Search for: All records

Building on the theory of practical rationality, we explore how three beginning secondary mathematics teachers reconcile competing professional obligations, namely: disciplinary, individual, and institutional obligations. As these teachers transitioned from supervised teaching to teaching their own classrooms, they reconciled competing obligations and developed their own ideas about mathematics teaching and learning. The analysis revealed that it was only institutional obligation that conflicted with either disciplinary, or individual obligation, or with teachers’ own teaching preferences. No other two obligations appeared to clash. The conflict with institutional obligation was reconciled in favor of institutional obligation in less than 30% of instances. In the vast majority of cases, another obligation took precedence. 

Algebra has long been recognized as a fundamental component of mathematics education for K-12 students and has been identified as a subject with which students continually struggle. Researchers have utilized various methods across contexts and conditions at the classroom level to improve algebra learning. This systematic review and meta-research (i.e., meta-analysis and meta-synthesis) aims to elucidate which of these efforts are effective, along with the conditions and populations for which they are most effective. In this article, we present our framing for the study under a modified version of the conceptual framework for learning progression, justify selected moderators, and detail our anticipated research process. Conducting meta-research on this topic is essential for providing policymakers, instructors, and researchers with an adequate understanding of the historical landscape of effective practices in algebra instruction.