Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education

, Volume 1, Issue 3, pp 243–267

Enabling Teachers to be Real Teachers: Necessary Levels of Awareness and Structure of Attention

  • John Mason
Article

Abstract

Awareness is a complex concept comprising both conscious and unconscious powers and sensitivities which enable people to act freshly and creatively in the moment. In the case of mathematics teachers, and teachers of those becoming mathematics teachers, it is possible to lead students mechanically through a sequence of ritualised tasks by means of trained and habitualised reactions. But the result is that even though student attention is indeed directed, their behaviour trained, and their awareness educated to some extent, the students have not been taught in the fullest sense of that word. I argue that to be a real teacher involves the refinement and development of a complex of awarenesses on three levels, and that this is manifested in alterations to the structure of attention.

The problematic nature of what students are attending to when a teacher is teaching them, led to the conjecture that each technical term in mathematics and in mathematics education signals a shift in the structure of attention of people using that term, and that a corresponding shift is required for students to appreciate that term. Investigations of attention led to the development of Gattegno's very general but rather subtle notion of awareness into a three-layer structure which applies both to mathematics and to teaching, and so demonstrates why becoming a teacher is such a complex matter.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ainley, J. (1987). Telling questions. Mathematics Teaching, 118, 24–26.Google Scholar
  2. Balacheff, N. (1987). Processus de preuve et situations de validation [Proof processes and validation situations]. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 18, 147–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bennett, J. (1978). Deeper man. London: Turnstone.Google Scholar
  4. Binns, E., & Mason, J. (1993). An exploration of Vergnaud's theorem-in-action in the context of algebra. In R. Sutherland (Ed.), Proceedings of the conference on Algebraic Processes and the Role of Symbolism (pp. 33–46). London: London Institute of Education.Google Scholar
  5. Brousseau, G. (1984). The crucial role of the didactic contract in the analysis and construction of situations in teaching and learning mathematics. In H.-G. Steiner (Ed.), Theory of mathematics education (Paper 54, pp. 110–119). Bielefeld, Germany: Institut für Didaktik der Mathematik der Universität Bielefeld.Google Scholar
  6. Cardano, G. (1545). Ars magna or the rules of algebra (T. Witmer, Trans., 1969). New York: Dover.Google Scholar
  7. Chevellard, Y. (1985). La transposition didactique [The didactic transposition]. Grenoble, France: Le Pensée Sauvage.Google Scholar
  8. Crick, F. (1994). The astonishing hypothesis: The scientific search for the soul. London: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  9. Davis, J. (1990). The role of the participant observer in the discipline of noticing. In H. Steinbring & F. Seeger (Eds.), The dialogue between theory and practice in mathematics education: Overcoming the broadcast metaphor (Fourth SCTP conference, pp. 167–176). 4th SCTP Conference, Bielefeld, Germany: Institut für Didaktik der Mathematik der Universität Bielefeld.Google Scholar
  10. Dewey, J. (1902). The child and the curriculum. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  11. Dubinsky E., & Levin P. (1986). Reflective abstraction and mathematics education: The genetic decomposition of induction and compactness. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 5, 55–92.Google Scholar
  12. Elbaz, F. (1983). Teacher's thinking: A study of practical knowledge. New York: Nichols.Google Scholar
  13. Gattegno, C. (1970). What we owe children: The subordination of teaching to learning. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  14. Gattegno, C. (1987). The science of education: Part I. Theoretical considerations. New York: Educational Solutions.Google Scholar
  15. Gates, P. (1989). Developing consciousness and pedagogical knowledge through mutual observation. In P. Woods (Ed.), Working for teacher development (pp. 11–38). London: Peter Francis.Google Scholar
  16. Gray, E., & Tall, D. (1994). Duality, ambiguity, and flexibility: A proceptual view of simple arithmetic. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 25, 116–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Griffin, P., & Gates, P. (1989). Project Mathematics UPDATE: PM753A Preparing to teach angle. Milton Keynes, UK: Open University.Google Scholar
  18. Hewitt, D. (1994). The principle of economy in the learning and teaching of mathematics. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Open University, Milton Keynes, UK.Google Scholar
  19. Kang, W., & Kilpatrick, J. (1992). Didactic transposition in mathematics textbooks. For the Learning of Mathematics, 12(1), 2–7.Google Scholar
  20. Kenny, A. (Ed.) (1994). The Wittgenstein reader. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  21. Mason, J. (1989). Geometry: What, why, where and how? Mathematics Teaching, 129, 40–47.Google Scholar
  22. Mason, J. (1991). Epistemological foundations for frameworks which stimulate noticing. In R. Underhill (Ed.), Proceedings of PME-NA 13 (Vol. 2, pp. 36–42). Blacksburg, VA: Division of Curriculum & Instruction, Virginia Polytech Inst. & State University.Google Scholar
  23. Mason, J. (1993a). Doing and construing mathematics in screen space (Plenary address). In B. Southwell (Ed.), Proceedings of Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia [MERGA]. Sidney, Australia: University of Western Sydney.Google Scholar
  24. Mason, J. (1993b). Working on awareness. In J. Searl (Ed.), Proceedings of the Edinburgh Mathematics Teaching Conference (pp. 10–14). Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
  25. Mason J. (1994a). Professional development and practitioner research. Chreods, 7, 3–12.Google Scholar
  26. Mason, J. (1994b). Researching from the inside in mathematics education: Locating an I-You relationship. In J. Ponte & J. Matos (Eds.), Proceedings of PME XVIII (pp. 176–194). Lisbon, Portugal: University of Lisbon.Google Scholar
  27. Mason, J. (1996). Personal enquiry: Moving from concern towards research. Milton Keynes, UK: Open University.Google Scholar
  28. Mason, J., Burton L., & Stacey K. (1984). Thinking mathematically. London: Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
  29. Mason, J., & Davis J. (1988). Cognitive and metacognitive shifts. In A. Borbás (Ed.), Proceedings of PME XII (Vol. 2, pp. 487–494). Veszprém, Hungary: Ferenc Genzwein.Google Scholar
  30. Mason, J., & Davis, J. (1989a). Notes on a radical constructivist epistemethodology applied to didactic situations. Journal of Structural Learning, 10, 157–176.Google Scholar
  31. Mason, J., & Davis, J. (1989b). The inner teacher, the didactic tension, and shifts of attention. In G. Vergnaud, J. Rogalski, & M. Artigue (Eds.), Proceedings of PME XIII (Vol. 2, pp. 274–281). Paris: Laboratoire de Psychologie du Développement et de l'Education de l'Enfant.Google Scholar
  32. Moshovits-Hadar, N. (1988). Surprise. For the Learning of Mathematics, 8(3), 34–40.Google Scholar
  33. Open University (1988). Investigating your own teaching, Unit 5 of ME234. Using mathematical thinking. Milton Keynes, UK: Author.Google Scholar
  34. Piaget, J. (1977). The development of thought: Equilibration of cognitive structures (A. Rosen, Trans.). New York: Viking.Google Scholar
  35. Ryle, G. (1949). The concept of mind. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
  36. Schoenfeld, A. (1985). Mathematical problem solving. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  37. Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. London: Temple Smith.Google Scholar
  38. Shulman, L. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge and growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–14.Google Scholar
  40. Sfard, A. (1991). On the dual nature of mathematical conceptions: Reflections on processes and objects as different sides of the same coin. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 22, 1–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Shah, I. (1978). Learning how to learn. London: Octagon.Google Scholar
  42. Skemp, R. (1969). The psychology of mathematics. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin.Google Scholar
  43. Tahta, D. (1980). About geometry. For the Learning of Mathematics, 1(1), 2–9.Google Scholar
  44. Tahta, D. (1981). Some thoughts arising from the new Nicolet films. Mathematics Teaching, 94, 25–29.Google Scholar
  45. Tahta, D. (1989). Is there a geometric imperative? Mathematics Teaching, 129, 20–29.Google Scholar
  46. Tall, D., & Vinner, S. (1981). Concept image and concept definition in mathematics with particular reference to limits and continuity. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 12, 151–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Vergnaud, G. (1981). Quelques Orientations Théoriques et Méthodologiques des Recherches Françaises en Didactique des Mathématiques [Some of the theoretical orientations and research methods in French didactics of mathematics]. Actes du Vième Colloque de PME (Vol. 2, pp. 7–17). Grenoble: Edition IMAG.Google Scholar
  48. Wheelwright, P. (Ed.) (1951). Aristotle. New York: Odyssey.Google Scholar
  49. Whitehead, A. (1932). The aims of education and other essays. London: Williams and Norgate. ?? ??Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • John Mason

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations