Social and analytic scaffolding in middle school mathematics: managing the dilemma of telling
The current reform movement in mathematics education urges teachers to support students as they make sense of mathematics, while also ensuring that they gain specific mathematical skills and knowledge. The tension between these two expectations gives rise to what we call the dilemma of telling: how to ensure that students come to certain mathematical understandings, without directly telling them what they need to know or do. Our study focused on how two middle school mathematics teachers who were incorporating many aspects of reform mathematics into their instruction responded to this dilemma. Data sources include classroom observations and videotapes of lessons over a three-year period. We found that both teachers devoted the majority of class time to student conversations, both small group and whole class; however, the teachers strategically entered the student-dominated conversations by “telling” to meet specific curricular goals.
KeywordsDiscourse Constructivist teaching Scaffolding
- Carter, R., & Richards, J. (1999). Dilemmas of constructivist mathematics teaching: Instances from classroom practice. In B. Jaworski, T. Wood, & S. Dawson (Eds.), Mathematics teacher education: Critical international perspectives (pp. 69–77). London: Falmer Press. Google Scholar
- Chazan, D., & Ball, D. (1999). Beyond being told not to tell. For the Learning of Mathematics, 19(2), 2–10.Google Scholar
- Cobb, P., Wood, T., & Yackel, E. (1993). Discourse, mathematical thinking, and classroom practice. In E. A. Forman, N. Minick, & C. A. Stone (Eds.), Contexts for learning: Sociocultural dynamics in children’s development (pp. 91–119). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Cohen, E. G., Lotan, R., Scarloss, B., Schultz, S. E., & Abram, P. (2002). Can groups learn? Teachers College Record, 104(6). http://www.trecord.org ID Number: 10986, Date Accessed: 2/17/04.
- Elmore, R., Peterson, P., & McCarthy, S. (1996). Restructuring in the classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
- Leinhardt, G. (2001). Instructional explanations: A commonplace for teaching and location for contrast. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed., pp. 333–357). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.Google Scholar
- Mayer, R. E. (2009). Constructivism as a theory of learning versus constructivism as a prescription for instruction. In S. Tobias & T. M. Duffy (Eds.), Constructivist instruction: Success or failure? (pp. 184–200). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1991). Professional standards for teaching mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.Google Scholar
- National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.Google Scholar
- Phillips, D. C. (1995). The good, the bad, and the ugly: The many faces of constructivism. Educational Researcher, 24(7), 5–12.Google Scholar
- Stein, M. K., Silver, E. A., & Smith, M. S. (1998). Mathematics reform in teacher development: A community of practice perspective. In J. G. Greeno & S. G. Goldman (Eds.), Thinking practices in mathematics and science learning (pp. 17–52). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar