Abstract
When teachers design learning opportunities, reflect on instructional situations or when they act and react in the classroom, they are likely to draw on their professional knowledge, including their epistemological beliefs and instruction-related views. Among these are also views related to motivational and affective aspects of learning and instruction. However, the awareness of affective and motivational aspects should be equilibrated with other PCK components. Consequently this chapter aims to explore how the awareness of affective aspects is related to other PCK, and in particular, what emphasis teachers give to aspects of motivation and affect as criteria for evaluating learning and instruction in relation to other relevant aspects for instructional quality and how important they see affective characteristics of representations in tasks. We report results from three empirical studies and discuss their qualitative and quantitative methodologies.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Ball, D. (1993). Halves, pieces, and twoths: Constructing representational contexts in teaching fractions. In T. Carpenter, E. Fennema, & T. Romberg (Eds.), Rational numbers: An integration of research (pp. 157–196). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
Ball, D., Thames, L., & Phelps, G. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special? Journal of Teacher Education, 59(5), 389–407.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioural change. Psychological Review, 84, 191–215.
Baumert, J., & Kunter, M. (2006). Stichwort: Professionelle Kompetenz von Lehrkräften. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 9(4), 469–520.
Biza, I., Nardi, E., & Zachariades, T. (2007). Using tasks to explore teacher knowledge in situation-specific contexts. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 10, 301–309.
Bromme, R. (1992). Der Lehrer als Experte. Zur Psychologie des professionellen Wissens. [The teacher as an expert. On the psychology of professional knowledge]. Bern: Hans Huber.
Clausen, M., Reusser, K., & Klieme, E. (2003). Unterrichtsqualität auf der Basis hoch-inferenter Unterrichtsbeurteilungen: ein Vergleich zwischen Deutschland und der deutschsprachigen Schweiz [Using high-inference ratings to assess quality of instruction. A comparison between Germany and the German-speaking part of Switzerland]. Unterrichtswissenschaft, 31(2), 122–141.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum.
Deci, F., & Ryan, R. (1993). Die Selbstbestimmungstheorie der Motivation und ihre Bedeutung für die Pädagogik. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 39, 223–238.
Duval, R. (2006). A cognitive analysis of problems of comprehension in a learning of mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 61, 103–131.
Elia, I., & Philippou, G. (2004). The functions of pictures in problem solving. In M. J. Høines & A. B. Fuglestad (Eds.), Proceedings of the 28th conference of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education (Vol. 2, pp. 327–334). Bergen: PME.
Heckhausen, H. (1989). Motivation und Handeln (2nd ed.). Berlin: Springer.
Helmke, A., & Weinert, F. (1997). Bedingungsfaktoren schulischer Leistungen. In F. Weinert (Hrsg.), Enzyklopädie der Psychologie. Band 3: Psychologie des Unterrichts und der Schule (S. 71–176). Göttingen: Hogrefe.
Hosenfeld, I. (2008). Diagnostische Kompetenzen von Mathematiklehrkräften und Leistung. [Presentation on 26.08.2009, 71st AEPF conference, Kiel].
Kersting, N., Givvin, K., Thompson, B., Santagata, R., & Stigler, J. (2012). Measuring usable knowledge: Teachers’ analyses of mathematics classroom videos predict teaching quality and student learning. American Educational Research Journal, 49(3), 568–589.
Krapp, A. (1992). Das Interessenskonstrukt. In A. Krapp, & M. Prenzel (Hrsg.), Interesse, Lernen, Leistung. Neuere Ansätze der pädagogisch-psychologischen Interessensforschung (S. 297–329). Münster: Aschendorff.
Kultusministerkonferenz (KMK). (2003). Bildungsstandards im Fach Mathematik für den Mittleren Schulabschluss. http://www.kmk.org/
Kuntze, S. (2011). In-service and prospective teachers’ views about modelling tasks in the mathematics classroom – Results of a quantitative empirical study. In G. Kaiser et al. (Eds.), Trends in teaching and learning of mathematical modelling (pp. 279–288). Dordrecht: Springer.
Kuntze, S. (2012). Pedagogical content beliefs: Global, content domain-related and situation-specific components. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 79(2), 273–292. doi:10.1007/s10649-011-9347-9.
Kuntze, S., & Rudolph-Albert, F. (2009). What is “good” mathematics instruction? – Mathematics teachers’ individual criteria for instructional quality and attributions for instructional success. In J. Cai, G. Kaiser, B. Perry, & N.-Y. Wong (Eds.), Effective mathematics teaching from teachers’ perspectives: National and cross-national studies (pp. 71–92). Rotterdam/Boston/Taipei: Sense Publishers.
Kuntze, S., Lerman, S., Murphy, B., Kurz-Milcke, E., Siller, H.-S., & Winbourne, P. (2011). Development of pre-service teachers’ knowledge related to big ideas in mathematics. In B. Ubuz (Ed.), Proceedings of the 35th conference of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education (Vol. 3, pp. 105–112). Ankara: PME.
Lerman, S. (1990). Alternative perspectives of the nature of mathematics and their influence on the teaching of mathematics. British Educational Research Journal, 16(1), 53–61.
Martignon, L., & Wassner, C. (2005). Schulung frühen stochastischen Denkens von Kindern. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 8(2), 202–222.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) (Ed.). (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston: NCTM.
Pajares, F. M. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307–332.
Pekrun, R., & Zirngibl, A. (2004). Schülermerkmale im Fach Mathematik. In Deutsches PISA-Konsortium (Hrsg.), PISA 2003. Der Bildungsstand der Jugendlichen in Deutschland – Ergebnisse des zweiten internationalen Vergleichs (S. 191–210). Münster: Waxmann.
Prenzel, M. (1988). Die Wirkungsweise von Interesse. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.
Shulman, L. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.
Straub, J., Kempf, W., & Werbik, H. (Eds.). (1997). Psychologie. Eine Einführung Grundlagen, Methoden, Forschungsfelder. München: Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag.
Törner, G. (2002). Mathematical beliefs. In G. Leder, E. Pehkonen, & G. Törner (Eds.), Beliefs: A hidden variable in mathematics education? (pp. 73–94). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Weinert, F. (2001). Vergleichende Leistungsmessung in Schulen – eine umstrittene Selbstverständlichkeit. In F. Weinert (Hrsg.), Leistungsmessungen in Schulen (S. 17–31). Weinheim: Beltz.
Acknowledgements
The project ABCmaths was funded with support from the European Commission (503215-LLP-1-2009-1-DE-COMENIUS-CMP). This publication reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kuntze, S., Dreher, A. (2015). PCK and the Awareness of Affective Aspects Reflected in Teachers’ Views About Learning Opportunities – A Conflict?. In: Pepin, B., Roesken-Winter, B. (eds) From beliefs to dynamic affect systems in mathematics education. Advances in Mathematics Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06808-4_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06808-4_15
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-06807-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-06808-4
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)