, Volume 44, Issue 3, pp 277–292

Mathematics-related teaching competence of Taiwanese primary future teachers: evidence from TEDS-M

Original Article


This paper draws on data from the international TEDS-M study, organized by the IEA, and utilizes a conceptual framework describing the Taiwanese perspective of mathematics and mathematics teaching competences (MTCs) with regard to investigating the uniqueness and patterns of Taiwanese future primary teacher performance in the international context. The framework includes content-oriented and thought-oriented categories of mathematics competence. The latter category contains subcategories adopted and revised from (3rd Mediterranean conference on mathematical education. Hellenic Mathematical Society, Athens, 2003) the competence approach by Niss. Hsieh’s (Research on the development of the professional ability for teaching mathematics in the secondary school level (3/3). Taiwan: National Science Council, 2009) model is also adopted and revised to serve as an analytical framework, including four categories relating to MTCs, representations, language, and misconceptions or error procedures. This paper shows that in thought-oriented mathematics competences Taiwan and Singapore share a unique pattern of higher percent correct in competences related to formalization, abstraction, and operations in mathematics than in those related to the way of thinking, modelling and reasoning in and with mathematics. The paper also addresses weak teaching competences claimed in domestic studies, which conflict with the TEDS-M results. Namely, in contrary to the international trend, Taiwanese future primary teachers are weak at judging mathematics competences required by students to learn mathematical concepts or solve problems, and superior at diagnosing and dealing with student misconceptions and error procedures.


TEDS-M MCK MPCK Mathematics teaching competence Teacher education International comparison 


  1. An, S., Kulm, G., & Wu, Z. (2004). The pedagogical content knowledge of middle school, mathematics teachers in China and the U.S. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 7, 145–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ball, D. L., & Bass, H. (2003). Toward a practice-based theory of mathematical knowledge for teaching. In B. Davis & E. Simmt (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2002 annual meeting of the Canadian Mathematics Education Study Group (pp. 3–14). Edmonton, Alberta, Canada: Canadian Mathematics Education Study Group/Groupe Canadien d’étude En Didactique des Mathématiques.Google Scholar
  3. Ball, D. L., Thames, M. H., & Phelps, G. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching. What makes it special? Journal of Teacher Education, 59(5), 389–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baumert, J., Kunter, M., Blum, W., Brunner, M., Voss, T., Jordan, A., et al. (2010). Teachers’ mathematical knowledge, cognitive activation in the classroom, and student progress. American Educational Research Journal, 47(1), 133–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blömeke, S., Paine, L., Houang, R. T., Hsieh, F.-J., Schmidt, W. H., Tatto, M. T., et al. (2008). Future teachers’ competence to plan a lesson: first results of a six-country study on the efficiency of teacher education. ZDM Mathematics Education, 40(5), 749–762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Clement, J. (1982). Algebra word problem solutions: Thought processes underlying a common misconception. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 13(1), 16–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cobb, P., Wood, T., Yackel, E., Nicholls, J., Wheatley, G., Trigatti, B., et al. (1991). Assessment of a problem-centered second-grade mathematics project. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 22, 3–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Grossman, P. L., & McDonald, M. (2008). Back to the future: Directions for research in teaching and teacher education. American Educational Research Journal, 45(1), 184–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hill, H. C., Ball, D. L., & Schilling, S. G. (2008). Unpacking pedagogical content knowledge: Conceptualizing and Measuring Teachers’ topic-specific knowledge of students. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 39(6), 372–400.Google Scholar
  12. Hill, H. C., Schilling, S. G., & Ball, D. L. (2004). Developing measures of teachers’ mathematics knowledge for teaching. Elementary School Journal, 105(1), 11–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 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 Publishing.Google Scholar
  14. Hsieh, F.-J. (2000). Teachers’ teaching beliefs and their knowledge about the history of negative numbers. Proceedings of the HPM 2000 conference, history in mathematics education: Challenges for a new millennium, Taiwan (Vol. 1, pp. 88–97).Google Scholar
  15. Hsieh, F.-J. (2009). Research on the development of the professional ability for teaching mathematics in the secondary school level (3/3) (Rep. No. NSC 96-2522-S-003-008). Taiwan: National Science Council (in Chinese).Google Scholar
  16. 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 toward/of future teachers and teacher educators. Journal of Teacher Education, 62(2), 172–187. doi:10.1177/0022487110390819.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hsieh, F.-J., Wang, T.-Y., Hsieh, C.-J., Tang, S.-J., Chao, G.-H., & Law C.-K., et al. (2010). A milestone of an international study in Taiwan teacher educationAn international comparison of Taiwan mathematics teacher (Taiwan TEDS-M 2008). Retrieved May 25, 2010, from http://tedsm.math.ntnu.edu.tw/eng/result.htm.
  18. Hung, Y.-C. (2009). Studying indicators of the professional development for secondary mathematics teachers: numbers and algebra competencies (3/3) (Rep. No. NSC 96-2522-S-003-006-). Taiwan: National Science Council (in Chinese).Google Scholar
  19. König, J., Blömeke, J., Paine, L., Schmidt, B., & Hsieh, F.-J. (2011). General pedagogical knowledge of future middle school teachers: On the complex ecology of teacher education in Germany, Taiwan, and the United States. Journal of Teacher Education, 62(2), 188–201. doi:10.1177/0022487110388664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Krauss, S., Baumert, J., & Blum, W. (2008). Secondary mathematics teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge and content knowledge: Validation of the COACTIV constructs. The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 40(5), 873–892.Google Scholar
  21. Krutetskii, V.A. (1976). The psychology of mathematical abilities in schoolchildren (J. Teller, Trans.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press (original work published 1968).Google Scholar
  22. Leu, Y.-C. (1996). Elementary school teachers’ knowledge of fractions. Journal of National Taipei Teachers College, 9, 427–460.Google Scholar
  23. Lin, P. J. (2001). Developing teachers’ knowledge of students’ mathematical learning: An approach of teachers’ professional development by integrating theory with practice. Taipei, Taiwan: Shu-Dah (in Chinese).Google Scholar
  24. Liu, M.-L. (2002). An exploration on the teaching of decimals. Journal of Pingtung Teachers College, 16, 319–354.Google Scholar
  25. Ma, L. (1999). Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics: Teachers’ understanding of fundamental mathematics in China and the United States. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  26. Mosteller, F., & Tukey, J. W. (1977). Data analysis and regression. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  27. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  28. 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.Google Scholar
  29. 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: Hellenic Mathematical Society.Google Scholar
  30. Rice, J. K. (2003). Teacher quality understanding the effectiveness of teacher attributes. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute.Google Scholar
  31. Schmidt, W. H., Blömeke, S., Tatto, M. T., Hsieh, F.-J., Cogan, L., Houang, R. T., et al. (2011). Teacher education matters: A study of middle school mathematics teacher preparation in six countries. NY: Teacher College Press.Google Scholar
  32. Schmidt, W. H., Cogan, L., & Houang, R. (2011). The role of opportunity to learn in teacher preparation: An international context. Journal of Teacher Education, 62(2), 138–153. doi:10.1177/0022487110391987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.Google Scholar
  34. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–22.Google Scholar
  35. Tatto, M. T., Schwille, J., Senk, S., Ingvarson, L., Peck, R., & Rowley, G. (2008). Teacher education and development study in mathematics (TEDS-M): Policy, practice, and readiness to teach primary and secondary mathematics. Conceptual framework. East Lansing, MI: Teacher Education and Development International Study Center, College of Education, Michigan State University.Google Scholar
  36. Tatto, M. T., Schwille, J., Senk, S., Rodriguez, M., Bankov, K., Reckase, M, D., Ingvarson, L., Peck, R., Rowley, G., Dumais, J., Carstens, R., Brese, F., & Meinck, S. (2009). Teacher education study in mathematics (TEDS-M): Technical summary. East Lansing, MI: Teacher Education International Study Center, College of Education, Michigan State University.Google Scholar
  37. Wang, J., Lin, E., Spalding, E., Odell, S. J., & Klecka, C. L. (2011). Understanding teacher education in an era of globalization. Journal of Teacher Education, 62(2), 115–120.Google Scholar
  38. Yang, D.-C., Reys, R. E., & Reys, B. J. (2009). Number sense strategies used by pre-service teachers in Taiwan. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7, 383–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© FIZ Karlsruhe 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Taiwan Normal UniversityTaipeiTaiwan
  2. 2.National Hsinchu University of EducationHsinchuTaiwan

Personalised recommendations