- Award ID(s):
- 1941720
- PAR ID:
- 10510464
- Publisher / Repository:
- Proceedings of the 46th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Proceedings of the 46th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education
- Volume:
- 4
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 347–354
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Location:
- Haifa, Israel
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
Karunakaran, S. S. ; Higgins, A. (Ed.)The critical role of teachers in supporting student engagement with reasoning and proving has long been recognized (Nardi & Knuth, 2017; NCTM, 2014). While some studies examined how prospective secondary teachers (PSTs) develop dispositions and teaching practices that promote student engagement with reasoning and proving (e.g., Buchbinder & McCrone, 2020; Conner, 2007), very little is known about long-term development of proof-related practices of beginning teachers and what factors affect this development (Stylianides et al., 2017). During the supervised teaching experiences, interns often encounter tensions between balancing their commitments to the university and cooperating teacher, while also developing their own teaching styles (Bieda et al., 2015; Smagorinsky et al., 2004; Wang et al., 2008). Our study examines how sociocultural contexts of the teacher preparation program and of the internship school, supported or inhibited proof-related teaching practices of beginning secondary mathematics teachers. In particular, this study aims to understand the observed gap between proof-related teaching practices of one such teacher, Olive, in two settings: as a PST in a capstone course Mathematical Reasoning and Proving for Secondary Teachers (Buchbinder & McCrone, 2020) and as an intern in a high-school classroom. We utilize activity theory (Leont’ev, 1979) and Engeström’s (1987) model of an activity system to examine how the various components of the system: teacher (subject), teaching (object), the tasks (tools), the curriculum and the expected teaching style (rules), the cooperating teacher (community) and their involvement during the teaching (division of labor) interact with each other and affect the opportunities provided to students to engage with reasoning and proving (outcome). The analysis of four lessons from each setting, lesson plans, reflections and interviews, showed that as a PST, Olive engaged students with reasoning and proving through productive proof-related teaching practices and rich tasks that involved conjecturing, justifying, proving and evaluating arguments. In a sharp contrast, as an intern, Olive had to follow her school’s rigid curriculum and expectations, and to adhere to her cooperating teacher’s teaching style. As a result, in her lessons as an intern students received limited opportunities for reasoning and proving. Olive expressed dissatisfaction with this type of teaching and her desire to enact more proof-oriented practices. Our results show that the sociocultural components of the activity system (rules, community and division of labor), which were backgrounded in Olive’s teaching experience as a PST but prominent in her internship experience, influenced the outcome of engaging students with reasoning and proving. We discuss the importance of these sociocultural aspects as we examine how Olive navigated the tensions between the proof-related teaching practices she adopted in the capstone course and her teaching style during the internship. We highlight the importance of teacher educators considering the sociocultural aspects of teaching in supporting beginning teachers developing proof-related teaching practices.more » « less
-
Christiansen, I (Ed.)
Despite the importance of reasoning and proving in mathematics and mathematics education, little is known about how future teachers become proficient in integrating reasoning and proving in their teaching practices. In this article, we characterize this aspect of prospective secondary mathematics teachers’ (PSTs’) professional learning by drawing upon the commognitive theory. We offer a triple-layer conceptualization of (student)
learning ,teaching , andlearning to teach mathematics via reasoning and proving by focusing on the discourses students participate in (learning), the opportunities for reasoning and proving afforded to them (teaching), and how PSTs design and enrich such opportunities (learning to teach). We explore PSTs’ pedagogical discourse anchored in the lesson plans they designed, enacted, and modified as part of their participation in a university-based course:Mathematical Reasoning and Proving for Secondary Teachers . We identified four types of discursive modifications: structural, mathematical, reasoning-based, and logic-based. We describe how the potential opportunities for reasoning and proving afforded to students by these lesson plans changed as a result of these modifications. Based on our triple-layered conceptualization we illustrate how the lesson modifications and the resulting alterations to student learning opportunities can be used to characterize PSTs’ professional learning. We discuss the affordances of theorizing teacher practices with the same theoretical lens (grounded in commognition) to inquire student learning and teacher learning, and how lesson plans, as a proxy of teaching practices, can be used as a methodological tool to better understand PSTs’ professional learning. -
Drijvers, P ; Csapodi, C ; Palmér, H ; Gosztonyi, K ; Kónya, E (Ed.)This study is part of a larger project exploring how beginning teachers learn to teach mathematics via reasoning and proving. The study followed two beginning secondary mathematics teachers for two years. First, as students in a capstone course in which they learned to integrate reasoning and proving into teaching mathematics, and then as full-time interns in secondary schools. The culminating part of the internship was an action research / inquiry project devoted to reasoning and proving. This exploratory multi-case study examined how conducting such an inquiry project affected interns’ discourses and practices for teaching mathematics via reasoning and proving. The results show that both beginning teachers successfully recontextualized what they learned in the capstone course in their inquiry projects. Yet, there were substantial differences between the two interns, which affected their conclusions about continuing integrating reasoning and proving in their classrooms.more » « less
-
Karunakaran, S. S. ; Higgins, A. (Ed.)Preparing prospective secondary teachers (PSTs) to teach mathematics with a focus on reasoning and proving is an important goal for teacher education programs. A capstone course, Mathematical Reasoning and Proving for Secondary Teachers, was designed to address this goal. One component of the course was a school-based experience in which the PSTs designed and taught four proof-oriented lessons in local schools, video recorded these lessons, and reflected on them. In this paper, we focus on one PST – Nancy, who took the course in Fall 2020 during the pandemic, when the school-based experience moved online. We analyzed how Nancy’s Mathematical Knowledge for Teaching Proof (MKT-P) evolved through her attempts to teach proof online and through repeated cycles of reflection.more » « less
-
Abstract As engineering learning experiences increasingly begin in elementary school, elementary teacher preparation programs are an important site for the study of teacher development in engineering education. In this article, we argue that the stances that novice teachers adopt toward engineering learning and knowledge are consequential for the opportunities they create for students. We present a comparative case study examining the epistemological framing dynamics of two novice urban teachers, Ana and Ben, as they learned and taught engineering design during a four‐week institute for new elementary teachers. Although the two teachers had very similar teacher preparation backgrounds, they interpreted the purposes of engineering design learning and teaching in meaningfully different ways. During her own engineering sessions, Ana took up the goal not only of meeting the needs of the client but also of making scientific sense of artifacts that might meet those needs. When facilitating students' engineering, she prioritized their building knowledge collaboratively about how things work. By contrast, when Ben worked on his own engineering, he took up the goal of delivering a product. When teaching engineering to students, he offered them constrained prototyping tasks to serve as hands‐on contexts for reviewing scientific explanations. These findings call for teacher educators to support teachers' framing of engineering design as a knowledge building enterprise through explicit conversations about epistemology, apprenticeship in sense‐making strategies, and tasks intentionally designed to encourage reasoning about design artifacts.