Abstract
Based on 30 syllabi and 108 questionnaire responsesfrom randomly selected U.S. colleges and universities,college geometry courses were analyzed with respect tocontent, pedagogy, and assessment. About 40% of thecourses start with elementary axioms and emphasizeEuclidean geometry or a mix of Euclidean andnon-Euclidean geometry; 23% employ a survey approach;and 20% employ an analytic or projective geometryapproach. In about 63% of the courses, the instructorlectures most or all of the time; in 36% of thecourses a substantial amount of class time is devotedto group work; and about 27% of the courses reflectnearly all the characteristics of good mathematicsteaching as defined by the NCTM Professional TeachingStandards. In most courses, in-class examinations,homework, and a final examination are the primaryevaluation tools; in about half of the courses atleast one alternative assessment contributes to thefinal grade. Common characteristics are evident butwide diversity exists also. A typical geometry coursedid not emerge from the data.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Ball, D.L. (1991). Research on teaching mathematics: Making subject matter knowledge part of the equation. In J.E. Brophy (Ed.), Advances in research on teaching: Vol. 2. Teachers' subject matter knowledge and classroom instruction (pp. 1-48). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Beaton, A.E., Mullis, I.V.S., Martin, M.O., Gonzalez, E.J., Kelly, D.L. & Smith, T.A. (1996). Mathematics achievement in the middle school years: IEA's Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). Chestnut Hill, MA: Center for the Study of Testing, Evaluation, and Educational Policy, Boston College.
Brown, C.A. & Baird, J. (1993). Inside the teacher: Knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes. In P.S.Wilson (Ed.), Research ideas for the classroom: High school mathematics (pp. 245-259). New York: Macmillan.
Callahan, W. (1994). Teaching middle school students with diverse cultural backgrounds. The Mathematics Teacher, 87, 122-126.
Crooks, T.J. (1988). The impact of classroom evaluation practices on students. Review of Educational Research, 58, 438-481.
Joyner, V.G. (1991). Research into practice: The use of a student teaching study to develop and improve mathematics method courses for preservice teachers. School Science Mathematics, 91, 236-237.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1990). Culturally relevant teaching: Effective instruction for black students. The College Board Review, 155, 20-25.
Lindquist, M.M. (1997). NAEP findings regarding the preparation and classroom practices of mathematics teachers. In P. Kenney & E.A. Silver (Eds.), Results from the sixth mathematics assessment of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (pp. 61-86). Reston, VA: NCTM.
McDevitt, T.M., Troyer, R., Ambrosio, A.L., Heikkinen, H.W. & Warren, E. (1995). Evaluating prospective elementary teachers' understanding of science and mathematics in a model preservice program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 749-775.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1991). Professional standards for teaching mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
Schoen, H.L. & Ziebarth, S.W. (1997). A progress report on student achievement in the Core Plus mathematics project field test. NCSM Journal of Mathematics Education Leadership, 1(3), 17-25.
Senk, S.L., Beckmann, C.E. & Thompson, D.R. (1997). Assessment and grading in high school mathematics classrooms. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28, 187-215.
Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-22.
Stein, M.K., Grover, B.W. & Henningsen, M. (1996). Building student capacity for mathematical thinking and reasoning: An analysis of mathematical tasks used in reform classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 33, 455-488.
Stein, M.K. & Lane, S. (1996). Instructional tasks and the development of student capacity to think and reason: An analysis of the relationship between teaching and learning in a reform mathematics project. Educational Research and Evaluation, 2, 50-80.
Stoffelett, R. & Stoddart, T. (1994). The ability to understand and use conceptual change pedagogy as a function of prior content learning experience. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(1), 31-51.
Strutchens, M.E. & Blume, G.W. (1997). What do students know about geometry? In P. Kenney & E.A. Silver (Eds.), Results from the sixth mathematics assessment of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (pp. 165-194). Reston, VA: NCTM.
Swafford, J.O., Jones, G.A. & Thornton, C.A. (1997). Increased knowledge in geometry and instructional practice. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28, 467-483.
U.S. Department of Education National Center for Education Statistics (1996). Pursuing excellence: A study of U.S. eighth-grade mathematics and science teaching, learning, curriculum, and achievement in international context (NCES 97-198 by Lois Peak). Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Grover, B.W., Connor, J. Characteristics of the College Geometry Course for Preservice Secondary Teachers. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education 3, 47–67 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009921628065
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009921628065