Abstract
Teaching practice, which uses student mathematical thinking to develop mathematical concepts, is valued by the mathematics education community, but the nuances of this practice are relatively unexplored (Leatham, Peterson, Stockero, & Van Zoest, 2015). We observed about 33 hours of video recordings of one-to-one instruction in the Mathematics Intervention Specialist Program (MISP), involving four teachers and six students, in order to identify patterns relating to how the teachers act in particular situations to achieve particular pedagogical goals. We conceptualized a set of instances of such patterns in one-to-one teaching sessions, called Key Elements (KEs)—micro-instructional strategies used by a teacher when interacting with a student solving an arithmetic task. Twenty-five KEs are described and incorporated into a framework consisting of four categories: before posing a task, during posing a task, during solving a task, and after solving a task. A scenario of one-to-one instruction is described and the teacher’s use of the following nine KEs is highlighted: Post-posing wait-time, post-responding wait-time, rephrasing the task, giving encouragement to a partly or nearly correct response, changing the setting during solving, scaffolding during, recapitulating, linking settings, and affirming. The three skills of professional noticing—attending, interpreting and deciding—are used to categorize the KEs of teaching occurring in the scenario. This highlights the linking of the KEs of instruction and the three skills of professional noticing. Thus, the study supports the notion that teacher development focusing on professional noticing can enhance teachers’ learning to use the KEs of one-to-one instruction.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Bloom, B. S. (1984). The 2 sigma problem: The search for methods of group instruction as effective as one-to-one tutoring. Educational Researcher, 13(6), 4–16.
Cazden, C. (1986). Classroom discourse. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 438–453). New York: MacMillan.
Chae, H. M., Kim, J. H., & Glass, M. (2005, April). Effective behaviors in a comparison between novice and expert algebra tutors. In Proceedings of Sixteenth Midwest AI and Cognitive Science Conference (pp. 25–30). Dayton, OH.
Clay, M. M. (1979). The early detection of reading difficulties. Portsmouth, New Hampshire: Heinemann.
Cobb, P., & Whitenack, J. W. (1996). A method for conducting longitudinal analyses of classroom video recordings and transcripts. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 30(3), 213–228.
Cohen, P. A., Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C. L. C. (1982). Educational outcomes of tutoring: A meta-analysis of findings. American Educational Research Journal, 19(2), 237–248.
Ellemor-Collins, D., & Wright, R. J. (2011). Unpacking mathematisation: An experimental framework for arithmetic instruction. In B. Ubuz (Ed.), Proceedings of the 35th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 313–320). Ankara, Turkey: PME.
Graesser, A. C., Person, N. K., & Magliano, J. P. (1995). Collaborative dialogue patterns in naturalistic one-to-one tutoring sessions. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 9(6), 1–28.
Grandi, C., & Rowland, T. (2013). Developing one-to-one teacher–student interaction in post-16 mathematics instruction. In Proceedings of the 37th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 385–392). Kiel, Germany: PME.
Jacobs, V. R., Lamb, L. L. C., & Philipp, R. A. (2010). Professional noticing of children’s mathematical thinking. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 41(2), 169–202.
Leatham, K. R., Peterson, B. E., Stockero, S. L., & Van Zoest, L. R. (2015). Conceptualizing mathematically significant pedagogical opportunities to build on student thinking. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 46(1), 88–124.
Lester, F. K. (2007). Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning. Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
Lu, X., Eugenio, B. D., Kershaw, T. C., Ohlsson, S., & Corrigan-Halpern, A. (2007). Expert vs. non-expert tutoring: dialogue moves, interaction patterns and multi-utterance turns. In A. Gelbukh (Ed.), Computational linguistics and intelligent text processing (Vol. 4394, pp. 456–467). Mexico City: Springer.
McMahon, E. B. (1998). A model for analysing one-to-one teaching in the Maths Recovery Programme (Unpublished honors thesis). Southern Cross University, Lismore.
Miller, K. F. (2011). Situation awareness in teaching: What educators can learn from video-based research in other fields. In M. G. Sherin, V. R. Jacobs, & R. A. Philipp (Eds.), Mathematics teacher noticing: Seeing through teachers’ eyes (pp. 51–65). Hoboken: Taylor and Francis.
Munter, C. (2010). Evaluating math recovery: The impact of implementation fidelity on student outcomes (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee.
Person, N. K., Lehman, B., & Ozbun, R. (2007). Pedagogical and motivational dialogue moves used by expert tutors. In 17th Annual Meeting of the Society for Text and Discourse, Glasgow, Scotland.
Powell, A. B., Francisco, J. M., & Maher, C. A. (2003). An analytical model for studying the development of learners’ mathematical ideas and reasoning using videotape data. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 22(4), 405–435.
Sherin, M. G., Jacobs, V. R., & Philipp, R. A. (2011). Situating the study of teacher noticing. In M. G. Sherin, V. R. Jacobs, & R. A. Philipp (Eds.), Mathematics teacher noticing: Seeing through teachers’ eyes (pp. 3–13). Hoboken: Taylor and Francis.
Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications Inc.
Tran, L. T., & Wright, R. J. (2014a). Using an experimental framework of key elements to parse one-to-one, targeted intervention teaching in whole-number arithmetic. In C. Nicol, S. Oesterle, P. Liljedahl, & D. Allan (Eds.), Proceedings of the 38th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education and the 36th Conference of the North American Chapter of the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 5, pp. 265–272). Vancouver, Canada: PME.
Tran, L. T., & Wright, R. J. (2014b). Beliefs of teachers who teach intensive one-to-one intervention about links to classroom teaching. In J. Anderson, M. Canvanagh, & A. Prescott (Eds.), Proceedings of the 37th annual conference of Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, Sydney (pp. 621–629). Sydney, Australia: MERGA.
Van Es, E. A. (2011). A framework for learning to notice student thinking. In M. G. Sherin, V. R. Jacobs, & R. A. Philipp (Eds.), Mathematics teacher noticing: Seeing through teachers’ eyes (pp. 134–151). Hoboken: Taylor and Francis.
Van Manen, M. (1997). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy (2nd ed.). Canada: The Althouse Press.
Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 17(2), 89–100.
Wright, R. J. (2010). Key elements of intervention teaching. Unpublished manuscript.
Wright, R. J., Ellemor-Collins, D., & Lewis, G. (2011). The P-4 Mathematics Intervention Specialist Project: Pedagogical tools and professional development resources. In J. Clark, B. Kissane, J. Mousley, & S. Thornton (Eds.), Proceedings of the 23rd AAMT-MERGA Conference, Alice Springs, Northern Territory, 3rd–7th July, 2011 (pp. 1089–1097). Adelaide: AAMT.
Wright, R. J., Martland, J., Stafford, A. K., & Stanger, G. (2002). Teaching number: Advancing children’s skills & strategies. London: SAGE.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Tran, T.L., Wright, R.J. (2017). Teachers’ Professional Noticing from a Perspective of Key Elements of Intensive, One-to-One Intervention. In: Schack, E., Fisher, M., Wilhelm, J. (eds) Teacher Noticing: Bridging and Broadening Perspectives, Contexts, and Frameworks. Research in Mathematics Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-46753-5_28
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-46753-5_28
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-46752-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-46753-5
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)