Educational Studies in Mathematics

, Volume 62, Issue 1, pp 3–24

Examining the Tasks of Teaching When Using Students' Mathematical Thinking

Article

Abstract

Recent research suggests that the examination of students' work may lead to changes in teaching practice that are more effective in terms of students' mathematical learning. However, the link between the examination of students' work and the teachers' actions in the classroom is largely unexamined, particularly at the secondary level. In this paper, I present the results of a study in which teachers had extensive opportunities to examine the development of students' conceptual models of exponential growth in the context of their own classrooms. I describe two related aspects of the practice of one teacher: (a) how she listened to students' alternative solution strategies and (b) how she responded to these strategies in her practice. The results of the analysis suggest that as the teacher listened to her students, she developed a sophisticated schema for understanding the diversity of student thinking. The actions of the teacher supported extensive student engagement with the task and led the students to revise and refine their own mathematical thinking. This latter action reflects a significant shift in classroom practice from the role of the teacher as evaluator of student ideas to the role of students as self-evaluators of their emerging ideas.

Keywords

functions problem solving secondary mathematics teaching subject matter knowledge teacher knowledge teaching practice 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Baroody, A.J., Cibulskis, M., Lai, M. and Li, X.: 2004, ‘Comments on the use of learning trajectories in curriculum development and research’, Mathematical Thinking and Learning 6(2), 227–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Borko, H., Mayfield, V., Marion, S., Flexer, R. and Cumbo, K.: 1997, ‘Teachers' developing ideas and practices about mathematics performance assessment: Successes, stumbling blocks, and implications for professional development’, Teaching and Teacher Education 13, 259–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Carpenter, T.P., Fennema, E. and Franke, M.L.: 1996, ‘Cognitively guided instruction: A knowledge base for reform in primary mathematics instruction’, Elementary School Journal 97(1), 3–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Confrey, J. and Smith, E.: 1994, ‘Exponential functions, rates of change, and the multiplicative unit’, Educational Studies in Mathematics 26(2–3), 135–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Confrey, J. and Smith, E.: 1995, ‘Splitting, covariation, and their role in the development of exponential functions’, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 26(1), 66–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Crespo, S.: 2000, ‘Seeing more than right and wrong answers: Prospective teachers' interpretations of students' mathematical work’, Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education 3, 155–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Davis, B.: 1996, ‘Teaching Mathematics: Toward a Sound Alternative’, Garland, New York.Google Scholar
  8. Davis, B.: 1997, ‘Listening for differences: An evolving conception of mathematics teaching’, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 28(3), 355–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Davis, B. and Simmt, E.: 2003, ‘Understanding learning systems: Mathematics education and complexity science’, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 34(2), 137–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Doerr, H.M. and Lesh, R.A.: 2003, ‘A modeling perspective on teacher development’, in R.A. Lesh and H.M. Doerr (eds.), Beyond Constructivism: Models and Modeling Perspectives on Mathematics Problem Solving, Teaching and Learning, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 125–139.Google Scholar
  11. Doerr, H.M.: 1998, ‘Student thinking about models of growth and decay’, in A. Olivier and K. Newstead (eds.), Proceedings of the 22nd Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Vol. 2, University of Stellenbosch, Stellenbosch, South Africa, pp. 256–263.Google Scholar
  12. Doerr, H.M.: 2000, ‘How can I find a pattern in this random data? The convergence of multiplicative and probabilistic reasoning’, Journal of Mathematical Behavior 18(4), 431–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dubinsky, E. and Harel, G. (eds.): 1992, The Concept of Function: Aspects of Epistemology and Pedagogy, Mathematical Association of America, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  14. English, L. and Lesh, R.A.: 2003, ‘Ends-in-view problems’, in R. Lesh and H. M. Doerr (eds.), Beyond Constructivism: Models and Modeling Perspectives on Mathematics Problem Solving, Learning and Teaching, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 297–316.Google Scholar
  15. Even, R.: 1993, ‘Subject-matter knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge: Prospective secondary teachers and the function concept’, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 24(2), 94–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Even, R. and Tirosh, D.: 1995, ‘Subject-matter knowledge and knowledge about students as sources of teacher presentations of the subject-matter’, Educational Studies in Mathematics 29(1), 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Even, R. and Wallach, T.: 2003, ‘On student observation and student assessment’, in L. Bragg, C. Campbell, G. Herbert and J. Mousley (eds.), Mathematics Education Research: Innovation, Networking, Opportunity: Proceedings of the 26th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, Vol. 1, Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia, pp. 316–323.Google Scholar
  18. Feltovich, P.J., Spiro, R.J. and Coulson, R.L.: 1997, ‘Issues of expert flexibility in contexts characterized by complexity and change’, in P.J. Feltovich, K.M. Ford and R.R. Hoffman (eds.), Expertise in Context: Human and Machine, AAAI/MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 125–146.Google Scholar
  19. Fennema, E. and Carpenter, T.P.: 1996, ‘A longitudinal study of learning to use children's thinking in mathematics instruction’, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 27(4), 403–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Franke, M.L., Carpenter, T., Fennema, E., Ansell, E. and Behrend, J.: 1998, ‘Understanding teachers' self-sustaining, generative change, in the context of professional development’, Teaching and Teacher Education 14, 67–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Heid, M.K., Blume, G.W., Zbiek, R.M. and Edwards, B.S.: 1999, ‘Factors that influence teachers learning to do interviews to understand students' mathematical understandings’, Educational Studies in Mathematics 37, 223–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Henningsen, M. and Stein, M.K.: 1997, ‘Mathematical tasks and student cognition: Classroom-based factors that support and inhibit high-level mathematical thinking and reasoning’, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 28(5), 524–549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jacobsen, C. and Lehrer, R.: 2000, ‘Teacher appropriation and student learning of geometry through design’, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 31(1), 71–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lampert, M.: 2001, Teaching Problems and the Problems of Teaching, Yale University Press, New Haven, CT.Google Scholar
  25. Lave, J. and Wenger, E.: 1991, Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.Google Scholar
  26. Leinhardt, G.: 1990, ‘Capturing craft knowledge in teaching’, Educational Researcher 19(2), 18–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Leinhardt, G., Zaslavsky, O. and Stein, M.K.: 1990, ‘Functions, graphs, and graphing: Tasks, learning and teaching’, Review of Educational Research 50(1), 1–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lesh, R.A., Cramer, K., Doerr, H.M., Post, T. and Zawojewski, J.S.: 2003, ‘Model development sequences’, in R.A. Lesh and H.M. Doerr (eds.), Beyond Constructivism: Models and Modeling Perspectives on Mathematics Problem Solving, Teaching and Learning, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 35–58.Google Scholar
  29. Lesh, R., Hoover, M. and Kelly, A.: 1992, ‘Equity, technology, and teacher development’, in I. Wirszup and R. Streit (eds.), Developments in School Mathematics Education Around the World, Vol. 3, National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Reston, VA, pp. 104– 129.Google Scholar
  30. Lesh, R.A. and Kelly, A.E.: 1999, ‘Multi-tiered teaching experiments’, in A.E. Kelly and R.A. Lesh (eds.), Handbook of Research Design in Mathematics and Science Education, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Mahwah, NJ, pp. 197–230.Google Scholar
  31. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics 2000, Principles and Standards for School Mathematics, National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Reston, VA.Google Scholar
  32. Romberg, T., Fennema, E. and Carpenter, T. (eds.): 1993, Integrating Research on the Graphical Representation of Functions, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.Google Scholar
  33. Schifter, D.: 1998, ‘Learning mathematics for teaching: From a teachers' seminar to the classroom’, Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education 1(1), 55–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Schifter, D. and Fosnot, C.T.: 1993, Reconstructing Mathematics Education: Stories of Teachers Meeting the Challenges of Reform, Teachers College Press, New York.Google Scholar
  35. Sfard, A.: 1991, ‘On the dual nature of mathematical conceptions: Reflections on processes and objects as different sides of the same coin’, Educational Studies in Mathematics 22, 1–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Simon, M.A.: 1995, ‘Reconstructing mathematics pedagogy from a constructivist perspective’, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 26(2), 114–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Simon, M.A. and Schifter, D.: 1991, ‘Towards a constructivist perspective: An intervention study of mathematics teacher development’, Educational Studies in Mathematics 22, 309–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Simon, M.A. and Tzur, R.: 2004, ‘Explicating the role of mathematical tasks in conceptual learning: An elaboration of the hypothetical learning trajectory’, Mathematical Thinking and Learning 6(2), 91–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Stein, M.K., Grover, B.W. and Henningsen, M.: 1996, ‘Building student capacity for mathematical thinking and reasoning: An analysis of mathematical tasks used in reform classrooms’, American Education Research Journal 33, 455–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Strauss, A. and Corbin, J.: 1998, Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory, 2nd ed., Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.Google Scholar
  41. Tirosh, D.: 2000, ‘Enhancing prospective teachers' knowledge of children's conceptions: The case of division of fractions’, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 31(1), 5–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Tzur, R.: 1999, ‘An integrated study of children's construction of improper fractions and the teacher/s role in promoting that learning’, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 30(4), 390–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Vacc, N.N. and Bright, G.W.: 1999, ‘Elementary preservice teachers' changing beliefs and instructional use of children's mathematical thinking’, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 30(1), 89–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Vinner, S. and Dreyfus, T.: 1989, ‘Images and definitions for the concept of function’, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 20(4), 356–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Mathematics DepartmentSyracuse UniversitySyracuseUSA

Personalised recommendations