Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education

, Volume 19, Issue 4, pp 371–396 | Cite as

The effect of teacher education programs on future elementary mathematics teachers’ knowledge: a five-country analysis using TEDS-M data

Article

Abstract

This article addresses the problem of how opportunities to learn in teacher education programs influence future elementary mathematics teachers’ knowledge. This study used data collected for the Teacher Education and Development Study in Mathematics (TEDS-M). TEDS-M measured the mathematics content knowledge (MCK) and the mathematics pedagogical content knowledge (MPCK) of future teachers in their final year in teacher preparation programs. The purpose of this study is to explore whether elementary teaching candidates’ MCK and MPCK are associated with their opportunities to learn in mathematics courses and mathematics methods courses in five countries. The results showed that opportunities to learn in some teacher preparation components are more important than in other components.

Keywords

Opportunity to learn Mathematics content knowledge Mathematics pedagogical content knowledge Teacher Education and Development Study in Mathematics 

References

  1. Akiba, M., LeTendre, G., & Scribner, J. P. (2007). Teacher quality, opportunity gap, and national achievement in 46 countries around the world. Educational Researcher, 36(7), 369–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allen, M. (2003). Eight questions on teacher preparation: What does the research say? Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED479051
  3. Baumert, J., Kunter, M., Blum, W., Brunner, M., Voss, T., Jordan, A., & Tsai, Y.-M. (2010). Teachers’ mathematical knowledge, cognitive activation in the classroom, and student progress. American Educational Research Journal, 47(1), 133–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Begle, E. G. (1979). Critical variables in mathematics education: Findings from a survey of the empirical literature. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  5. Bloemeke, S. (2004). Empirische Befunde zur Wirksamkeit der Lehrerbildung [Empirical findings for the effectiveness of the teacher formation]. In S. Bloemeke, P. Reinhold, G. Tulodziecki, & J. Wildt (Eds.), Handbuch lehrerbildung [Manual teacher formation] (pp. 59–91). Bad Heilbrunn/Braunschweig: Klinkhardt/Westermann.Google Scholar
  6. Bloemeke, 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boyd, D., Grossman, P., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2009). Teacher preparation and student achievement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 31(4), 416–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brese, F., & Tatto, M. T. (Eds.). (2012). User guide for the TEDS-M international database. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA).Google Scholar
  9. Briscoe, C., & Stout, D. (1996). Integrating mathematics and science through problem centered learning in methods courses: Effects on prospective teachers’ understanding of problem solving. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 8(2), 66–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Clift, R. T., & Brady, P. (2005). Research on methods courses and field experiences. In M. Cochran-Smith & K. Zeichner (Eds.), Studying teacher education: The report of the AERA Panel on Research and Teacher Education (pp. 309–424). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.Google Scholar
  11. Clotfelter, C. T., Ladd, H. F., & Vigdor, J. L. (2007). Teacher credentials and student achievement: Longitudinal analysis with student fixed effects. Economics of Education Review, 26(6), 673–682.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cochran-Smith, M., & Zeichner, K. (Eds.). (2005). Studying teacher education: The report of the AERA Panel on Research and Teacher Education. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.Google Scholar
  13. Committee on the Study of Teacher Preparation Programs in the United States. (2010). Preparing teachers: Building evidence for sound policy. Washington, DC: National Research Council, The National Academies. Available online at http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12882
  14. Croninger, R. G., Rice, J. K., Rathbun, A., & Nishio, M. (2007). Teacher qualifications and early learning: Effects of certification, degree, and experience on first-grade student achievement. Economics of Education Review, 26(3), 312–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Goe, L. (2007). The link between teacher quality and student outcomes: A research synthesis. Washington, DC: National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality. Retrieved from http://ncctq.learningpt.org/publications/LinkBetweenTQandStudentOutcomes.pdf
  16. Goldhaber, D. D., & Brewer, D. J. (1997). Evaluating the effect of teacher degree level on educational performance. In W. J. Fowler (Ed.), Developments in school finance, 1996 (pp. 197–210). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education.Google Scholar
  17. Goldhaber, D. D., & Brewer, D. J. (2000). Does teacher certification matter? High school certification status and student achievement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 22(2), 129–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hill, H. C. (2010). The nature and predictors of elementary teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 41(5), 513–545.Google Scholar
  19. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hill, H. C., Sleep, L., Lewis, J. M., & Ball, D. L. (2007). Assessing teachers’ mathematical knowledge: What knowledge matters and what evidence counts? In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 111–155). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.Google Scholar
  21. Ingvarson, L., Beavis, A., & Kleinhenz, E. (2007). Factors affecting the impact of teacher education courses on teacher preparedness: Implications for accreditation policy. European Journal of Teacher Education, 30(4), 351–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kaplan, L. S., & Owings, W. A. (2001). Teacher quality and student achievement: Recommendations for principals. NASSP Bulletin, 85(628), 64–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kim, M. K., & Sharp, J. (2000). Investigating and measuring preservice elementary mathematics teachers’ decision about lesson planning after experiencing technology-enhanced methods instruction. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 19(4), 317–338.Google Scholar
  24. Langrall, C. W., Thornton, C. A., Jones, G. A., & Malone, J. A. (1996). Enhanced pedagogical knowledge and reflective analysis in elementary mathematics teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 47(4), 271–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mewborn, D. S. (1999). Reflective thinking among preservice elementary mathematics teachers. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30(3), 316–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Monk, D. H. (1994). Subject area preparation of secondary math and science teachers and student achievement. Economics of Education Review, 13, 125–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Monk, D. H., & King, J. A. (1994). Multilevel teacher resource effects on pupil performance in secondary mathematics and science: The case of teacher subject-matter preparation. In R. Ehrenberg (Ed.), Choices and consequences: Contemporary policy issues in education (pp. 29–58). Ithaca, NY: ILR Press.Google Scholar
  28. Mullens, J. E., Murnane, R. J., & Willett, J. B. (1996). The contribution of training and subject matter knowledge to teaching effectiveness: A multilevel analysis of longitudinal evidence from Belize. Comparative Education Review, 40(2), 139–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future. (1996). What matters most: Teaching for America’s future. Report of the National Commission on Teaching & America’s Future. Woodbridge, VA: Author.Google Scholar
  30. Rice, J. K. (2003). Teacher quality: Understanding the effectiveness of teacher attributes. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute.Google Scholar
  31. Rowan, B., Chiang, B. F., & Miller, R. J. (1997). Using research on employees’ performance to study the effects of teachers on students’ achievement. Sociology of Education, 70, 256–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Schmidt, W. H., Bloemeke, S., & Tatto, M. T. (2011a). Teacher education matters: A study of middle school mathematics teacher preparation in six countries. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  33. Schmidt, W. H., Cogan, L., & Houang, R. (2011b). The role of opportunity to learn in teacher preparation: An international context. Journal of Teacher Education, 62(2), 138–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Schwille, J., Ingvarson, L., & Holdgreve-Resendez, R. (Eds.). (2013). TEDS-M Encyclopedia: A guide to teacher education context, structure, and quality assurance in seventeen TEDS-M countries. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University.Google Scholar
  35. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 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. East Lansing: Teacher Education International Study Center, College of Education, Michigan State University.Google Scholar
  37. Vacc, N. N., & 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
  38. Wayne, A. J., & Youngs, P. (2003). Teacher characteristics and student achievement gains: A review. Review of Educational Research, 73(1), 89–122.Google Scholar
  39. Wilson, S. M., Floden, R. E., & Ferrini-Mundy, J. (2001). Teacher preparation research: Current knowledge, gaps, and recommendations. Seattle, WA: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy. Retrieved September 30, 2009, from http://depts.washington.edu/ctpmail/PDFs/TeacherPrep-WFFM-02-2001.pdf
  40. Youngs, P., & Qian, H. (2013). The influence of university courses and field experiences on Chinese Elementary candidates’ mathematicsematical knowledge for teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 64(3), 244–261.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Council of State Boards of NursingChicagoUSA
  2. 2.University of VirginiaCharlottesvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations