Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education

, Volume 18, Issue 5, pp 467–488 | Cite as

Knowledge and motivation as mediators in mathematics teaching practice: the case of drawn models for fraction arithmetic

  • Erik JacobsonEmail author
  • Andrew Izsák


Past studies have suggested that in light of recent curriculum standards, many US teachers make limited use of drawn models in their mathematics instruction. To gain insight into this phenomenon, we investigated relationships between US teachers’ opportunities to learn about, knowledge of, motivation for, and instructional use of drawn models for representing multiplication and division of fractions. A national sample of 990 practicing middle-grade teachers was administered a three-part survey that contained a knowledge assessment; a professional history and teaching practices questionnaire that included questions about opportunities to learn to use drawn models; and a motivation questionnaire that measured teachers’ value, anxiety, and self-concept of ability for using such models in instruction. In regression models without motivation, opportunity to learn significantly predicted the teachers’ knowledge, frequency of use, and purpose for use of drawn models. In structural equation models that included motivation, knowledge and motivation substantially accounted for relationships between the teachers’ opportunity to learn and their self-reported use of drawn models in instruction. These findings are consistent with the general hypothesis that teacher’ opportunities to learn teaching practices indirectly affect their instructional practices. Teachers’ knowledge and motivation also play a central role.


Teacher knowledge Teacher motivation Mathematical knowledge for teaching Practicing teachers 



This research was supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF) under Grant DRL-0903411. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of NSF.


  1. Ball, D. L. (1990). Prospective elementary and secondary teachers’ understanding of division. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 21, 132–144.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 mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 81–104). Westport, CT: Ablex.Google Scholar
  3. Ball, D., Thames, M., & Phelps, G. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special? Journal of Teacher Education, 59(5), 389–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baumert, J., Kunter, M., Bum, W., Brunner, M., Voss, T., Jordan, A., et al. (2010). Teachers’ mathematical knowledge, cognitive activation in the classroom, and student progress. American Educational Research Journal, 47(1), 133–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bergqvist, T. (2005). How students verify conjectures: Teachers’ expectations. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 8, 171–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Borko, H., Eisenhart, M., Brown, C., Underhill, R., Jones, D., & Agard, P. (1992). Learning to teach hard mathematics: Do novice teachers and their instructors give up too easily? Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 23, 194–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bradshaw, L., Izsák, A., Templin, J., & Jacobson, E. (2014). Diagnosing teachers’ understandings of rational number: Building a multidimensional test within the diagnostic classification framework. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 33(1), 2–14.Google Scholar
  9. Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (2006). Introduction to classical and modern test theory. Mason, OH: Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
  10. Eisinga, R., Te Grotenhuis, M., & Pelzer, B. (2013). The reliability of a two-item scale: Pearson, Cronbach, or Spearman-Brown? International Journal of Public Health, 58(4), 637–642.Google Scholar
  11. Enders, C. (2010). Applied missing data analysis. New York, NY: Guilford.Google Scholar
  12. Fennema, E., Carpenter, T. P., Franke, M. L., Levi, L., Jacobs, V. R., & Empson, S. B. (1996). A longitudinal study of learning to use children’s thinking in mathematics instruction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27, 403–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fiedler, K., Schott, M., & Meiser, T. (2011). What mediation analysis can (not) do. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47, 1231–1236.Google Scholar
  14. Henson, R. A., Templin, J., & Willse, J. T. (2009). Defining a family of cognitive diagnosis models using log linear models with latent variables. Psychometrika, 74, 191–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hill, H. C. (2007). Mathematical knowledge of middle school teachers: Implications for the no child left behind policy initiative. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 29, 95–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hill, H., Rowan, B., & Ball, D. L. (2005). Effects of teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 42(2), 371–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Izsák, A. (2008). Mathematical knowledge for teaching fraction multiplication. Cognition and Instruction, 26, 95–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Izsák, A., Tillema, E., & Tunç-Pekkan, Z. (2008). Teaching and learning fraction addition on number line. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 39, 33–62.Google Scholar
  20. Izsák, A., Orrill, C. H., Cohen, A. S., & Brown, R. E. (2010). Measuring middle grades teachers' understanding of rational numbers with the mixture Rasch model. Elementary School Journal, 110(3), 279–300.Google Scholar
  21. Izsák, A., Lobato, J., Orrill, C. H., & Jacobson, E. (2011). Diagnosing teachers’ multiplicative reasoning attributes. Unpublished manuscript, Department of Mathematics and Science Education, University of Georgia, Athens, GA.Google Scholar
  22. Izsák, A., Jacobson, E., de Araujo, Z., & Orrill, C. H. (2012). Measuring mathematical knowledge for teaching fractions with drawn quantities. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 43, 391–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Katic, E., Hmelo-Silver, C., & Weber, K. (2009). Material mediation: Tools and representations supporting collaborative problem-solving discourse. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 21(1), 13–24.Google Scholar
  24. Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J., & Findell, B. (Eds.). (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  25. Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford.Google Scholar
  26. Learning and Performance Support Laboratory (n.d) InterMath. Retrieved January 1, 2015, from
  27. Ma, L. (1999). Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics: Teachers’ understanding of fundamental mathematics in China and the United States. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  28. Meece, J. I., Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (1990). Predictors of math anxiety and its influence on young adolescents’ course enrollment intentions and performance in mathematics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 60–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2012). Mplus user’s guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.Google Scholar
  30. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  31. National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common core state standards for mathematics. Washington, DC: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and Council of Chief State School Officers. Retrieved from
  32. Newton, K. J. (2009). Instructional practices related to prospective elementary school teachers’ motivation for fractions. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 12, 89–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Norton, A., & Wilkins, J. (2012). The splitting group. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 43(5), 557–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sowder, J., Philipp, R., Armstrong, B., & Schappelle, B. (1998). Middle-grade teachers’ mathematical knowledge and its relationship to instruction: A research monograph. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  36. Staub, F. C., & Stern, E. (2002). The nature of teachers’ pedagogical content beliefs matters for students’ achievement gains: Quasi-experimental evidence from elementary mathematics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 344–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Steffe, L. (2004). On the construction of learning trajectories of children: The case of commensurate fractions. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 6(2), 129–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Stipek, D. (2002). Good instruction is motivating. In A. Wigfield & J. S. Eccles (Eds.), The development of achievement motivation (pp. 310–334). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  39. Stylianou, D. (2010). Teachers’ conceptions of representation in middle school mathematics. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 13, 325–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Tirosh, D. (2000). Enhancing prospective teachers’ knowledge of children’s conceptions: The case of division of fractions. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31, 5–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Tirosh, D., & Graeber, A. (1990). Evoking cognitive conflict to explore preservice teachers’ thinking about division. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 21, 98–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Trice, A. D., & Ogden, E. D. (1986). Correlates of mathematics anxiety in first-year elementary school teachers. Educational Research Quarterly, 11(3), 2–4.Google Scholar
  43. Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A. W. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(7), 783–805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Turner, J. C., Meyer, D. K., Midgley, C., & Patrick, H. (2003). Teacher discourse and sixth graders’ reported affect and achievement behaviors in two high-mastery/high performance mathematics classrooms. Elementary School Journal, 103(4), 357–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 68–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wigfield, A., & Meece, J. (1988). Math anxiety in elementary and secondary school students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(2), 210–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wilkins, J., & Norton, A. (2011). The splitting loope. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 42(4), 386–416.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Curriculum and InstructionIndiana UniversityBloomingtonUSA
  2. 2.Department of Mathematics and Science EducationUniversity of GeorgiaAthensUSA

Personalised recommendations