Towards a Participatory Approach to ‘Beliefs’ in Mathematics Education

Chapter
Part of the Advances in Mathematics Education book series (AME)

Abstract

Over the last three decades research in beliefs, and affect more generally, has developed into a significant field of study. It attempts to make sense of teachers’ and students’ understandings of mathematics, of its teaching and learning, and of themselves as doers, teachers, and learners of mathematics and of how these understandings relate to classroom practice. Studies of these issues have been published widely and in the most prestigious journals and book series. However, belief research is still confronted with significant conceptual and methodological problems. I suggest that this is at least in part due to the dominant conceptualization of individual functioning in belief research, one that is based on acquisitionism with its emphasis on human action as an enactment of previously reified mental entities. In the present chapter I build on social practice theory and symbolic interactionism to rephrase key issues of belief research, especially that of the relationship between beliefs and practice, in more participatory terms. The suggestion is to shift the focus from beliefs to the pre-reified processes that are said to give rise to them. This leads to more dynamic understandings of learning and lives in mathematics classrooms and serves to overcome some of the conceptual and methodological problems of the field.

Keywords

Belief research Mathematics teachers Dynamic views of beliefs Acquisition Patterns of Participation (PoP) 

References

  1. Abelson, R. P. (1979). Differences between belief and knowledge systems. Cognitive Science, 3(4), 355–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abelson, R. P. (1986). Beliefs are like possessions. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 16(3), 223–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aguirre, J., & Speer, N. M. (2000). Examining the relationship between beliefs and goals in teacher practice. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 18(3), 327–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barwell, R. (2013). Discursive psychology as an alternative perspective on mathematics teacher knowledge. ZDM, 45(5), 595–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism. Perspective and method. Berkeley: University of Los Angeles Press.Google Scholar
  6. Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory. A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  7. Charmaz, K., & Mitchell, R. G. (2001). Grounded theory in ethnography. In P. Atkinson, A. Coffey, S. Delamont, J. Lofland, & L. Lofland (Eds.), Handbook of ethnography (pp. 160–174). London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cobb, P., & Yackel, E. (1996). Constructivist, emergent, and sociocultural perspectives in the context of developmental research. Educational Psychologist, 31(3/4), 175–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cobb, P., Stephan, M., McClain, K., & Gravemeijer, K. (2001). Participating in classroom mathematical practices. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 10(1/2), 113–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cobb, P., McClain, K., & Gravemeijer, K. (2003). Learning about statistical covariation. Cognition and Instruction, 21(1), 1–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. De Corte, E., Op’t Eynde, P., & Verschaffel, L. (2002). “Knowing what to believe”: The relevance of students’ mathematical beliefs for mathematics education. In B. K. Hofer & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epistemology. The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 297–320). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Evans, J., Morgan, C., & Tsatsaroni, A. (2006). Discursive positioning and emotion in school mathematics practices. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 63(2), 209–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fives, H., & Buehl, M. M. (2012). Spring cleaning for the messy construct of teachers’ beliefs: What are they? Which have been examined? What can they tell us? In K. R. Harris, S. Graham, & T. Urdan (Eds.), APA educational psychology handbook (Individual differences and cultural and contextual factors, Vol. 2, pp. 471–499). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  14. Goldin, G. A. (2002). Beliefs, meta-affect, and mathematical belief structures. In G. C. Leder, E. Pehkonen, & G. Törner (Eds.), Beliefs: A hidden variable in mathematics education? (pp. 59–72). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  15. Goldin, G. A., Epstein, Y. M., Schorr, R. Y., & Warner, L. B. (2011). Beliefs and engagement structures: Behind the affective dimension of mathematical learning. ZDM, 43(4), 547–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Green, T. (1971). The activities of teaching. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  17. Hodgen, J., & Askew, M. (2007). Emotion, identity and teacher learning: Becoming a primary mathematics teacher. Oxford Review of Education, 33(4), 469–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Holland, D., Skinner, D., Lachicotte, W., Jr., & Cain, C. (1998). Identity and agency in cultural worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Horn, I. S. (2007). Fast kids, slow kids, lazy kids: Framing the mismatch problem in mathematics teachers’ conversations. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16(1), 37–79.Google Scholar
  20. Horn, I. S., Nolen, S. B., Ward, C., & Campbell, S. S. (2008). Developing practices in multiple worlds: The role of identity in learning to teach. Teacher Education Quarterly, 35(3), 61–72.Google Scholar
  21. Hoyles, C. (1992). Mathematics teachers and mathematics teaching: A meta-case study. For the Learning of Mathematics, 12(3), 32–44.Google Scholar
  22. Lerman, S. (2001). A review of research perspectives on mathematics teacher education. In F.-L. Lin & T. J. Cooney (Eds.), Making sense of mathematics teacher education (pp. 33–52). Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ma, J. Y., & Singer-Gabella, M. (2011). Learning to teach in the figured world of reform mathematics: Negotiating new models of identity. Journal of Teacher Education, 62(1), 8–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Malmivuori, M.-L. (2006). Affect and self-regulation. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 63(2), 149–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self, and society from the standpoint of a social behaviorist. Chicago: University of Chicago.Google Scholar
  26. Nespor, J. (1987). The role of beliefs in the practice of teaching. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 19(4), 317–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Op’t Eynde, P., De Corte, E., & Verschaffel, L. (2006). “Accepting emotional complexity”: A socio-constructivist perspective on the role of emotions in the mathematics classroom. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 63(2), 193–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Palmér, H. (2013). To become- or not to become – A primary school mathematics teacher. Ph.D. thesis, Linnaeus University, Växjö, Sweden. Retrieved from: http://lnu.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:613396/FULLTEXT02.pdf
  29. Schoenfeld, A. (1992). Learning to think mathematically: Problem solving, metacognition and sense making in mathematics. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 334–370). New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan.Google Scholar
  30. Schoenfeld, A. (2011a). How we think. A theory of goal-oriented decision making and its educational applications. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. Schoenfeld, A. (2011b). Toward professional development for teachers grounded in a theory of decision making. ZDM – The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 43(4), 457–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sfard, A. (2007). When the rules of discourse change, but nobody tells you: Making sense of mathematics learning from a commognitive perspective. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16(4), 565–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sfard, A. (2008). Thinking as communicating. Human development, the growth of discourses, and mathematizing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Shott, S. (1979). Emotion and social life: A symbolic interactionist analysis. The American Journal of Sociology, 84(6), 1317–1334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Skott, J. (2001). The emerging practices of a novice teacher: The roles of his school mathematics images. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 4(1), 3–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Skott, J. (2009). Contextualising the notion of belief enactment. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 12(1), 27–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Skott, J. (2013). Understanding the role of the teacher in emerging classroom practices: Searching for patterns of participation. ZDM – The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 45(4), 547–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Skott, J. (2014). The promises, problems, and prospects of research on teachers’ beliefs. In H. Fives & M. G. Gill (Eds.), International handbook of research on teachers’ beliefs (pp. 13–30). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  39. Skott, J., Larsen, D. M., & Østergaard, C. H. (2011). From beliefs to patterns of participation: Shifting the research perspective on teachers. Nordic Studies in Mathematics Education, 16(1–2), 29–55.Google Scholar
  40. Speer, N. M. (2008). Connecting beliefs and practices: A fine-grained analysis of a college mathematics teacher’s collections of beliefs and their relationship to his instructional practices. Cognition and Instruction, 26, 218–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Stephan, M., Bowers, J., Cobb, P., & Gravemeijer, K. (2003). Supporting students’ development of measurement conceptions: Analyzing students’ learning in social context (Vol. 12). Reston: NCTM.Google Scholar
  42. Sztajn, P. (2003). Adapting reform ideas in different mathematics classrooms: Beliefs beyond mathematics. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 6(1), 53–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wagner, D., & Herbel-Eisenmann, B. (2009). Re-mythologizing mathematics through attention to classroom positioning. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 72(1), 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mathematics EducationThe Linnaeus UniversityVäxjöSweden
  2. 2.Department of EducationAarhus UniversityCopenhagenDenmark

Personalised recommendations