Using the history of mathematics to induce changes in preservice teachers’ beliefs and attitudes: insights from evaluating a teacher education program

  • Charalambos Y. CharalambousEmail author
  • Areti Panaoura
  • George Philippou


Scholars and teacher educators alike agree that teachers’ beliefs and attitudes toward mathematics are key informants of teachers’ instructional approaches. Therefore, it has become clear that, in addition to enriching preservice teachers’ (PSTs) knowledge, teacher education programs should also create opportunities for prospective teachers to develop productive beliefs and attitudes toward teaching and learning mathematics. This study explored the effectiveness of a mathematics preparatory program based on the history of mathematics that aimed at enhancing PSTs’ epistemological and efficacy beliefs and their attitudes toward mathematics. Using data from a questionnaire administered four times, the study traced the development of 94 PSTs’ beliefs and attitudes over a period of 2 years. The analysis of these data showed changes in certain dimensions of the PSTs’ beliefs and attitudes; however, other dimensions were found to change in the opposite direction to that expected. Differences were also found in the development of the PSTs’ beliefs and attitudes according to their mathematical background. The data yielded from semi-structured follow-up interviews conducted with a convenience sample of PSTs largely corroborated the quantitative data and helped explain some of these changes. We discuss the effectiveness of the program considered herein and draw implications for the design of teacher education programs grounded in the history of mathematics.


Attitudes Epistemological beliefs Efficacy beliefs History of mathematics Program evaluation Preservice teacher education 



The authors are grateful to the editor and three anonymous reviewers for their comments on an earlier version of this paper. Nevertheless, the authors assume full responsibility for any errors that may appear in the paper.


  1. Adler, J., Ball, D., Krainer, K., Lin, F., & Novotna, J. (2005). Reflections on an emerging field: Researching mathematics teacher education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 60, 359–381. doi: 10.1007/s10649-005-5072-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ball, D. L., & Bass, H. (2000). Interweaving content and pedagogy in teaching and learning to teach: Knowing and using mathematics. In J. Boaler (Ed.), Multiple perspectives on the teaching and learning of mathematics (pp. 83–104). CT: Ablex.Google Scholar
  3. Ball, D. L., Lubienski, S., & Mewborn, D. (2001). Research on teaching mathematics: the unsolved problem of teachers’ mathematics knowledge. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 433–456, 4th ed.). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  4. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman.Google Scholar
  5. Barbin, E., Bagni, G., Grugnetli, L., & Kronfellner, M. (2000). Integrating history: research perspectives. In J. Fauvel, & J. Maanen (Eds.), History in mathematics education—The ICMI study (pp. 63–90). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  6. Boaler, J. (1997). When even the winners are losers: evaluating the experiences of “top set” students. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 29(2), 165–182. doi: 10.1080/002202797184116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Buehl, M., Alexander, A., & Murphy, P. (2002). Beliefs about schooled knowledge: domain general or domain specific? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27, 415–449. doi: 10.1006/ceps.2001.1103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Charalambous, C. Y., Philippou, G. N., & Kyriakides, L. (2008). Tracing the development of preservice teachers’ efficacy beliefs in teaching mathematics during fieldwork. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 67, 125–142. doi: 10.1007/s10649-007-9084-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ernest, P. (1991). Philosophy of mathematics education. New York: Falmer.Google Scholar
  10. Fasanelli, F., Arcavi, A., Bekken, O., Dynnikov, C., Furinghetti, F., Grugnetii, L., et al. (2000). The political context. In J. Fauvel, & J. Maanen (Eds.), History in mathematics education—The ICMI study (pp. 1–38). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  11. Furinghetti, F. (2007). Teacher education through the history of mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 66, 131–143. doi: 10.1007/s10649-006-9070-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gill, M., Ashton, P., & Algina, S. (2004). Changing preservice teachers’ epistemological beliefs about teaching and learning in mathematics: An intervention study. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29(2), 164–185. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2004.01.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Goldin, G. A. (2002). Affect, meta-affect and mathematical belief structures. In G. Leder, E. Pehkonen, & G. Törner (Eds.), Beliefs: A hidden variable in mathematics education? (pp. 59–72) Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  14. Gordon, C., Lim, L., Mckinnon, D., & Nkala, F. (1998). Learning approach, control orientation and self-efficacy of beginning teacher education students. Asia Pacific Journal of Teacher & Development, 1(1), 53–63.Google Scholar
  15. Hofer, B. K., & Pintrich, P. R. (1997). The development of epistemological theories: beliefs about knowledge and knowing and their relation to learning. Review of Educational Research, 67, 88–140.Google Scholar
  16. Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J., & Findell, B. (Eds.). (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. Washington, DC: National Academy.Google Scholar
  17. Lin, H., & Gorrell, J. (2001). Exploratory analysis of pre-service teacher efficacy in Taiwan. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(5), 623–635. doi: 10.1016/S0742-051X(01)00018-X.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Philipp, R. A. (2007). Mathematics teachers’ beliefs and affect. In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 257–315). Charlotte: Information Age.Google Scholar
  19. Philippou, G. N., & Christou, C. (1998). The effects of a preparatory mathematics program in changing prospective teachers` attitudes toward mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 35, 189–206. doi: 10.1023/A:1003030211453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Radford, L., Furinghetti, F., & Katz, V. (2007). Introduction: the topos of meaning or the encounter between past and present. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 66, 107–110. doi: 10.1007/s10649-006-9076-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ross, J. A. (1992). Teacher efficacy and the effect of coaching on student achievement. Canadian Journal of Education, 17(1), 51–65. doi: 10.2307/1495395.Google Scholar
  22. Schubring, G., Cousquer, E., Fung, C., El-Idrissi, A., Gispert, H., Heiede, T., et al. (2000). History of mathematics for trainee teachers. In J. Fauvel, & J. Maanen (Eds.), History in mathematics education—The ICMI study (pp. 91–142). Boston: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  23. Soodak, L., & Podell, D. M. (1996). Teacher efficacy and student problems as factors in special education referral. The Journal of Special Education, 27, 66–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Taplin, M., & Chan, C. (2001). Developing problem-solving practitioners. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 4(4), 285–304. doi: 10.1023/A:1013331126790.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Tschannen-Moran, M., Hoy, A., & Hoy, W. (1998). Teacher efficacy and measure. Review of Educational Research, 68, 202–248.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Charalambos Y. Charalambous
    • 1
    Email author
  • Areti Panaoura
    • 2
  • George Philippou
    • 3
  1. 1.School of EducationUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA
  2. 2.School of EducationFrederick UniversityNicosiaCyprus
  3. 3.Department of EducationUniversity of CyprusNicosiaCyprus

Personalised recommendations