Educational Studies in Mathematics

, Volume 98, Issue 1, pp 1–17 | Cite as

Teacher questioning and invitations to participate in advanced mathematics lectures

  • Teo Paoletti
  • Victoria Krupnik
  • Dimitrios Papadopoulos
  • Joseph Olsen
  • Tim Fukawa-Connelly
  • Keith Weber


We were interested in exploring the extent to which advanced mathematics lecturers provide students with opportunities to play a role in considering or generating course content. To do this, we examined the questioning practices of 11 lecturers who taught advanced mathematics courses at the university level. Because we are unaware of other studies examining advanced mathematics lecturers’ questioning, we first analyzed the data using an open coding scheme to categorize the types of content lecturers solicited and the opportunities they provided students to participate in generating course content. In a second round of analysis, we examined the extent to which lecturers provide students with opportunities to generate mathematical contributions and to engage in reasoning that researchers have identified as important in advanced mathematics. Our findings highlight that, although lecturers asked many questions, lecturers did not provide substantial opportunities for students to participate in generating mathematical content and reasoning. Additionally, we provide several examples of lecturers providing students with some opportunities to generate important contributions. We conclude by providing implications and areas for future research.


Questioning Teaching of advanced mathematics courses Opportunities to participate 

Supplementary material

10649_2018_9807_MOESM1_ESM.docx (123 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 123 kb)


  1. Aizikovitsh-Udi, E., & Star, J. (2011). The skill of asking good questions in mathematics teaching. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 1354–1358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alcock, L. (2010). Mathematicians’ perspectives on the teaching and learning of proof. In F. Hitt, D. Holton, & P. Thompson (Eds.), Research in collegiate mathematics education VII (pp. 63–92). Washington DC: MAA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alcock, L., & Weber, K. (2005). Proof validation in real analysis: Inferring and checking warrants. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 24(2), 125–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Artemeva, N., & Fox, J. (2011). The writing’s on the board: The global and the local in teaching undergraduate mathematics through chalk talk. Written Communication, 28(4), 345–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blair, R. M., Kirkman, E. E., & Maxwell, J. W. (2013). Statistical abstract of undergraduate programs in the mathematical sciences in the United States: Fall 2010 CBMS survey. American Mathematical Society.Google Scholar
  6. Boaler, J., & Brodie, K. (2004). The importance of depth and breadth in the analysis of teaching: A framework for analyzing teacher questions. In D. E. McDougall & J. A. Ross (Eds.), Proceedings of the 26th annual meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 773–80). Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
  7. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chi, M. T. H., & Wiley, R. (2014). The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 219–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Duell, O. K., Lynch, D. J., Ellsworth, R., & Moore, C. A. (1992). Wait-time in college classes taken by education majors. Research in Higher Education, 33(4), 483–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Franke, M. L., Webb, N. M., Chan, A. G., Ing, M., Freund, D., & Battey, D. (2009). Teacher questioning to elicit students’ mathematical thinking in elementary school classrooms. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(4), 380–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fukawa-Connelly, T. P., Johnson, E., & Keller, R. (2016). Can math education research improve the teaching of abstract algebra? Notices of the AMs, 63(3), 276–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fukawa-Connelly, T. P., & Newton, C. (2014). Analyzing the teaching of advanced mathematics courses via the enacted example space. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 87(3), 323–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fukawa-Connelly, T. P., Weber, K., & Mejia-Ramos, J. P. (2017). Informal content and student note taking in advanced mathematics classes. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 48(5), 567–579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gabel, M., & Dreyfus, T. (2017). Affecting the flow of a proof by creating presence—A case study in number theory. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 96(2), 187–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Heinze, A., & Erhard, M. (2006). How much time do students have to think about teacher questions? An investigation of the quick succession of teacher questions and student responses in the German mathematics classroom. ZDM, 38(5), 388–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hiebert, J., & Wearne, D. (1993). Instructional tasks, classroom discourse, and students’ learning in second-grade arithmetic. American Educational Research Journal, 30(2), 393–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lew, K., Fukawa-Connelly, T. P., Mejia-Ramos, J. P., & Weber, K. (2016). Lectures in advanced mathematics: Why students might not understand what the mathematics professor is trying to convey. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 47(2), 162–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Mesa, V. (2010). Student participation in mathematics lessons taught by seven successful community college instructors. Adults Learning Mathematics, 5(1), 64–88.Google Scholar
  19. Mesa, V., Celis, S., & Lande, E. (2014). Teaching approaches of community college mathematics faculty: Do they relate to classroom practices? American Educational Research Journal, 51(1), 117–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mills, M. (2014). A framework for example usage in proof presentations. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 33, 106–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Moyer, P. S., & Milewicz, E. (2002). Learning to question: Categories of questioning used by preservice teachers during diagnostic mathematics interviews. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 5(4), 293–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Nathan, M. J., & Kim, S. (2009). Regulation of teacher elicitations in the mathematics classroom. Cognition and Instruction, 27(2), 91–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pinto, A. (2013). Revisiting university mathematics teaching: A tale of two instructors. Paper presented in the Eighth Congress of European Research in Mathematics Education (CERME 8), Antalya, Turkey.Google Scholar
  24. Rasmussen, C., & Wawro, M. (2017). Post-calculus research in undergraduate mathematics education. In J. Cai (Ed.), Handbook of research in mathematics education. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics: Reston, VA.Google Scholar
  25. Rowe, M. B. (1974). Wait-time and rewards as instructional variables, their influence on language, logic, and fate control: Part one-wait-time. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 11(2), 81–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rowe, M. B. (1986). Wait time: Slowing down may be a way of speeding up! Journal of Teacher Education, 37(1), 43–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sahin, A., & Kulm, G. (2008). Sixth grade mathematics teachers’ intentions and use of probing, guiding, and factual questions. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 11(3), 221–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Selden, A., & Selden, J. (2003). Validations of proofs considered as texts: Can undergraduates tell whether an argument proves a theorem? Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 4–36.Google Scholar
  29. Stein, M. K., Remillard, J., & Smith, M. S. (2007). How curriculum influences student learning. In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning. Information Age Pub: Charlotte, NC.Google Scholar
  30. Stylianides, G. J., Stylianides, A. J., & Weber, K. (2017). Research on the teaching and learning of proof: Taking stock and moving forward. In J. Cai (Ed.), Handbook of research in mathematics education (pp. 237–266). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  31. Swift, J. N., & Gooding, C. T. (1983). Interaction of wait time feedback and questioning instruction on middle school science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20(8), 721–730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Tobin, K. (1986). Effects of teacher wait time on discourse characteristics in mathematics and language arts classes. American Educational Research Journal, 23(2), 191–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Viirman, O. (2015). Explanation, motivation and question posing routines in university mathematics teachers' pedagogical discourse: A commognitive analysis. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 46(8), 1165–1181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Weber, K. (2001). Student difficulty in constructing proofs: The need for strategic knowledge. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 48(1), 101–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Weber, K. (2004). Traditional instruction in advanced mathematics courses: A case study of one professor’s lectures and proofs in an introductory real analysis course. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 23(2), 115–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wood, T. (1998). Alternative patterns of communication in mathematics classes: Funneling or focusing. In H. Steinbring, M. G. Bartolini Bussi, & A. Sierpinska (Eds.), Language and communication in the mathematics classroom (pp. 167–178). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Teo Paoletti
    • 1
  • Victoria Krupnik
    • 2
  • Dimitrios Papadopoulos
    • 3
  • Joseph Olsen
    • 2
  • Tim Fukawa-Connelly
    • 4
  • Keith Weber
    • 2
  1. 1.Mathematical Sciences DepartmentMontclair State UniversityMontclairUSA
  2. 2.Graduate School of EducationRutgers UniversityNew BrunswickUSA
  3. 3.Department of MathematicsDrexel UniversityPhiladelphiaUSA
  4. 4.College of EducationTemple UniversityPhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations