Advertisement

Characterizing mathematics teacher educators’ written feedback to prospective teachers

  • Signe E. Kastberg
  • Alyson E. Lischka
  • Susan L. Hillman
Article

Abstract

Mathematics teacher educators’ (MTEs’) written feedback is an instantiation of teaching practice and provides information to support the developing understanding of prospective teachers (PTs), yet no research has been undertaken to characterize such feedback. Research on feedback forms, including written feedback, has focused on information provided to learners that draws attention to different components of their performances or understandings, such as elements of the task and processes used to complete it. While no models of feedback or feedback systems prescribe what feedback should contain, factors that researchers have identified as impacting performance or understanding under some conditions have been identified. To explore MTEs’ written feedback as an instantiation of practice and to characterize such feedback, we used a self-study methodology to analyze three MTEs’ written feedback to PTs regarding their responses to students, including the process of attending to and using learners’ mathematics in responses to written work. Findings showed MTEs used some practices described as effective feedback by building on to PTs’ feedback to mathematics-learners. Yet they also provided feedback described as less than effective, such as redirecting PTs to attend to elements in students’ work not addressed by the PTs but perceived by MTEs as important to address. In addition, findings illustrated that MTEs provided little feedback on PTs’ self-regulation. We argue that if MTEs’ written feedback is meant to serve as an instantiation of practice as well as provide information to PTs about their feedback practice, MTEs should explore their feedback so that the model provided operates as they intend.

Keywords

Mathematics teacher educators Feedback Instantiations of practice 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Arts, J., Jaspers, M., & Brinke, D. (2016). A case study on written comments as a form of feedback in teacher education: So much to gain. European Journal of Teacher Education, 39(2), 159–173.  https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2015.1116513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bay-Williams, J. M. (2013). Field experience guide for elementary and middle school mathematics teaching developmentally (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.Google Scholar
  3. Borko, H., Liston, D., & Whitcomb, J. (2007). Genres of empirical research in teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 58, 3–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Buhagiar, M. (2013). Mathematics student teachers’ views on tutor feedback during teaching practice. European Journal of Teacher Education, 36(1), 55–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Connelly, F. M., & Clandinin, D. J. (1988). Teachers as curriculum planners. Toronto, ON: OISE Press.Google Scholar
  6. Crespo, S. (2000). Seeing more than right and wrong answers: Prospective teachers’ interpretations of students’ mathematical work. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 3, 155–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Crespo, S. (2002). Praising and correcting: Prospective teachers investigate their teacherly talk. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, 739–758.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Crespo, S. (2003). Learning to pose mathematical problems: Exploring changes in preservice teachers’ practices. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 52, 243–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. D’Ambrosio, B. (1998). Using research as a stimulus for learning. In A. Teppo (Ed.), Qualitative research methods in mathematics education (pp. 144–155). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  10. D’Ambrosio, B. (2004). Preparing teachers to teach mathematics within a constructivist framework: The importance of listening to children. In T. Watanabe & D. Thompson (Eds.), The work of mathematics teacher educators: Exchanging ideas for effective practice (Vol. 1, pp. 135–150). San Diego, CA: Association of Mathematics Teacher Educators.Google Scholar
  11. Evans, C. (2013). Making sense of assessment feedback in higher education. Review of Educational Research, 83(1), 70–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Goodell, J. (2006). Using critical incident reflections: A self-study as a mathematics teacher educator. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 9, 221–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Grossman, P., Compton, C., Igra, D., Ronfeldt, M., Shahan, E., & Williamson, P. (2009). Teaching practice: A cross-professional perspective. Teachers College Record, 111(9), 2055–2100.Google Scholar
  14. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hudson, P. (2016). Identifying mentors’ observations for providing feedback. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 22, 219–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jacobs, V., Lamb, L., & Philipp, R. (2010). Professional noticing of children’s mathematical thinking. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 41, 169–202.Google Scholar
  17. Kastberg, S., Sanchez, W., Tyminski, A., Lischka, A., & Lim, W. (2013). Exploring mathematics methods courses and impacts for prospective teachers. In M. Martinez & A. Superfine (Eds.), Proceedings of the 35th Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education [PME-NA] (pp. 1349-1357). Chicago, IL: University of Illinois at Chicago.Google Scholar
  18. Kazemi, E., Ghousseini, H., Cunard, A., & Turrou, A. (2016). Getting inside rehearsals: Insights from teacher educators to support work on complex practice. Journal of Teacher Education, 67(1), 18–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kitchen, J. (2008). The feedback loop in reflective practice: A teacher educator responds to reflective writing by preservice teachers. Excelsior: Leadership in Teaching and Learning, 2(2), 37–46.Google Scholar
  20. Kluger, A., & DeNissi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 254–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. LaBoskey, V. K. (2007). The methodology of self-study and its theoretical underpinnings. In J. Loughran, M. L. Hamilton, V. K. LaBoskey, & T. Russell (Eds.), International handbook of self-study of teaching and teacher education practices (pp. 817–869). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  22. Lampert, M., Franke, M., Kazemi, E., Ghousseini, H., Turrou, A., Beasley, H., et al. (2013). Keeping it complex: Using rehersals to support novice teacher learning of ambitious teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 64(3), 226–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Leatham, K., Peterson, B., Stockero, S., & Van Zoest, L. (2015). Conceptualizing mathematically significant pedagogical opportunities to build on student thinking. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 46(1), 88–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Loughran, J. (2007). Researching teacher education practices: Responding to the challenges, demands and expectations of self-study. Journal of Teacher Education, 58, 12–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Loughran, J., & Berry, A. (2005). Modeling by teacher educators. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 193–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Norton, A., & Kastberg, S. (2012). Learning to pose cognitively demanding tasks through letter writing. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 15, 109–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Philipp, R. A., Ambrose, R., Lamb, L. L. C., Sowder, J. T., Schappelle, B. P., Sowder, L., et al. (2007). Effects of early field experiences on the mathematical content knowledge and beliefs of prospective elementary school teachers: an experimental study. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 35(5), 438–476.Google Scholar
  28. Pittaway, S., & Dowden, T. (2014). Providing students with written feedback on their assessment: A collaborative self-study exploring the nexus of research and practice. Studying Teacher Education, 10, 197–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ritter, J., Powell, D., Hawley, T., & Blasik, J. (2011). Reifying the ontology of individualism at the expense of democracy: An examination of university supervisors’ written feedback to student teachers. Teacher Education Quarterly, 38(1), 29–46.Google Scholar
  30. Samaras, A., & Freese, A. (2009). Looking back and looking forward: An historical overview of the self-study school. In C. Lassonde, S. Galman, & C. Kosnik (Eds.), Self-Study research methodologies for teacher educators (pp. 3–20). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  31. Shute, V. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78, 153–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Simon, M. (2008). The challenge of mathematics teacher education in an era of mathematics education reform. In B. Jaworksi & T. Wood (Eds.), The international handbook of mathematics teacher education: The mathematics teacher educator as a developing professional (Vol. 4, pp. 17–29). Rotterdam:Sense.Google Scholar
  33. Simon, M., & Tzur, R. (1999). Explicating the teacher’s perspective from the researchers’ perspectives: Generating accounts of mathematics teachers’ practice. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30, 252–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Spear, M., Lock, N., & McCulloch, M. (1997). The written feedback mentors give to student teachers. Teacher Development, 1(2), 269–280.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13664539700200019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Steffe, L., & D’Ambrosio, B. (1995). Toward a working model of constructivist teaching: A reaction to Simon. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 26, 146–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Thompson, A., & Thompson, P. (1996). Talking about rates conceptually, part II: Mathematical knowledge for teaching. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27, 2–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Tunc-Pekkan, Z., & D’Ambrosio, B. (2008/2009). Mathematical communications: Elementary pre-service teachers’ e-mail exchanges with sixth grade students. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 10, 4–14.Google Scholar
  38. Ulrich, C., Tillema, E., Hackenberg, A., & Norton, A. (2014). Constructivist model building: Empirical examples from mathematics education. Constructivist Foundations, 9(3), 328–339.Google Scholar
  39. Vanassche, E., & Kelchtermans, G. (2015). The state of the art in self-study of teacher education practices: A systematic literature review. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 47, 508–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Whitehead, J. (1989). Creating a living educational theory from questions of the kind, ‘how do I improve my practice?’. Cambridge Journal of Education, 19, 41–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Wiliam, D. (2011). What is assessment for learning? Studies in Educational Evaluation, 37, 3–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Mathematics Education, College of EducationPurdue UniversityWest LafayetteUSA
  2. 2.Middle Tennessee State UniversityMurfreesboroUSA
  3. 3.Saginaw Valley State UniversityUniversity CenterUSA

Personalised recommendations