Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Understanding teachers’ resistance to the curricular inclusion of alternative algorithms

  • Articles
  • Published:
Mathematics Education Research Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study focuses on a group of practitioners from a school district that adopted reform-oriented curriculum materials but later rejected them, partially due to the inclusion of alternative algorithms in the materials. Metaphors implicit in a conversation among the group were analysed to illuminate their perspectives on instructional issues surrounding alternative algorithms. Several possible sources of resistance to folding alternative algorithms into instruction were found, including the ideas that: successful learning does not involve struggling with mathematics, the teacher’s role in the classroom is primarily to present information, and that mathematics learning progresses according to a fixed sequence of levels.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ball, D. L., Lubienski, S. T., & Mewborn, D. S. (2001). Research on teaching mathematics: The unsolved problem of teachers’ mathematical knowledge. In V. Richardson (Ed.),Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed., pp. 433–456). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Australian Association of Mathematics Teachers. (2006).Standards for excellence in teaching mathematics in Australian schools. Retrieved 25 January 2007 from: http://www.aamt.edu.au/standards/intro.html

  • Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1992).Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bullough, R. V. (1991). Exploring personal teaching metaphors in preservice teacher education.Journal of Teacher Education, 42(1), 43–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, O. (1997). Metaphors in the teaching of mathematical problem solving.Educational Studies in Mathematics, 32(3), 201–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collopy, R. (2003). Curriculum materials as a professional development tool: How a mathematics textbook affected two teachers’ learning.Elementary School Journal, 103(3), 287–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Franke, M. L., Levi, L., & Empson, S. B. (1999).Children’s mathematics: Cognitively Guided Instruction. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, T. P., Franke, M. L., Jacobs, V. R., Fennema, E., & Empson, S. B. (1998). A longitudinal study of invention and understanding in children’s multidigit addition and subtraction.Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 29(1), 3–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, W. M., & Isaacs, A. (2003). Achievement of students using the University of Chicago School Mathematics Project’s Everyday Mathematics. In S. L. Senk & D. R. Thompson (Eds.),Standards-based school mathematics curricula: What are they? What do students learn? (pp. 79–108). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences. (2001).The mathematical education of teachers. Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Desire2Learn (2006).Desire2Learn: Innovative teaching technology. Retrieved February 2, 2006 from http://www.desire2learn.com/index.asp.

  • Dooley, C. (1998). Teaching as a two-way street: Discontinuities among metaphors, images, and classroom realities.Journal of Teacher Education, 49(2), 97–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dysthe, O. (2002). The learning potential of a web-mediated discussion in a university course.Studies in Higher Education, 27(3), 339–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Education Development Center. (2005).MathScape: Seeing and thinking mathematically. Retrieved February 2, 2006 from http://www2.edc.org/Mathscape/phil/default.asp.

  • Erlwanger, S. H. (1973). Benny’s conception of rules and procedures in IPI mathematics.Journal of Children’s Mathematical Behavior, 1(2), 7–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fishel, M., & Ramirez, L. (2005). Evidence-based parent involvement interventions with school-aged children.School Psychology Quarterly, 20(4), 371–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gentner, D., & Holyoak, K. J. (1997). Reasoning and learning by analogy.American Psychologist, 52(1), 32–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glesne, C. (1999).Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (2nd ed.). New York: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greeno, J. G. (1997). On claims that answer the wrong questions.Educational Researcher, 26(1), 5–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grossman, P. (2005). Research on pedagogical approaches in teacher education. In M. Cochran-Smith & K. M. Zeichner (Eds.),Studying teacher education: The report of the AERA panel on research and teacher education (pp. 425–476). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groth, R. E., & Bergner, J. A. (in press). Building an online discussion group for teachers.Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School.

  • Harism, L. M. (1990). Online education: An environment for collaboration and intellectual amplification. In L. M. Harism (Ed.),Online education: Perspectives on a new environment (pp. 39–64). New York: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatfield, M. M., Edwards, N. T., Bitter, G. G., & Morrow, J. (2003).Mathematics methods for elementary and middle school teachers (4th ed.). New York: John Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heaton, R. M. (2000).Teaching mathematics to the new standards: Relearning the dance. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hiebert, J., Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Fuson, K. C., & Wearne, D. (1997).Making sense: Teaching and learning mathematics with understanding. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, H. C., Rowan, B., & Ball, D. L. (2005). Effects of teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching on student achievement.American Educational Research Journal, 42(2), 371–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, H. C., & Ball, D. L. (2004). Learning mathematics for teaching: Results from California’s mathematics professional development institutes.Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 35(5), 330–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamii, C. K., & Dominick, A. (1998). The harmful effects of algorithms in grades 1–4. In L. J. Morrow (Ed.),The teaching and learning of algorithms in school mathematics (pp. 130–140). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J. & Findell, B. (Eds.). (2001).Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, P.D. (1997). Multiplying the problems of intelligence by eight: A critique of Gardner’s theory.Canadian Journal of Education, 22(4), 377–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980).Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lampert, M. (2001).Teaching problems and the problems of teaching. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, C., & Ketter, J. (2004). Learning as social interaction: Interdiscursivity in a teacher and researcher study group. In R. Rogers (Ed.),Introduction to critical discourse analysis in education (pp. 117–146). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd, G. M. (1999). Two teachers’ conceptions of a reform-oriented curriculum: Implications for mathematics teacher development.Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 2(3), 227–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd, G. M., & Behm, S. L. (2005). Preservice elementary teachers’ analysis of mathematics instructional materials.Action in Teacher Education, 26(4), 48–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ma, L. (1999).Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mack, N. K. (1990). Learning fractions with understanding: Building on informal knowledge.Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 21(1), 16–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matusov, E. (1996). Intersubjectivity without agreement.Mind, Culture, and Activity, 3(1), 25–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matusov, E., Hayes, R., & Pluta, M. J. (2005). Using discussion webs to develop an academic community of learners.Educational Technology & Society, 8(2), 16–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994).Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mish, F. C. (Ed.). (1991).Webster’s ninth new collegiate dictionary. Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muhr, T. (2004).User’s Manual for ATLAS.ti 5.0. Berlin: ATLAS.ti Scientific Software Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newell, G., Wilsman, M., Langenfeld, M., & McIntosh, A. (2002). Online professional development: Sustained learning with friends.Teaching Children Mathematics, 8(9), 505–508.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nieto, S. (1992).Affirming diversity: The sociopolitical context of multicultural education. White Plains, NY: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ogawa, R. T. (1998). Organising parent-teacher relations around the work of teaching.Peabody Journal of Education, 73(1), 6–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petrie, H. (1980). Metaphor and learning. In A. Ortony (Ed.),Metaphor and thought (pp. 438–461). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Philipp, R. A. (1996). Multicultural mathematics and alternative algorithms.Teaching Children Mathematics, 3(3), 128–133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piaget, J. (1983). Piaget’s theory. In P. Mussen (Ed.),Handbook of child psychology (pp. 103–128). New York: John Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Presmeg, N. C. (1992). Prototypes, metaphors, metonymies and imaginative rationality in high school mathematics.Educational Studies in Mathematics, 23(6), 595–610.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Presmeg, N. C. (1998). Metaphoric and metonymic signification in mathematics.Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 17(1), 25–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R. T., & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning?Educational Researcher, 29(1), 4–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Randolph, T. D., & Sherman, H. J. (2001). Alternative algorithms: Increasing options, reducing errors.Teaching Children Mathematics, 7(8), 480–484.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raymond, A. M. (1997). Inconsistency between a beginning elementary school teacher’s mathematics beliefs and teaching practice.Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28(5), 550–576.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Remillard, J. T., & Bryans, M. B. (2004). Teachers’ orientations toward mathematics curriculum materials: Implications for teacher learning.Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 35(5), 352–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Remillard, J. T., & Jackson, K. (2006). Old math, new math: Parents’ experiences with standards-based reform.Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 8(3), 231–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Romberg, T. A., & Shafer, M. C. (2003).Mathematics in context — Preliminary evidence about student outcomes. In S. L. Senk & D. R. Thompson (Eds.),Standards-based school mathematics curricula: What are they? What do students learn? (pp. 225–250). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salmon, G. (2004).E-Moderating: The key to teaching and learning online. London: Routledge/Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shotsberger, P. G. (1999). The INSTRUCT Project: Web professional development for mathematics teachers.Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 18(1), 49–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stake, R. E., & Trumbull, D. J. (1982). Naturalistic generalizations.Review Journal of Philosophy and Social Science, 7(1–2), 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stein, M. K., Grover, B. W., & Henningsen, M. (1996). Building student capacity for mathematical thinking and reasoning: An analysis of mathematical tasks used in reform classrooms.American Educational Research Journal, 33(2), 455–488.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (1999).The teaching gap. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wickstom, C. D. (2003). A funny thing happened on the way to the forum.Journal of Adult and Adolescent Literacy, 46(5), 414–423.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zaslavsky, O. (2005). Seizing the opportunity to create uncertainty in learning mathematics.Educational Studies in Mathematics, 60(3), 297–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Education Department, Salisbury University, 21801, Salisbury, MD, USA

    Randall Groth

Authors
  1. Randall Groth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Groth, R. Understanding teachers’ resistance to the curricular inclusion of alternative algorithms. Math Ed Res J 19, 3–28 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217447

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217447

Keywords

Search

Navigation