Skip to main content

Examining Teachers’ Interactions with Curriculum Resource to Uncover Pedagogical Design Capacity

Part of the ICME-13 Monographs book series (ICME13Mo)

Abstract

This chapter considers how teachers interact with curriculum resources to design and enact mathematics instruction and the capacities involved in doing this work. It begins with a discussion of conceptual and empirical issues related to curriculum, resources as a genre of tools, and pedagogical design capacity (PDC). These concepts are then illustrated, using one elementary teacher’s interactions with an unfamiliar curriculum resource. Analysis of the teacher’s reading of the guide, an enacted lesson, and pre- and post-observation interviews, identified robust and underdeveloped aspects of the teacher’s PDC. Analysis of the teacher’s guide indicates a lack of transparency about key mathematical and pedagogical concepts, which shed light on these findings.

Keywords

  • Mathematics teachers’ resources
  • Pedagogical design capacity
  • Teacher’s guides
  • Elementary teachers

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-73253-4_4
  • Chapter length: 20 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-3-319-73253-4
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Softcover Book
USD   219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Hardcover Book
USD   219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Fig. 4.1
Fig. 4.2
Fig. 4.3

Notes

  1. 1.

    ICUBiT stands for Improving Curriculum Use for Better Teaching. It is a project funded by the National Science Foundation in the U.S., directed by Janine Remillard and Ok-Kyeong Kim.

  2. 2.

    Pseudonyms.

References

  • Adler, J. (2000). Conceptualising resources as a theme for teacher education. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 3, 205–224. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009903206236.

  • Ball, D. L., Thames, M. H., & Phelps, G. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special? Journal of Teacher Education, 59(5), 389–407.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, M. W. (2009). The teacher–tool relationship: Theorizing the design and use of curriculum materials. In J. T. Remillard, B. A. Herbel-Eisenmann, & G. M. Lloyd (Eds.), Mathematics teachers at work: Connecting curriculum materials and classroom instruction (pp. 17–36). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chevallard, Y. (1988, August). On didactic transposition theory: Some introductory notes. Paper presented at the International Symposium on Research and development in Mathematics, Bratislava, Czechoslavakia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Choppin, J. (2011). Learned adaptations: Teachers’ understanding and use of curriculum resources. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 14(5), 331–353. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-011-9170-3.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Cobb, P., Zhao, Q., & Dean, C. (2009). Conducting design experiments to support teachers’ learning: A reflection from the field. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 18(2), 165–199.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, E. A., & Krajcik, J. S. (2005). Designing educative curriculum materials to promote teacher learning. Educational Researcher, 34(3), 3–14.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Doyle, W. (1983). Academic work. Review of Education Research, 2(53), 159–199.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Fan, L., Zhu, Y., & Miao, Z. (2013). Textbook research in mathematics education: Development status and directions. ZDM Mathematics Education, 45(5), 633–646.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Gueudet, G., & Trouche, L. (2009). Towards new documentation systems for mathematics teachers? Educational Studies in Mathematics, 71(3), 199–218.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kheong, F. H., Sharpe, P., Soon, G. K., Ramakrishnan, C., Wah, B. L. P., & Choo, M. (2009). Math in focus: The Singapore approach by Marshall Cavendish. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kheong, F. H., Sharpe, P., Soon, G. K., Ramakrishnan, C., Wah, B. L. P., & Choo, M. (2010). Math in focus: The Singapore approach by Marshall Cavendish. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ongstad, S. (2006). Mathematics and mathematics education as triadic communication? A semiotic framework exemplified. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 61(1–2), 247–277. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-006-8302-7.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Pepin, B., Gueudet, G., & Trouche, L. (2013). Investigating textbooks as crucial interfaces between culture, policy and teacher curricular practice: Two contrasted case studies in France and Norway. ZDM Mathematics Education, 45(5), 685–698. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-013-0526-2.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Pepin, B., & Haggarty, L. (2001). Mathematics textbooks and their use in English, French, and German classrooms: A way to understand teaching and learning cultures. ZDM Mathematics Education, 33(5), 158–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rabardel, P. (1995). Les hommes et les technologies, approche cognitive des instruments contemporains, Armand Colin, Paris (English version at http://ergoserv.psy.univ-paris8.fr/Site/default.asp?Act_group=1).

  • Remillard, J. T. (2005). Examining key concepts of research on teachers’ use of mathematics curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75(2), 211–246.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Remillard, J. T. (2013, May). Beyond the script: Educative features of five mathematics curricula and how teachers use them. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Remillard, J. T. (2016). Keeping an eye on the teacher in the digital curriculum race. In M. Bates & Z. Usiskin (Eds.), Digital curricula in school mathematics (pp. 195–204). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Remillard, J. T., & Heck, D. (2014). Conceptualizing the curriculum enactment process in mathematics education. ZDM Mathematics Education, 46(5), 705–718.

    Google Scholar 

  • Remillard, J. T., & Kim, O.-K. (2017). Knowledge of curriculum embedded mathematics: Exploring a critical domain of teaching. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 96(1), 65–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-017-9757-4.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Remillard, J. T., & Taton, J. (2015). Rewriting myths about curriculum materials and teaching to new standards. In J. A. Supovitz & J. Spillane (Eds.), Challenging standards: Navigating conflict and building capacity in the era of the common core (pp. 49–58). Lahnam, MD: Rowan & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Remillard, J. T., Van Steenbrugge, H., & Bergqvist, T. (2016, April). A cross-cultural analysis of the voice of six teacher’s guides from three cultural contexts. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, M., & Tzur, R. (1999). Explicating the teachers’ perspective from the researcher’ perspectives: Generating accounts of mathematics teachers’ practice. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30(3), 252–264.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Sleep, L. (2009). Teaching to the mathematical point: Knowing and using mathematics in teaching (Unpublished dissertation). University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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(2), 455–488.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Stein, M. K., & Kim, G. (2009). The role of mathematics curriculum materials in large-scale urban reform: An analysis of demands and opportunities for teacher learning. In J. T. Remillard, B. A. Herbel-Eisenmann, & G. M. Lloyd (Eds.), Mathematics teachers at work: Connecting curriculum materials and classroom instruction (pp. 37–55). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich, C. (2015). Stages in constructing and coordinating units additively and multiplicatively (part 1). For the Learning of Mathematics, 35(3), 2–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This paper is based on work supported by the National Science Foundation under grants No. 0918141 and 0918126. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. Research team members who have contributed to the analysis include: Ok-Kyeong Kim, Napthalin Atanga, Luke Reinke, Dustin Smith, Joshua Taton, and Hendrik Van Steenbrugge.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Janine T. Remillard .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Remillard, J.T. (2018). Examining Teachers’ Interactions with Curriculum Resource to Uncover Pedagogical Design Capacity. In: Fan, L., Trouche, L., Qi, C., Rezat, S., Visnovska, J. (eds) Research on Mathematics Textbooks and Teachers’ Resources. ICME-13 Monographs. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73253-4_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73253-4_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-73252-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-73253-4

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)