 |
Resturcturing Subject Matter and Education Curriculum to Develop Mathematical Knowledge for Teaching: An Integrated Approach to Teacher Education
| |
| | Unformatted Document Text:
Resturcturing Subject Matter and Education Curriculum to Develop Mathematical
Knowledge for Teaching: An Integrated Approach to Teacher Education
Statement of the issue:
There are common themes currently running through the discourse of teacher preparation. Does teacher education make a difference? (Darling-Hammond & Youngs, 2002). Can teacher preparation programs empirically demonstrate their effectiveness through the student achievement of pupils whose teacher participated in a particular preparation program? (Cochran- Smith, 2003; Darlind-Hammond, 2002) To what extent is subject matter knowledge a factor in the effectiveness of a new teacher? (Darling-Hammond, 2002) How should preparation programs proportion the amount of time spent in subject matter preparation and development of pedagogy? (Stoddart & Floden, 1996; Wilson, Floden, & Ferrini-Mundy, 2002)
In mathematics, attention has recently been directed toward developing
“mathematical knowledge for teaching” (Ball, Lubienski, and Mewborn, 2001, p.437). More than an mere understanding of subject matter and different from generic pedagogical strategies, mathematical knowledge for teaching applies teaching skill to a deep understanding of mathematical concepts in order to influence student achievement in mathematics. How can teacher education be structured to promote the development of mathematical knowledge for teaching in future teachers? How can the development of such sophisticated knowledge be assessed? And, to what extent will the development of this type of knowledge influence the teaching practice of novice elementary level teachers?
A. Literature review:
The literature base that explores the relationship of mathematics subject matter
knowledge base and ability of teachers to be successful teachers of mathematics is extensive, yet still incomplete. At the apex of that literature base is the frequently referenced TIMSS study of mathematics teaching (Stigler & Heibert, 1999). This study clearly identifies the poor performance of U.S. teachers as compared to their Japanese counterparts. The ensuing discussion in the literature base as to why this would be the case centers around the U.S. teachers’ abilities to understand mathematics deeply in such a way as to affect the ability to analyze and correct students’ forming conceptions and misconceptions about mathematical concepts, what Ball calls the “knowledge of mathematics for teaching” (Ball, Lubienski, and Mewborn, 2001, p.437) and what Ma describes as “knowledge packets”(1999, p. 114). The need for changing the way future teachers develop subject matter knowledge in mathematics and use that knowledge to teach effectively is currently being researched and debated (Ball & Bass, 2000; Phillip, Clement, Thanheiser, Schapelle, & Sowder, 2003). A growing emphasis on the examination of learner misconceptions in both mathematics courses for teachers as well as pedagogy courses for teachers is a focus of change in a variety of teacher education settings.
At the center of this mathematics education reform is a deepening understanding of
the role of pedagogical content knowledge as a critical component of the teacher
|
| | Authors: Hertzog, Hillary., Zeitlin, Joel., Czech, Maria., Gold, Jerrold., Basta, Rita. and O'Rode, Nancy. |
|
| |
|
|
Resturcturing Subject Matter and Education Curriculum to Develop Mathematical
Knowledge for Teaching: An Integrated Approach to Teacher Education
Statement of the issue:
There are common themes currently running through the discourse of teacher preparation.
Does teacher education make a difference? (Darling-Hammond & Youngs, 2002). Can
teacher preparation programs empirically demonstrate their effectiveness through the
student achievement of pupils whose teacher participated in a particular preparation
program? (Cochran- Smith, 2003; Darlind-Hammond, 2002) To what extent is subject
matter knowledge a factor in the effectiveness of a new teacher? (Darling-Hammond,
2002) How should preparation programs proportion the amount of time spent in subject
matter preparation and development of pedagogy? (Stoddart & Floden, 1996; Wilson,
Floden, & Ferrini-Mundy, 2002)
In mathematics, attention has recently been directed toward developing
“mathematical knowledge for teaching” (Ball, Lubienski, and Mewborn, 2001, p.437).
More than an mere understanding of subject matter and different from generic
pedagogical strategies, mathematical knowledge for teaching applies teaching skill to a
deep understanding of mathematical concepts in order to influence student achievement
in mathematics. How can teacher education be structured to promote the development of
mathematical knowledge for teaching in future teachers? How can the development of
such sophisticated knowledge be assessed? And, to what extent will the development of
this type of knowledge influence the teaching practice of novice elementary level
teachers?
A. Literature review:
The literature base that explores the relationship of mathematics subject matter
knowledge base and ability of teachers to be successful teachers of mathematics is
extensive, yet still incomplete. At the apex of that literature base is the frequently
referenced TIMSS study of mathematics teaching (Stigler & Heibert, 1999). This study
clearly identifies the poor performance of U.S. teachers as compared to their Japanese
counterparts. The ensuing discussion in the literature base as to why this would be the
case centers around the U.S. teachers’ abilities to understand mathematics deeply in such
a way as to affect the ability to analyze and correct students’ forming conceptions and
misconceptions about mathematical concepts, what Ball calls the “knowledge of
mathematics for teaching” (Ball, Lubienski, and Mewborn, 2001, p.437) and what Ma
describes as “knowledge packets”(1999, p. 114). The need for changing the way future
teachers develop subject matter knowledge in mathematics and use that knowledge to
teach effectively is currently being researched and debated (Ball & Bass, 2000; Phillip,
Clement, Thanheiser, Schapelle, & Sowder, 2003). A growing emphasis on the
examination of learner misconceptions in both mathematics courses for teachers as well
as pedagogy courses for teachers is a focus of change in a variety of teacher education
settings.
At the center of this mathematics education reform is a deepening understanding of
the role of pedagogical content knowledge as a critical component of the teacher
|
|
 Convention | | Need a solution for abstract management? All Academic can help! Contact us today to find out how our system can help your annual meeting. | | Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. | | Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! | | Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! | | Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. | | Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! | | Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! | | Click here for more information. |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Page 1 of 4 
