Skip to main content

Using tasks to develop pre-service teachers’ knowledge for teaching mathematics with digital technology

Abstract

Teacher education is central to the development of the professional knowledge of pre-service teachers. The main goal of this paper is to reflect on the development that the analysis (done by a group of pre-service secondary teachers) of a set of tasks, based on elements related to domains of KTMT—Knowledge for Teaching Mathematics with Technology—can bring to the knowledge of pre-service teachers of mathematics. Specifically, the goal was to investigate the following questions: (1) What are the factors that guide the pre-service teachers’ task discussion? (2) Which KTMT domains are emphasized by pre-service teachers during task discussion? The elements taken into account are the characteristics of the tasks (focus on cognitive level, structuring level and technology role), the use of representations (focus on balance and articulation of representations), and the equilibrium between experimentation (focus on digital technology affordances) and justification (focus on argumentation and proof). The methodology of this case study involves a qualitative approach. The main conclusions suggest that influences in the pre-service teachers’ discussion of tasks fell into the following categories: the potentialities of technology, the type of tasks, and the prospective teachers’ experience with a set of tasks, and analysis of some real students’ reports. With regard to KTMT, although it was possible to identify some global development, Teaching and Learning and Technology Knowledge was the domain in which stronger development took place.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

(adapted from Ponte 2005)

Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13

References

  1. Biza, I., Nardi, E., & Zachariades, T. (2010). Teachers’ views on the role of visualization anddidactical intentions regarding proof. In V. Durand-Guerrier, S. Soury-Lavergne, & F. Arzarello (Eds.), Proceedings of CERME 6 (pp. 261–270). Paris: INRP.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Burril, G. (2017). Designing interactive dynamic technology activities to support the development of conceptual understanding. In A. Leung & A. Baccaglini-Frank (Eds.), Digital technologies in designing mathematics education tasks—Potential and pitfalls (pp. 303–328). Cham: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Clark-Wilson, A., & Timotheus, J. (2013). Designing tasks within a multi-representational technological environment: An emerging rubric. In C. Margolinas (Ed.), Task design in Mathematics Education—Proceedings of ICMI Study 22 (pp. 45–52). Oxford: ICMI.

    Google Scholar 

  4. De Villiers, M. (1990). The role and function of proof in mathematics. Pythagoras, 24, 17–24.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Dreher, A., Kuntze, S., & Lerman, S. (2016). Why use multiple representations in the mathematics classroom? Views of English and German preservice teachers. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14, S363–S382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Drijvers, P., Tacoma, S., Besamusca, A., Doorman, M., & Boon, P. (2013). Digital resources inviting changes in mid-adopting teachers’ practices and orchestrations. ZDM, 45(7), 987–1001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Duval, R. (2006). A cognitive analysis of problems of comprehension in a learning of mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 61(1–2), 103–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Goos, M., & Bennison, A. (2008). Surveying the technology landscape: Teachers’ use of technology in secondary mathematics classrooms. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 20(3), 102–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Hanna, G. (2001). Proof, explanation and exploration: An overview. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 44, 5–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Haspekian, M. (2011). The co-construction of a mathematical and a didactical instrument. In M. Pytlak, T. Rowland, & E. Swoboda (Eds.), Proceedings of the 7th CERME (pp. 2298–2307). Rzeszow: ERME, University of Rzeszow.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hegedus, S., Laborde, C., Bradey, C., Dalton, S., Siller, H.-S., Tabach, M., et al. (2017). Uses of technology in upper secondary mathematics education. Hamburg: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  12. Heid, M., & Blume, G. (2008). Technology and the development of algebraic understanding. In M. Heid & G. Blume (Eds.), Research on technology and the teaching and learning of Mathematics (Vol. 2, pp. 55–108). Charlotte: NCTM, IAP.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Hsieh, F., Horng, W., & Shy, H. (2012). From exploration to proof production. In G. Hanna & M. de Villiers (Eds.), Proof and proving in mathematics education (pp. 279–304). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Joubert, M. (2017). Revisiting theory for the design of tasks: Special considerations for digital environments. In A. Leung & A. Baccaglini-Frank (Eds.), Digital technologies in designing mathematics education tasks—Potential and pitfalls (pp. 17–40). Cham: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Kaput, J. (1989). Linking representations in the symbol systems of algebra. In S. Wagner & C. Kieran (Eds.), Research issues in the learning and teaching of algebra (pp. 167–194). Reston, VA: NCTM.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Kaur, B. (2017). Impact of the course teaching and learning of mathematics on preservice grades 7 and 8 mathematics teachers in Singapore. ZDM, 49(2), 265–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Kendal, M., & Stacey, K. (2001). Influences on and factors changing technology privileging. In M. Heuvel-Panhuizen (Ed.), Proceedings of the 25th PME, vol. 4 (pp. 217–224). Utrecht: PME.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Laborde, C. (2001). Integration of technology in design of geometry tasks with Cabri-geometry. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 6, 283–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Lepak, J., Wernet, J., & Ayieko, R. (2018). Capturing and characterizing students’ strategic algebraic reasoning through cognitively demanding tasks with focus on representations. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 50, 57–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Lesseig, K. (2016). Investigating mathematical knowledge for teaching proof in professional development. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 2, 253–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Leung, A. (2011). An epistemic model of task design in dynamic geometry environment. ZDM, 43, 325–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Lopes, S. (2016). Funções no 10.º ano (unpublished work). Lisbon: FCT-UNL.

  23. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108, 1017–1054.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Molenje, L., & Doerr, H. (2006). High school mathematics teachers’ use of multiple representations when teaching functions in graphing calculator environments. In S. Alatorre, J. Cortina, M. Sáiz, & A. Méndez (Eds.), Proceedings of the 28th NA-PME. Mérida: Universidad Pedagógica Nacional.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Monaghan, J., Trouche, L., & Borwein, J. (2016). Tools and mathematics: Instruments for learning. Cham: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  26. Picciatto, H. (1996). Make these designs. Mathematics Teacher, 89(5), 424–427.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Ponte, J. (2005). Gestão curricular em Matemática. In GTI (Eds.), O professor e o desenvolvimento curricular (pp. 11–34). Lisbon: APM.

  28. Rabardel, P. (1995). Les hommes et les technologies, approche cognitive des instruments contemporains. Paris: Armand Colin.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Rocha, H. (2013). Knowledge for Teaching Mathematics with Technology—A new framework of teacher knowledge. In A. Lindmeier & A. Heinze (Eds.), Proceedings of the 37th PME, vol. 4 (pp. 105–112). Kiel: PME.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Rocha, H. (2016). Teacher’s representational fluency in a context of technology use. Teaching Mathematics and its Applications, 35(2), 53–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Shulman, L. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Tabach, M. (2011). A Mathematics teacher’s practice in a technological environment: A case study analysis using two complementary theories. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 16(3), 247–265.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Tall, D., Yevdokimov, O., Koichu, B., Whiteley, W., Kondratieva, M., & Cheng, Y. (2012). Cognitivedevelopment of proof. In G. Hanna & M. de Villiers (Eds.), Proof and proving inMathematics Education (pp. 13–49). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Thomas, M., & Hong, Y. (2013). Teacher integration of technology into mathematics learning. International Journal of Technology in Mathematics Education, 20, 69–84.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Thomas, M., & Lin, C. (2013). Designing tasks for use with digital technology. In C. Margolinas (Ed.), Task design in mathematics education—Proceedings of ICMI Study 22 (pp. 109–118). Oxford: ICMI.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Trgalova, J., Clark-Wilson, A., & Weigand, H.-G. (2018). Technology and resources in mathematics education. In T. Dreyfus, M. Artigue, D. Potari, S. Prediger, & K. Ruthven (Eds.), Developing research in mathematics education: Twenty years of communication, cooperation and collaboration in Europe (pp. 142–161). Cham: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  37. Trouche, L. (2004). Managing complexity of human/machine interactions in computerized learning environments: Guiding students’ command process through instrumental orchestrations. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 9, 281–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Yeo, J. (2017). Development of a framework to characterize the openness of mathematical tasks. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15, 175–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Yin, R. (2003). Case study research—Design and methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Zbiek, R., Heid, M., Blume, G., & Dick, T. (2007). Research on technology in mathematics education. In F. Lester (Ed.), 2nd Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning (pp. 1169–1207). Charlotte: NCTM.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Helena Rocha.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rocha, H. Using tasks to develop pre-service teachers’ knowledge for teaching mathematics with digital technology. ZDM Mathematics Education 52, 1381–1396 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01195-1

Download citation

Keywords

  • Teacher’s knowledge
  • KTMT
  • Technology
  • Mathematics
  • Functions