More Like this

1. Categorizing mathematics teachers’ questioning: The demands and contributions of teachers’ questions

   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101690  

   DeJarnette, A. F.; Wilke, E.; Hord, C. (October 2020, International journal of educational research)

   We conducted a review of literature to answer the following research questions: (1) What types of questions do teachers pose in mathematical discussions? (2) What evidence exists of the effects of different types of questioning on students’ learning and participation? (3) What are the implications of existing research for teacher preparation? Existing literature can broadly be categorized according to studies that distinguish between higher order and lower order questioning, studies that characterize and distinguish probing questions, and studies that address teacher questioning in technology-rich environments. The demands of different types of questions need to be considered in light of the broader contributions that such questions make to students’ mathematical learning. 

   more » « less
2. Using technology in representing practice to support preservice teachers’ quality questioning: The roles of noticing in improving practice

   Walkoe, J. and (January 2018, Journal of technology and teacher education)

   Calls for a “practice-based” approach to teacher education have become common in scholarship on teacher education, and preservice-teaching (PST) mathematics programs are increasingly heeding this call. Practice-based teacher education (PBTE) moves beyond standard approaches to teacher education in which PSTs learn about teaching in ways they are then expected to apply in practice and toward an approach that provides PSTs opportunities to gain experience in particular core practices in ways that approximate enactment in the classroom. A growing body of research suggests that teachers’ responses, including the questions they ask, can help students’ develop content knowledge and proficiency in mathematics and science practices in the classroom. However, despite evidence that PSTs can notice students’ thinking in various activities in their preparation programs, it is not clear that they are sufficiently well-prepared to propose quality responses before entering the classroom. In this paper, we describe two different approaches that we have taken to provide support for quality teacher questioning in the LessonSketch environment. From our results, we develop a hypothesis that a pedagogical approach that primes novices to notice model questioning can support a stance of focusing on the substance of students’ thinking and probing rather than guiding students’ thinking in their proposed questions. 

   more » « less
3. Teachers’ responses to instances of student mathematical thinking with varied potential to support student learning

   https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-020-00334-x  

   Stockero, Shari L.; Van Zoest, Laura R.; Freeburn, Ben; Peterson, Blake E.; Leatham, Keith R. (January 2020, Mathematics Education Research Journal)

   null (Ed.)

   Teacher responses to student mathematical thinking (SMT) matter because the way in which teachers respond affects student learning. Although studies have provided important insights into the nature of teacher responses, little is known about the extent to which these responses take into account the potential of the instance of SMT to support learning. This study investigated teachers’ responses to a common set of instances of SMT with varied potential to support students’ mathematical learning, as well as the productivity of such responses. To examine variations in responses in relation to the mathematical potential of the SMT to which they are responding, we coded teacher responses to instances of SMT in a scenario-based interview. We did so using a scheme that analyzes who interacts with the thinking (Actor), what they are given the opportunity to do in those interactions (Action), and how the teacher response relates to the actions and ideas in the contributed SMT (Recognition). The study found that teachers tended to direct responses to the student who had shared the thinking, use a small subset of actions, and explicitly incorporate students’ actions and ideas. To assess the productivity of teacher responses, we first theorized the alignment of different aspects of teacher responses with our vision of responsive teaching. We then used the data to analyze the extent to which specific aspects of teacher responses were more or less productive in particular circumstances. We discuss these circumstances and the implications of the findings for teachers, professional developers, and researchers. 

   more » « less
4. Analyzing teacher supports for collective argumentation in integrative STEM classrooms.

   Welji, S. (June 2022, ASEE annual conference)

   The Next Generation Science Standards [1] recognized evidence-based argumentation as one of the essential skills for students to develop throughout their science and engineering education. Argumentation focuses students on the need for quality evidence, which helps to develop their deep understanding of content [2]. Argumentation has been studied extensively, both in mathematics and science education but also to some extent in engineering education (see for example [3], [4], [5], [6]). After a thorough search of the literature, we found few studies that have considered how teachers support collective argumentation during engineering learning activities. The purpose of this program of research was to support teachers in viewing argumentation as an important way to promote critical thinking and to provide teachers with tools to implement argumentation in their lessons integrating coding into science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (which we refer to as integrative STEM). We applied a framework developed for secondary mathematics [7] to understand how teachers support collective argumentation in integrative STEM lessons. This framework used Toulmin’s [8] conceptualization of argumentation, which includes three core components of arguments: a claim (or hypothesis) that is based on data (or evidence) accompanied by a warrant (or reasoning) that relates the data to the claim [9], [8]. To adapt the framework, video data were coded using previously established methods for analyzing argumentation [7]. In this paper, we consider how the framework can be applied to an elementary school teacher’s classroom interactions and present examples of how the teacher implements various questioning strategies to facilitate more productive argumentation and deeper student engagement. We aim to understand the nature of the teacher’s support for argumentation—contributions and actions from the teacher that prompt or respond to parts of arguments. In particular, we look at examples of how the teacher supports students to move beyond unstructured tinkering (e.g., trial-and-error) to think logically about coding and develop reasoning for the choices that they make in programming. We also look at the components of arguments that students provide, with and without teacher support. Through the use of the framework, we are able to articulate important aspects of collective argumentation that would otherwise be in the background. The framework gives both eyes to see and language to describe how teachers support collective argumentation in integrative STEM classrooms. 

   more » « less
5. Investigating Students’ Learning Experiences in a Neural Engineering Integrated STEM High School Curriculum

   https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12100705  

   Aldemir, Tugce; Davidesco, Ido; Kelly, Susan Meabh; Glaser, Noah; Kyle, Aaron M.; Montrosse-Moorhead, Bianca; Lane, Katie (October 2022, Education Sciences)

   STEM integration has become a national and international priority, but our understanding of student learning experiences in integrated STEM courses, especially those that integrate life sciences and engineering design, is limited. Our team has designed a new high school curriculum unit that focuses on neural engineering, an emerging interdisciplinary field that brings together neuroscience, technology, and engineering. Through the implementation of the unit in a high school engineering design course, we asked how incorporating life sciences into an engineering course supported student learning and what challenges were experienced by the students and their teacher. To address these questions, we conducted an exploratory case study consisting of a student focus group, an interview with the teacher, and analysis of student journals. Our analysis suggests that students were highly engaged by the authentic and collaborative engineering design process, helping solidify their self-efficacy and interest in engineering design. We also identified some challenges, such as students’ lower interest in life sciences compared to engineering design and the teacher lacking a life sciences background. These preliminary findings suggest that neural engineering can provide an effective context to the integration of life sciences and engineering design but more scaffolding and teacher support is needed for full integration. 

   more » « less