Advertisement

Exemplary Practices of Mathematics Teachers

  • Yew Hoong LeongEmail author
  • Berinderjeet Kaur
  • Ngan Hoe Lee
  • Tin Lam Toh
Chapter
Part of the Mathematics Education – An Asian Perspective book series (MATHEDUCASPER)

Abstract

In the first section of this chapter, we review the growing literature on “practices”, focusing on the purpose of studying teacher practices in actual classrooms in view of its potential in teacher professional development. Following that, we zoom in to the Singapore situation by reviewing other studies here on mathematics teacher practices. In the second section, we describe an ongoing project and its contribution to research on exemplary practices of Singapore mathematics teachers. In the final section, we discuss the usefulness of this review in relation to the effort of building portraits of Singapore mathematics teacher practices.

Keywords

Exemplary teaching Instructional practices Mathematics Singapore 

References

  1. Ball, D. L., Sleep, L., Boerst, T., & Bass, H. (2009). Combining the development of practice and the practice of development in teacher education. Elementary School Journal, 109(5), 458–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barkatsas, A. N., & Hunting, R. (1996). A review of recent research on cognitive, metacognitive and affective aspects of problem solving. Nordic Studies in Mathematics Education, 4(4), 7–30.Google Scholar
  3. Boaler, J. (2002). Learning from teaching: Exploring the relationship between reform curriculum and equity. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 33(4), 239–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Clarke, D. J. (1998). Studying the classroom negotiation of meaning: Complementary accounts methodology. In A. Teppo (Ed.), Qualitative research methods in mathematics education, monograph number 9 of the Journal for Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 98–111). Reston, VA: NCTM.Google Scholar
  5. Clarke, D., Keitel, C., & Shimizu, Y. (2006). The Leaner’s perspective study. In D. Clarke, C. Keitel, & Y. Shimizu (Eds.), Mathematics classrooms in twelve countries: The Insider’s perspective (pp. 1–14). The Netherlands, Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  6. Cobb, P., Perlwitz, M., & Underwood-Gregg, D. (1998). Individual construction, mathematical acculturation, and the classroom community. In M. Larochelle, N. Bednarz, & J. Garrison (Eds.), Constructivism in education (pp. 63–80). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Doabler, C. T., Baker, S. K., Kosty, D. B., Smolkowski, K., Clarke, B., Miller, S. J., et al. (2015). Examining the association between explicit mathematics instruction and student mathematics achievement. The Elementary School Journal, 115(3), 303–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gersten, R., & Carnine, D. (1984). Direct instruction mathematics: A longitudinal evaluation of low-income elementary school students. Elementary School Journal, 84(4), 395–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hallam, S. (2004). Homework: The evidence. London: University of London, Institute of Education.Google Scholar
  10. Hatch, T., & Grossman, P. (2009). Learning to look beyond the boundaries of representation: Using technology to examine teaching (Overview for a digital exhibition: Learning from the practice of teaching). Journal of Teacher Education, 60(1), 70–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Jeanotte, D., & Kieran, C. (2017). A conceptual model of mathematical reasoning for school mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics. Advance online publication.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-017-9761-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kaur, B. (2008). Teaching and learning of mathematics—What really matters to teachers and students? ZDM—The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 40(6), 951–962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kaur, B. (2009). Characteristics of good mathematics teaching in Singapore grade eight classrooms—A juxtaposition of teachers’ practice and students’ perception. ZDM—The international Journal on Mathematics Education, 41(3), 333–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kaur, B. (2010). A study of mathematical tasks from three classrooms in Singapore. In Y. Shimizu, B. Kaur, R. Huang, & D. Clarke (Eds.), Mathematical tasks in classrooms around the world (pp. 15–33). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  15. Kaur, B. (2011). Mathematics homework: A study of three grade eight classrooms in Singapore. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9(1), 187–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kaur, B. (2013). Participation of students in content-learning classroom discourse: A study of two grade 8 mathematics classes in Singapore. In B. Kaur, G. Anthony, M. Ohtani, & D. Clarke (Eds.), Student voice in mathematics classrooms around the world (pp. 65–88). Rotterdam: Sense Publisher.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kaur, B. (2014). Developing procedural fluency in algebraic structures—A case study of a mathematics classroom in Singapore. In F. K. S. Leung, K. Park, D. Holton, & D. Clarke (Eds.), Algebra teaching around the world (pp. 81–98). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  18. Kaur, B., & Loh, H. K. (2009). Student perspective on effective mathematics pedagogy: Stimulated recall approach study. Singapore.Google Scholar
  19. Kaur, B., Low, H. K., & Seah, L. H. (2006). Mathematics teaching in two Singapore classrooms: The role of textbook and homework. In D. Clarke, C. Keitel, & Y. Shimizu (Eds.), Mathematics classrooms in 12 countries: The insider’s perspective (pp. 99–115). Rotterdam/Taipei: Sense Publisher.Google Scholar
  20. Kaur, B., Tay, E.G., Toh, T.L., Leong, Y.H., & Lee, N.H. (2018). A study of school mathematics curriculum enacted by competent teachers in Singapore secondary schools. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 30(1), 103-116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kirshner, D. (2002). Untangling teachers’ diverse aspirations for student learning: A cross-disciplinary strategy for relating psychological theory to pedagogical practice. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 33(1), 46–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lampert, M. (1990). When the problem is not the question and the solution is not the answer: Mathematical knowing and teaching. American Educational Research Journal, 27, 29–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lampert, M. (2010). Learning teaching in, from, and for practice: What do we mean? Journal of Teacher Education, 61(1–2), 21–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lee, N. H. (2009). Preparation of Schemes of Work and Lesson Plans. In P. Y. Lee & N. H. Lee (Eds.), Teaching Secondary School Mathematics—A Resource Book (2nd ed. Updated) (pp. 337–356). Singapore: McGraw Hill Education.Google Scholar
  25. Leong, Y. H., Cheng, L. P., Toh, W. Y., Kaur, B., & Toh, T. L. (in press). Making things explicit using instructional materials: A case study of a Singapore teacher’s practice. Mathematics Education Research Journal.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-018-0240-z, Online First.
  26. Leung, F. K. S. (2001). In search of an East Asian identity in mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 47(1), 35–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Love, E., & Pimm, D. (1996). ‘This is so’: A text on texts. In A. J. Bishop, K. Clements, K. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick, & C. Laborde (Eds.), International handbook of mathematics education (pp. 371–409). Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  28. MacBeath, J., & Turner, M. (1990). Learning out of school: Homework, policy and practice. Glasgow: Jordanhill College of Education.Google Scholar
  29. Ministry of Education. (2012). Ordinary-level and normal (academic)-level mathematics teaching and learning syllabus. Singapore: Author.Google Scholar
  30. Mok, A. C. I. (2004). Learning tasks. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, April 12–16, 2004.Google Scholar
  31. Mok, I. A. C., & Kaur, B. (2006). ‘Learning task’ lesson events. In D. Clarke, J. Emanuelsson, E. Jablonka, & I. A. C. Mok (Eds.), Making connections: Comparing mathematics classrooms around the world (pp. 147–163). Rotterdam/Taipei: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  32. NCTM (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTMGoogle Scholar
  33. Seah, L. H., Kaur, B., & Low, H. K. (2006). Case studies of Singapore secondary mathematics classrooms: The instructional approaches of two teachers. In D. Clarke, C. Keitel, & Y. Shimizu (Eds.), Mathematics classrooms in 12 countries: The insider’s perspective (pp. 151–165). Rotterdam/Taipei: Sense Publisher.Google Scholar
  34. Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (1999). The teaching gap. Best ideas from the world’s teachers for improving education in the classroom. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  35. Stodolsky, S. S. (1988). The subject matters: Classroom activity in math and social studies. Chicago, IL, US: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  36. Thompson, A., Philipp, R., Thompson, P., & Boyd, B. (1994). Calculational and conceptual orientations in teaching mathematics. In D. Aichele & A. Coxford (Eds.), Professional development for teachers of mathematics (pp. 79–92). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yew Hoong Leong
    • 1
    Email author
  • Berinderjeet Kaur
    • 1
  • Ngan Hoe Lee
    • 1
  • Tin Lam Toh
    • 1
  1. 1.National Institute of EducationSingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations