support the generation of mathematical knowledge for teaching. All preservice teachers enrolled in the program were invited to participate in the study. Means on Likert-scale survey items were calculated at three points in time over one year to determine changes. Open-ended survey items and focus group interviews were analyzed qualitatively to supplement the quantitative findings. These data support the result that middle level preservice teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching can be positively impacted by a middle level mathematics teacher education program. Two broader implications are provided: 1) teacher education experiences can have positive impact on prospective teachers’ development, and 2) this development is possible in a multi-site teacher education setting. Possible implications on international teacher education efforts are provided.

References

  • Abell, S. K., Lannin, J. K., Marra, R. M., Ehlert, M. W., Cole, J. S., Lee, M. H., Park Roger, M. A., & Wang, C. Y. (2007). Multi-site evaluation of science and mathematics teacher professional development programs: The project profile approach. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 33(2), 135-158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2007.04.003
  • Andrews, T., & Klease, G. (1998). Challenges of multisite video conferencing: The development of an alternative teaching/learning model. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 14(2), 88-97. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.1902
  • Association for Middle Level Education. (2010). This we believe: Keys to educating young adolescents. Westerville, OH: National Middle School Association.
  • Ball, D. L., & Bass, H. (2009). With an eye on the mathematical horizon: Knowing mathematics for teaching to learners’ mathematical futures. Paper presented at the 43rd JahrestagungfürDidaktik der Mathematik. Retrieved from http://www.mathematik.tudortmund.de/ieem/cms/media/BzMU/BzMU2009/Beitraege/Hauptvortraege/BALL_Deborah_BASS_Hyman_2009_Horizon.pdf
  • 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
  • Biggs, J. B., & Collis, K. F. (1982). Evaluating the quality of learning: The SOLO Taxonomy (Structure of the Observed Learning Outcome). New York: Academic Press.
  • Borko, H., Liston, D., & Whitcomb, J. A. (2007). Apples and fishes: The debate over dispositions in teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 58(5), 359-364. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487107309977
  • Cardetti, F., & Truxaw, M. P. (2014). Toward improving the mathematics preparation of elementary preservice teachers. School Science and Mathematics, 114(1), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12047
  • Collins, A., & Halverson, R. (2018). Rethinking education in the age of technology: The digital revolution and schooling in America. New York: Teachers College Press.
  • Darling-Hammond, L., & Bransford, J. (2005). Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
  • Depaepe, F., Verschaffel, L., & Kelchtermans, G. (2013). Pedagogical content knowledge: A systematic review of the way in which the concept has pervaded mathematics educational research. Teaching and Teacher Education, 34, 12-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2013.03.001
  • Duke, J., Francis, G., &Nagro, S. (2017). Student engagement across distance learning models. In Innovations in Teaching & Learning Conference Proceedings (Vol. 9). Fairfax, VA: Mason Publishing. Retrieved from https://journals.gmu.edu/ITLCP/article/view/1849/0
  • Forzani, F. M. (2014). Understanding “core practices” and “practice-based” teacher education: Learning from the past. Journal of Teacher Education, 65(4), 357-368. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487114533800
  • Grossman, P., Hammerness, K., & McDonald, M. (2009). Redefining teaching, re‐imagining teacher education. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 15(2), 273-289. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540600902875340
  • Hannafin, M. J., & Land, S. M. (1997). The foundations and assumptions of technology-enhanced student-centered learning environments. Instructional Science, 25(3), 167-202. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1002997414652
  • Hiebert, J., Gallimore, R., Garnier, H., Givvin, K. B., Hollingsworth, H., Jacobs, J., & Stigler, J. (2003). Teaching mathematics in seven countries: Results from the TIMSS 1999 video study. Education Statistics Quarterly, 5(1), 7-15. https://doi.org/10.1037/e610352011-003
  • Hill, H. C., Ball, D. L., & Schilling, S. G. (2008). Unpacking pedagogical content knowledge: Conceptualizing and measuring teachers’ topic-specific knowledge of students. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 39(4), 372-400.
  • Hoover, M., Mosvold, R., Ball, D. L., & Lai, Y. (2016). Making progress on mathematical knowledge for teaching. The Mathematics Enthusiast, 13(1), 3-34.
  • Jacob, R., Hill, H., & Corey, D. (2017). The impact of a professional development program on teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching, instruction, and student achievement. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 10(2), 379-407. https://doi.org/10.1080/19345747.2016.1273411
  • Jacobs, J., Hiebert, J., Givvin, K., Hollingsworth, H., Garnier, H., & Wearne, D. (2006). Does eighth-grade mathematics teaching in the United States align with the NCTM Standards? Results from the TIMSS 1995 and 1999 video studies. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 37(1), 5-32. https://doi.org/10.2307/27646307
  • Jakobsen, A., Thames, M. H., Ribeiro, C. M., & Delaney, S. (2012). Using practice to define and distinguish horizon content knowledge. In S. J. Cho (Ed.), 12th International Congress in Mathematics Education (12th ICME) (pp. 4635-4644). New York: Springer.
  • Kleickmann, T., Richter, D., Kunter, M., Elsner, J., Besser, M., Krauss, S., & Baumert, J. (2013). Teachers’ content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge: The role of structural differences in teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 64(1), 90-106. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487112460398
  • Leavy, A. M., & Hourigan, M. (2016). Using lesson study to support knowledge development in initial teacher education: Insights from early number classrooms. Teaching and Teacher Education, 57, 161-175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.04.002
  • Lewin, K. M. & Stuart, J. S. (2003). Researching teacher education: New perspectives on practice, performance and policy. Multi-Site Teacher Education Research Project (MUSTER) synthesis report (Education Research Paper, No. 49a). London, Department for International Development.
  • Maltese, A. V., Melki, C. S., & Wiebke, H. L. (2014). The nature of experiences responsible for the generation and maintenance of interest in STEM. Science Education, 98(6), 937-962. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21132
  • McDonald, M., Kazemi, E., & Kavanagh, S. S. (2013). Core practices and pedagogies of teacher education: A call for a common language and collective activity. Journal of Teacher Education, 64(5), 378-386. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487113493807
  • Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc.
  • Morris, A. K., Hiebert, J., & Spitzer, S. M. (2009). Mathematical knowledge for teaching in planning and evaluating instruction: What can preservice teachers learn? Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 40(5), 491-529. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.40.5.0491
  • National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
  • National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
  • National Governors Association (NGA) (2010). Common core state standards for mathematics. Washington D.C: Author.
  • National Research Council (NRC), & Mathematics Learning Study Committee. (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.
  • Reiss, K., Obersteiner, A., Heinze, A., Itzlinger-Bruneforth, U., & Lin, F. L. (2019). Large-scale studies in mathematics education research. In H. N. Jahnke & L. Hefendehl-Hebeker (Eds.), Traditions in German-Speaking Mathematics Education Research (pp. 249-278). New York: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11069-7_10
  • Reys, R., Reys, B., Lapan, R., Holliday, G., &Wasman, D. (2003). Assessing the impact of “standards”-based middle grades mathematics curriculum materials on student achievement. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 34(1), 74-95. https://doi.org/10.2307/30034700
  • Sadler, P. M., Sonnert, G., Hazari, Z., & Tai, R. (2012). Stability and volatility of STEM career interest in high school: A gender study. Science Education, 96(3), 411-427. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21007
  • Saldaña, J. (2015). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. New York: Sage.
  • Senk, S. L., Tatto, M. T., Reckase, M., Rowley, G., Peck, R., & Bankov, K. (2012). Knowledge of future primary teachers for teaching mathematics: An international comparative study. ZDM Mathematics Education, 44(3), 307-324. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-012-0400-7
  • Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X015002004
  • Slavit, D., deVincenzi, A., Akmal, T., & Lesseig, K. (2018). Promoting community and core practices in a multisite middle level mathematics program. In P. B. Howell, S. A. Faulkner, J. Jones, & J. Carpenter (Eds.), Preparing middle level educators for 21st century schools: Enduring beliefs, changing times, evolving practices (pp.179-202). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
  • Spangler, D. A., & Hallman-Thrasher, A. (2014). Using task dialogues to enhance preservice teachers’ abilities to orchestrate discourse. Mathematics Teacher Educator, 3(1), 58-75. https://doi.org/10.5951/mathteaceduc.3.1.0058
  • Stein, M. K., Silver, E. A., & Smith, M. S. (1998). Mathematics reform and teacher development: A community of practice perspective. Thinking practices in mathematics and science learning, 14(1), 21-32.
  • Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (2009). The teaching gap: Best ideas from the world’s teachers for improving education in the classroom. New York: Simon and Schuster.
  • Stigler, J. W., Gallimore, R., & Hiebert, J. (2000). Using video surveys to compare classrooms and teaching across cultures: Examples and lessons from the TIMSS video studies. Educational Psychologist, 35(2), 87-100. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3502_3
  • Stylianides, G. J., & Stylianides, A. J. (2009). Facilitating the transition from empirical arguments to proof. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 40(3), 314-352.
  • van Hiele, P. M. (1985). The child’s thought and geometry. In D. Fuys, D. Geddes, & R. Tischler (Eds.), English translation of selected writings of Dina van Hiele-Geldof and Pierre M. van Hiele (pp. 243-252). Brooklyn, NY: Brooklyn College, School of Education. (Original work published 1959)
  • Wang, J., and Goldschmidt, P. (2003). Importance of middle school mathematics on high school students’ mathematics achievement. The Journal of Educational Research, 97(1), 3-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220670309596624
  • Warren, C. A. (2018). Empathy, teacher dispositions, and preparation for culturally responsive pedagogy. Journal of Teacher Education, 69(2), 169-183. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487117712487
  • Zazkis, R., & Mamolo, A. (2011). Reconceptualizing knowledge at the mathematical horizon. For the Learning of Mathematics, 31(2), 8-13.
  • Zeichner, K., & Conklin, H. G. (2008). Teacher education programs as sites for teacher preparation. In M. Cochran-Smith, S. Feiman-Nemser, D. J. McIntyre, & K. E. Demers (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education: Enduring questions in changing contexts (pp. 269-289). New York: Routledge.
  • Zhao, Y., & Frank, K. A. (2003). Factors affecting technology uses in schools: An ecological perspective. American Educational Research Journal, 40(4), 807-840. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312040004807

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.