Skip to main content
Book cover

Research on Mathematics Textbooks and Teachers’ Resources pp 89–117Cite as

Disaggregating a Mathematics Teacher’s Pedagogical Design Capacity

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

Abstract

The analytical approach for describing teachers’ Pedagogical Design Capacity (PDC) adopted in this chapter is part of a larger study investigating mathematics teachers’ use of a prescribed textbook. In this chapter, we describe teachers’ PDC through (i) the type of use of the curricular resource, that is, whether use is deliberate or tacit; as well as, (ii) the type of a relationship the teacher forges with this resource. We find that a deliberate use of the textbook and an intimate relationship with the textbook reflects a high PDC. We argue that PDC is more than the degree of appropriation of the affordances of curricular resources by the teacher: it is also about the quality of opportunities for mediation of mathematics that the teacher creates.

Keywords

  • Mathematics teachers’ resources
  • Pedagogical design capacity
  • Omissions
  • Injections
  • Teacher-textbook relationship

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

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-73253-4_5
  • Chapter length: 29 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)
Learn about institutional subscriptions
Fig. 5.1
Fig. 5.2
Fig. 5.3
Fig. 5.4
Fig. 5.5
Fig. 5.6
Fig. 5.7
Fig. 5.8
Fig. 5.9
Fig. 5.10
Fig. 5.11

Notes

  1. 1.

    The Wits Maths Connect Secondary Project (WMCS) is a research and development programme funded by the FirstRand Foundation (FRF), and the Department of Science and Technology offering a school-based professional development and research programme for mathematics teachers.

  2. 2.

    We adhere to terminology of Taylor and Vinjevold (1999) who distinguish between textbooks and workbooks by defining textbooks as providing a systematic learning programme while workbooks providing supplemental and revision materials in support of the textbooks.

References

  • Adler, J. (2000). Conceptualising resources as a theme for teacher education. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 3(3), 205–224.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Adler, J. (2012). Knowledge resources in and for school mathematics teaching. In G. Gueudet, B. Pepin, & L. Trouche (Eds.), From text to ‘lived’ resources: Mathematics curriculum materials and teacher development (pp. 3–22). Rotterdam: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ball, D. L., & Cohen, D. K. (1996). Reform by the book: What is: Or might be: The role of curriculum materials in teacher learning and instructional reform? Educational Researcher, 25(9), 6–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Peretz, M. (1990). The teacher-curriculum encounter: Freeing teachers from the tyranny of texts. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, M. (2002). Teaching by design: Understanding the intersection between teacher practice and the design of curricular innovations (Doctoral thesis). Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, M. (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). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chavez, O. L. (2003). From the textbook to the enacted curriculum: Textbook use in the middle school mathematics classroom (Doctoral thesis). University of Missouri, Columbia, MO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Choppin, J. (2011). Learned adaptations: Teachers’ understanding and use of curriculum resources. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 14(5), 331–353.

    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 

  • Ensor, P., Dunne, T., Galant, J., Gumedze, F., Jaffer, S., Reeves, C., et al. (2002). Textbooks, teaching and learning in primary mathematics classrooms. African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 6(1), 21–35.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Even, R. (1998). Factors involved in linking representations of functions. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 17(1), 105–121.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, J. J. (1977). The theory of affordances. In R. Shaw & J. Bransford (Eds.), Perceiving, acting, and knowing: Toward an ecological psychology (pp. 67–84). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    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 

  • Kim, O. K., & Atanga, N. A. (2014). Teacher fidelity decisions and their impact on lesson enactment. Paper presented at the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics Research Conference, New Orleans, LA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leshota, M. (2015). The relationship between textbook affordances and mathematics’ teachers’ pedagogical design capacity (PDC) (Doctoral thesis). University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leshota, M., & Adler, J. (2014). The analysis of teachers’ mobilisation of the textbook affordances. Paper presented at the International Conference on Mathematics Textbook Research and Development (ICTM-2014), University of Southampton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norman, D. A. (1999). Affordance, conventions, and design. Interactions, 6(3), 38–43.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Pepin, B., Gueudet, G., & Trouche, L. (2013). Re-sourcing teachers’ work and interactions: A collective perspective on resources, their use and transformation. ZDM Mathematics Education, 45(7), 929–943.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Polanyi, M. (1967). The tacit dimension. Garden City, NY: Anchor Books.

    Google Scholar 

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

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Sherin, M. G., & Drake, C. (2009). Curriculum strategy framework: Investigating patterns in teachers’ use of a reform-based elementary mathematics curriculum. Journal for Curriculum Studies, 41(4), 467–500.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.

    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. 37–56). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, N., & Vinjevold, P. (1999). Getting learning right: Report of the president’s education initiative research project. Joint Education Trust.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wertsch, J. V. (1998). Mind as action. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Science Education, National University of Lesotho, P.O. Roma, 180, Roma, Lesotho

    Moneoang Leshota

  2. University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa

    Jill Adler

Authors
  1. Moneoang Leshota
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jill Adler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Moneoang Leshota .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Southampton Education School, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom

    Prof. Lianghuo Fan

  2. Institut Français de l’Education, École Normale Supérieure de Lyon, Lyon, France

    Prof. Luc Trouche

  3. Faculty of Education, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China

    Dr. Chunxia Qi

  4. EIM—Institut für Mathematik, Universität Paderborn, Paderborn, Germany

    Prof. Dr. Sebastian Rezat

  5. School of Education, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

    Dr. Jana Visnovska

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

Leshota, M., Adler, J. (2018). Disaggregating a Mathematics Teacher’s 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_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73253-4_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-73252-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-73253-4

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)