Advertisement

Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education

, Volume 12, Issue 1, pp 27–46 | Cite as

Contextualising the notion of ‘belief enactment’

  • Jeppe SkottEmail author
Article

Abstract

For more than 20 years, belief research has been based on the premise that teachers’ beliefs may serve as an explanatory principle for classroom practice. This is a highly individual perspective on belief–practice relationships, one that does not seem to have been influenced by the increasingly social emphases in other parts of mathematics education research. In this article, I use the notions of context and practice to develop a locally social approach to understanding the belief–practice relationships. It is a corollary of the approach taken that the high hopes for belief research with regard to its potential impact on mathematics instruction need to be modified.

Keywords

Belief research Belief–practice relationships Contexts Mathematics teachers Novice teachers Social practice theory A social turn 

References

  1. Abreu, G. (2000). Relationships between macro and micro socio-cultural contexts: Implications for the study of interactions in the mathematics classroom. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 41(1), 1–29. doi: 10.1023/A:1003875728720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Blanton, M. L., Westbrook, S., & Carter, G. (2005). Using Valsiner’s zone theory to interpret teaching practices in mathematics and science classrooms. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 8(1), 5–33. doi: 10.1007/s10857-005-0456-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cooney, T. J. (1985). A beginning teacher’s view of problem solving. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 16(5), 324–336. doi: 10.2307/749355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ensor, P. (2001). From pre-service mathematics teacher education to beginning teaching: A study in recontextualizing. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 32(3), 296–320. doi: 10.2307/749829.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ernest, P. (1989). The impact of beliefs on the teaching of mathematics. In P. Ernest (Ed.), Mathematics teaching. The state of the art (pp. 249–254). London: Falmer.Google Scholar
  6. Goos, M. (2005). A sociocultural analysis of the development of pre-service and beginning teachers’ pedagogical identities as users of technology. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 8(1), 35–59. doi: 10.1007/s10857-005-0457-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Kvale, S. (1996). InterViews. An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  8. Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Lave, J. (1996). The practice of learning. In S. Chaiklin & J. Lave (Eds.), Understanding practice. Perspectives on activity and context (pp. 3–32). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning. Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Leatham, K. R. (2006). Viewing mathematics teachers’ beliefs as sensible systems. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 9(1), 91–102. doi: 10.1007/s10857-006-9006-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lerman, S. (2000). The social turn in mathematics education research. In J. Boaler (Ed.), Multiple Perspectives on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 19–44). Westport, CT: Ablex.Google Scholar
  13. Lerman, S. (2001). A review of research perspectives on mathematics teacher education. In F.-L. Lin & T. J. Cooney (Eds.), Making sense of mathematics teacher education (pp. 33–52). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  14. Lerman, S. (2002). Situating research on mathematics teachers’ beliefs and on change’. In G. C. Leder, E. Pehkonen, & G. Törner (Eds.), Beliefs: A hidden variable in mathematics education? (pp. 233–243). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  15. Lester, F. (2002). Implications for research on students’ beliefs for classroom practice. In G. C. Leder, E. Pehkonen, & G. Törner (Eds.), Beliefs: A hidden variable in mathematics education? (pp. 345–353). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  16. McDermott, R. P. (1996). The acquisition of a child by a learning disability. In S. Chaiklin & J. Lave (Eds.), Understanding practice. Perspectives on activity and context (pp. 269–305). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  17. McLeod, D. B., & McLeod, S. H. (2002). Synthesis—Beliefs and mathematics education: Implications for learning, teaching, and research. In G. C. Leder, E. Pehkonen, & G. Törner (Eds.), Beliefs: A hidden variable in mathematics education? (pp. 115–123). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  18. Mehan, H. (1996). Beneath the skin and between the ears: A case study in the politics of representation. In S. Chaiklin & J. Lave (Eds.), Understanding practice. Perspectives on activity and context (pp. 241–268). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Patton, M. Q. (2001). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  20. Skott, J. (2001). The emerging practices of a novice teacher: The roles of his school mathematics images. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 4(1), 3–28. doi: 10.1023/A:1009978831627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Skott, J. (2004). The forced autonomy of mathematics teachers. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 55(1–3), 227–257. doi: 10.1023/B:EDUC.0000017670.35680.88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Sztajn, P. (2003). Adapting reform ideas in different mathematics classrooms: Beliefs beyond mathematics. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 6(1), 53–75. doi: 10.1023/A:1022171531285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Thompson, A. G. (1984). The relationship of teachers’ conceptions of mathematics and mathematics teaching to instructional practice. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 15, 105–127. doi: 10.1007/BF00305892.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Valsiner, J. (1997). Culture and the development of children’s actions. A theory of human development (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  25. van Oers, B. (1998). The fallacy of decontextualization. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 5(2), 135–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. In M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman (Eds.), The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  28. Wedege, T. (1999). To know—or not to know—mathematics, that is a question of context. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 31(1–3), 205–227. doi: 10.1023/A:1003871930181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wedege, T., & Skott, J. (2006). Changing views and practices? A study of the KappAbel mathematics competition. Trondheim, Norway: NTNU.Google Scholar
  30. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice. Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Wertsch, J. V. (1985). Vygotsky and the social formation of mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Wilson, S., & Cooney, T. (2002). Mathematics teacher change and development. In G. C. Leder, E. Pehkonen, & G. Törner (Eds.), Beliefs: A hidden variable in mathematics education? (pp. 127–147). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Växjö UniversityVaxjoSweden
  2. 2.University of AarhusAarhusDenmark

Personalised recommendations