ABSTRACT
This study investigates the similarities and differences of mathematics-related teaching competencies between the future secondary school teachers of Taiwan and Singapore by using data from the international Teacher Education and Development Study in Mathematics (TEDS-M), organized by the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement. Taiwan and Singapore are identified as the only two Asian countries integrating the Chinese/Confucian tradition in their education regarding TEDS-M. The relative strengths and weaknesses of these two countries, as compared to other TEDS-M higher-achieving Western countries, such as Germany, Poland, Russia, Switzerland, and the USA, are examined after reselecting and reclassifying the achievement items based on Niss’ (2003) mathematics competence and Hsieh’s (Secondary Education, 63(3), 2012) mathematics teaching competence structures. This study shows that Singaporean future teachers are weaker in the competence of devising formal mathematical arguments and transforming heuristic ideas into valid proofs than Taiwanese future teachers. Taiwan and Singapore demonstrate relative strengths at primary, lower-, and upper-secondary levels in mathematics competencies but show relative weaknesses at the tertiary level than do other higher-achieving Western countries. Comparing these two countries, Taiwan shows relative strengths at upper-secondary and tertiary levels, and Singaporean strengths are at primary and lower-secondary levels. This distinction is primarily because of the thought-oriented category of mathematics competencies. This study also finds that Taiwan and Singapore belong to different clusters compared with the higher-achieving Western countries regarding their future teachers’ relative strengths and weaknesses in either mathematics or mathematics teaching competence.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Birenbaum, M., Tatsuoka, C. & Xin, T. (2005). Large‐scale diagnostic assessment: Comparison of eighth graders’ mathematics performance in the United States, Singapore and Israel. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 12(2), 167–181.
Blömeke, S. & Kaiser, G. (2012). Homogeneity or heterogeneity? Profiles of opportunities to learn in primary teacher education and their relationship to cultural context and outcomes. ZDM—The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 44(3), 249–264. doi:10.1007/s11858-011-0378-6.
Blömeke, S., Suhl, U. & Döhrmann, M. (2013). Assessing strengths and weaknesses of teacher knowledge in Asia, Eastern Europe, and Western Countries: differential item functioning in TEDS-M. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, this issue.
Blömeke, S., Suhl, U. & Kaiser, G. (2011). Teacher education effectiveness: Quality and equity of future primary teachers’ mathematics and mathematics pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Teacher Education, 62(2), 154–171. doi:10.1177/0022487110386798.
Bond, T. G. & Fox, C. M. (2007). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Chen, C. J., Reys, B. J. & Reys, R. E. (2009). Analysis of the learning expectations related to grade 1–8 measurement in some countries. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7(5), 1013–1031.
Delaney, S., Ball, D. L., Hill, H. C., Schilling, S. G. & Zopf, D. (2008). “Mathematical knowledge for teaching”: Adapting U.S. measures for use in Ireland. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 11(3), 171–197.
Gopinathan, S. (1999). Preparing for the next rung: Economic restructuring and educational reform in Singapore. Journal of Education and Work, 12(3), 295–308.
Hsieh, F.-J. (2012). 國高中數學教學專業知能指標 [Indicators of professional mathematics teaching competence at the secondary school level]. Secondary Education, 63(3).
Hsieh, F.-J., Chu, C.-T., Hsieh, C.-J., Lin, P.-J. (in press). In-depth analyses of different countries' responses to MCK items: a view on the differences within and between East and West. In S. Blömeke, F.-J. Hsieh, G. Kaiser & W. H. Schmidt (Eds.), Teacher knowledge, teacher beliefs and opportunities to learn in 16 countries. New York: Springer.
Hsieh, F.-J., Law, C.-K., Shy, H.-Y., Wang, T.-Y., Hsieh, C.-J. & Tang, S.-J. (2011). Mathematics teacher education quality in TEDS-M—globalizing the views of future teachers and teacher educators. Journal of Teacher Education, 62(2), 172–187. doi:10.1177/0022487110390819.
Hsieh, F.-J., Lin, P.-J., Chao, G. & Wang, T.-Y. (2009). Policy and practice of mathematics teacher education in Taiwan. Retrieved from http://tedsm.math.ntnu.edu.tw/Teds-m%20Taiwan%20Policy%20Report.pdf
Hsieh, F.-J., Lin, P.-J. & Shy, H.-Y. (2012). Mathematics teacher education in Taiwan. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Taiwan, 1, 187–206.
Hsieh, F.-J., Lin, P.-J. & Wang, T.-Y. (2012). Mathematics related teaching competence of Taiwanese primary future teachers: Evidence from the TEDS-M. ZDM—The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 44(3), 277–292. doi:10.1007/s11858-011-0377-7.
Krutetskii, V. A. (1976). The psychology of mathematical abilities in schoolchildren (J. Teller, Trans.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. (Original work published 1968).
Leung, F. K. S. (2006). Mathematics education in East Asia and the West: Does culture matter? In F. K. S. Leung, K.-D. Graf & F. J. Lopez-Real (Eds.), Mathematics education in different cultural traditions—a comparative study of the East Asia and the West (pp. 21–46). New York: Springer.
Li, Y. & Ginsburg, M. B. (2006). Classification and framing of mathematical knowledge in Hong Kong, Mainland China, Singapore, and the United States. In F. K. S. Leung, K.-D. Graf & F. J. Lopez-Real (Eds.), Mathematics education in different cultural traditions—a comparative study of the East Asia and the West (pp. 195–211). New York: Springer.
Marginson, S. (2011). Higher education in East Asia and Singapore: Rise of the Confucian model. Higher Education, 61(5), 587–611.
Masters, G. (1982). A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrika, 47(2), 149–174.
Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Foy, P. & Arora, A. (2012). TIMSS 2011 international reports in mathematics. Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
National Research Council (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. In J. Kilpatrick, J. Swafford & B. Findell (Eds.), Mathematics Learning Study Committee, Center for Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Science and Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Nisell, M., Brodin, U., Christensson, K. & Rydelius, P.-A. (2009). The Imperforate Anus Psychosocial Questionnaire (IAPSQ): Its construction and psychometric properties. Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health, 3(15). Retrieved from http://www.capmh.com/content/pdf/1753-2000-3-15.pdf
Niss, M. A. (2003). Mathematical competencies and the learning of mathematics: The Danish KOM project. In A. Gagatsis & S. Papastavridis (Eds.), 3rd Mediterranean Conference on Mathematical Education—Athens, Hellas 3–4–5 January 2003 (pp. 116–124). Athens, Greece: Hellenic Mathematical Society.
OECD (2010). PISA 2009 results: What students know and can do—student performance in reading, mathematics and science (Vol 1). Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264091450-en
Ramakrishnan, M. (2000). Should the United States emulate Singapore’s education system to achieve Singapore’s success in the TIMSS? Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 5(6), 345–348.
Schmidt, W. H. & Houang, R. T. (2012). Preparing primary teachers in the United States: Balancing selection and preparation. ZDM—The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 44(3), 265–276. doi:10.1007/s11858-011-0372-z.
Schwille, J., Ingvarson, L. & Holdgreve-Resendez, R. (Eds.). (2013). TEDS-M encyclopedia: A guide to teacher education context, structure and quality assurance in the seventeen TEDS-M countries. East Lansing, MI: TEDS-M International Study Center.
Shen, C. (2005). How American middle schools differ from schools of five Asian countries: Based on cross-national data from TIMSS 1999. Educational Research and Evaluation: An International Journal on Theory and Practice, 11(2), 179–199.
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–22.
Sim, W.-K. (1991). The influence of Western theories on teacher education and research practices in Singapore. Journal of Education for Teaching: International Research and Pedagogy, 17(3), 263–275.
Stacey, K. (2010). Mathematical and scientific literacy around the world. Journal of Science and Mathematics Education in Southeast Asia, 33(1), 1–16.
Stigler, J. W., Gallimore, R. & Hiebert, J. (2000). Using video surveys to compare classrooms and teaching across cultures: Examples and lessons from the TIMSS video studies. Educational psychologist, 35(2), 87–100.
Tan, J. B. & Yates, S. (2011). Academic expectations as sources of stress in Asian students. Social Psychology of Education: An International Journal, 14(3), 389–407.
Tatto, M. T., Schwille, J., Senk, S., Ingvarson, L., Rowley, G., Peck, R., et al (2012). Policy, practice, and readiness to teach primary and secondary mathematics in 17 countries. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Multicopy.
Wu, M. (2006). A comparison of mathematics performance between East and West: What PISA and TIMSS can tell us. In F. K. S. Leung, K.-D. Graf & F. J. Lopez-Real (Eds.), Mathematics education in different cultural traditions—a comparative study of the East Asia and the West (pp. 239–259). New York: Springer.
Wu, M. (2011). Relative strengths of Western and Asian students. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 56(1), 67– 89.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hsieh, FJ., Wong, K.Y. & Wang, TY. ARE TAIWANESE AND SINGAPOREAN FUTURE TEACHERS SIMILAR IN THEIR MATHEMATICS-RELATED TEACHING COMPETENCIES?. Int J of Sci and Math Educ 11, 819–846 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-013-9418-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-013-9418-8