Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education

, Volume 11, Issue 3, pp 199–219 | Cite as

Real-world connections in secondary mathematics teaching

  • Julie GainsburgEmail author


The mathematics-education community stresses the importance of real-world connections in teaching. The extant literature suggests that in actual classrooms this practice is infrequent and cursory, but few studies have specifically examined whether, how, and why teachers connect mathematics to the real world. In this study, I surveyed 62 secondary mathematics teachers about their understanding and use of real-world connections, their purposes for making connections in teaching, and factors that support and constrain this practice. I also observed 5 teachers making real-world connections in their classrooms and I conducted follow-up interviews; these qualitative data are used to illuminate findings from the survey data. The results offer an initial portrayal of the use of real-world connections in secondary mathematics classes and raise critical issues for more targeted research, particularly in the area of teacher beliefs about how to help different kinds of students learn mathematics.


Learning in context Mathematical applications Real-world connections Secondary mathematics Teaching practices 


  1. Boaler, J. (1997). Experiencing school mathematics: Teaching styles, sex, and setting. Philadelphia: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Boaler, J., & Humphreys, C. (2005). Connecting mathematics: Middle school video cases to support teaching and learning. Portsmouth: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  3. Borko, H., & Putnam, R. T. (1996). Learning to teach. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 673–708). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  4. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  5. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42.Google Scholar
  6. Burns R. B., & Lash, A. A. (1988). Nine seventh-grade teachers’ knowledge and planning of problem-solving instruction. The Elementary School Journal, 88, 369–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Calderhead, J. (1996). Teachers: Beliefs and knowledge. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 709–725). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  8. Carraher, D. W., & Schliemann, A. D. (2002). Is everyday mathematics truly relevant to mathematics education? In M. Brenner & J. Moschkovich (Eds.), Everyday and academic mathematics in the classroom (pp. 131–153). Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  9. Chapman, O. (2006). Classroom practices for context of mathematics word problems. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 62, 211–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1990). Anchored instruction and its relationship to situated cognition. Educational Researcher, 19(6), 2–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Collins, W., Cuevas, G., Foster, A. G., Gordon, B., Moore-Harris, B., Rath, J., et al. (1998). Algebra 1: Integration – Applications – Connections. New York: Glencoe/McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  12. Committee for Economic Development. (2003). Learning for the future: Changing the culture of math and science education to ensure a competitive workforce. New York: Author.Google Scholar
  13. Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
  14. Daley, G., & Valdés, R. (2006). Value added analysis and classroom observation as measures of teacher performance: A preliminary report (Publication No. 311). Los Angeles: Los Angeles Unified School District; Program Evaluation and Research Branch; Planning, Assessment and Research Division.Google Scholar
  15. De Corte, E., Greer, B., & Verschaffel, L. (1996). Mathematics teaching and learning. In: D. Berliner & R. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 491–549). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  16. De Lange, J. (1996). Using and applying mathematics in education. In: A. J. Bishop, K. Clements, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick, & C. Laborde (Eds.), International handbook of mathematics education (pp. 49–97). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  17. Ernest, P. (1989). The knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes of the mathematics teacher: A model. Journal of Education for Teaching, 15(1), 13–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Greeno, J. G., & Middle-School Mathematics Through Applications (MMAP) Project Team. (1997). Theories of practices of thinking and learning to think. American Journal of Education, 106, 85–126.Google Scholar
  19. Greer, B. (1997). Modeling reality in mathematics classrooms: The case of word problems. Learning and Instruction, 7(4), 293–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hong, E. (1998). Korean and US preservice elementary teachers’ conceptions about teaching work problem solving. Journal of Education for Teaching, 24, 165–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hoyles, C., Wolf, A., Molyneux-Hodgson, S., & Kent, P. (2002). Mathematical skills in the workplace: Final report to the Science, Technology, and Mathematics Council. London: Institute of Education, University of London.Google Scholar
  22. Lehrer, R., Schauble, L., Strom, D., & Pligge, M. (2001). Similarity of form and substance: From inscriptions to models. In D. Klahr & S. Carver (Eds.), Cognition and instruction: 25 years of progress (pp. 39–74). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  23. National Academy of Sciences (2003). Engaging schools: Fostering high school students’ motivation to learn. Washington: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  24. National Center for Education Statistics (2003). Teaching mathematics in seven countries: Results from the TIMSS 1999 video study. Washington: US Department of Education.Google Scholar
  25. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston: Author.Google Scholar
  26. National Research Council (NRC) (1990). Reshaping school mathematics: A philosophy and framework for curriculum. Washington: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  27. National Research Council (NRC) (1998). High school mathematics at work: Essays and examples for the education of all students. Washington: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  28. Nicol, C. (2002). Where’s the math? Prospective teachers visit the workplace. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 50, 289–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Schmidt, W. H., McKnight, C. C., & Raizen, S. A. (1997). A splintered vision: An investigation of U.S. science and mathematics education. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  30. Schoenfeld, A. S. (1998). Toward a theory of teaching-in-context. Issues in Education, 4(1), 1–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Steen, L. A. (1997). Preface: The new literacy. In L. A. Steen (Ed.), Why numbers count: Quantitative literacy for tomorrow’s America (pp. xv–xxviii). New York: College Entrance Examination Board.Google Scholar
  32. Steen, L. A., & Forman, S. L. (1995). Mathematics for work and life. In I. M. Carl (Ed.), Prospectus for school mathematics (pp. 219–241). Reston: NCTM.Google Scholar
  33. Thompson, A. G. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and conceptions: A synthesis of the research. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), NCTM handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 127–146). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  34. Tyson, H. (1997). Overcoming structural barriers to good textbooks. Paper presented at the National Education Goals Panel Meeting. Retrieved June 22, 2006, from
  35. Verschaffel, L., Greer, B., & De Corte, E. (2000). Making sense of word problems. Exton: Swets & Zeitlinger Publishers.Google Scholar
  36. Zeuli, J. S., & Ben-Avie, M. (2003). Connecting with students on a social and emotional level through in-depth discussions of mathematics. In N. M. Haynes, M. Ben-Avie, & J. Ensign (Eds.), How social and emotional development add up: Getting results in math and science education (pp. 36–64). New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Secondary Education, Michael D. Eisner College of EducationCalifornia State University, NorthridgeNorthridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations