Advertisement

It’s part of my life and the modelling process

  • Linda Galligan
  • Taryn AxelsenEmail author
  • Toni Pennicott
  • Ron Addie
  • Peter Galbraith
  • Geoff Woolcott
Article
  • 22 Downloads

Abstract

Mathematical modelling is increasingly becoming an integral component of mathematical curricular in primary and secondary schools throughout the world. However, in Australia modelling skills are currently rarely found in university teacher preparation courses. Limited experience with modelling processes, as well as a lack of confidence and personal efficacy in the field of mathematics, limits the ability for prospective teachers of mathematics to develop into effective high school educators and thus concomitantly adversely affects student learning outcomes. To address the problems related to the lack of experience that prospective teachers have with mathematical modelling and the associated lack of confidence and personal efficacy that can result, this paper presents a case study of a strategy—the enhancement, learning, reflection (ELR) process—designed to improve prospective teachers’ confidence and personal efficacy in teaching mathematics, with a focus on the modelling process as a teaching strategy.

Keywords

Mathematics education Mathematics modelling Prospective teacher education Prospective teacher confidence Prospective teacher personal efficacy 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was partially supported by the USQ Mathematics Enrichment program and was also supported by the Australian Government Department of Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education OLT (Office for Learning and Teaching) Award, Grant No. OLT: MS13-1367.

References

  1. Atlay, M. K., Ozdemir, E. Y., & Akar, S. S. (2014). Pre-service elementary mathematics teachers’ views on model eliciting activities. Procedia-Social and Behavioural Sciences, 116, 345–349.Google Scholar
  2. Axelsen, T., Galligan, L., & Woolcott, G. (2017). The modelling process and pre-service teacher confidence. Paper presented at the 40th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia: 40 years onWe are still learning!, Melbourne (3–6 July, 2017).Google Scholar
  3. Ball, D. L., Hill, H. C., & Bass, H. (2005). Knowing mathematics for teaching: who knows mathematics well enough to teach third grade, and how can we decide? American Educator, 29(3), 14–46.Google Scholar
  4. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action : a social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  5. Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. In V. S. Ramachaudran (Ed.), Encyclopedia of human behaviour (Vol. 4, pp. 71–81). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  6. Baumert, J., Kunter, M., Blum, W., Brunner, M., Voss, T., Jordan, A., et al. (2010). Teachers’ mathematical knowledge, cognitive activation in the classroom and student progress. American Educational Research Journal, 47(1), 133–180.Google Scholar
  7. Berry, A., Depaepe, F., & van Driel, J. (2016). Pedagogical content knowledge in teacher education. In J. Loughran & M. L. Hamilton (Eds.), International handbook of teacher education (Vol. 1, pp. 347–386). Singapore: Springer.Google Scholar
  8. Beswick, K. (2015). Inferring pre-service teachers’ beliefs from their commentary on knowledge items. In K. Beswick, T. Muir, & J. Fielding-Wells (Eds.), Proceedings of the 39th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 121–128). University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia: IGPME (International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education).Google Scholar
  9. Biembengut, M. S., & Hein, N. (2013). Mathematical modelling: Implications for teaching. In R. Lesh, P. Gailbraith, P. Haines, & A. Hurford (Eds.), Modelling students’ mathematical modelling competencies: International perspectives on the teaching and learning of mathematical modelling, ICTMA 13 (pp. 481–490). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  10. Blaikie, N. (2009). Designing social research: The logic of anticipation (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  11. Blum, W. (2015). Quality teaching of mathematical modelling: what do we know, what can we do? In S. J. Cho (Ed.), Proceedings of the 12th International Congress on Mathematical Education: Intellectual and attitudinal challenges (pp. 73–98). Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
  12. Blum, W., & Borromeo Ferri, R. (2009). Mathematical modelling: Can it be taught and learned? Journal of Mathematical Modelling and Application, 1(1), 45–58.Google Scholar
  13. Borromeo Ferri, R., & Blum, W. (2013). Insights into teachers’ unconscious behaviour in modelling contexts. In R. Lesh, P. Gailbraith, P. Haines, & A. Hurford (Eds.), Modelling students’ mathematical modelling competencies: International perspectives on the teaching and learning of mathematical modelling, ICTMA 13 (pp. 423–432). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  14. Burkhardt, H. (2006). Modelling in mathematics classrooms: Reflections on past developments and the future. ZDM Mathematics Education, 38(2), 178–195.Google Scholar
  15. Bursal, M., & Paznokas, L. (2006). Mathematics anxiety and pre-service elementary teachers’ confidence to teach mathematics and science. School Science and Mathematics, 106(4), 173–180.Google Scholar
  16. Butterfield, B., & Chinnappan, M. (2010). Walking the talk: Translation of mathematical content knowledge to practice. In L. Sparrow, B. Kissane, & C. Hurst (Eds.), Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Conference of the Mathematical Education Research Group of Australasia: Shaping the Future of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 109-116). Fremantle, WA: MERGA (Mathematical Education Research Group of Australasia).Google Scholar
  17. Crawford, J. R., & Henry, J. D. (2004). The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS): Construct validity, measurement properties and normative data in a large non-clinical sample. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 43(3), 245–265.Google Scholar
  18. De Mauro, A. A., & Jennings, P. A. (2016). Pre-service teachers’ efficacy beliefs and emotional states. Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, 21(1), 119–132.Google Scholar
  19. de Winter, J. C. (2013). Using the student’s t-test with extremely small sample sizes. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 18(10), 1–12.Google Scholar
  20. Delice, A., & Kertil, M. (2015). Investigating the representational fluency of pre-service mathematics teachers in a modelling process. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13(3), 631–656.Google Scholar
  21. Denzin, N. K. (1989). The sociological interview. In N. K. Denzin (Ed.), The research act: a theoretical introduction to sociological methods (3rd ed., pp. 102–120). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  22. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2013). Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  23. Fontana, A., & Frey, J. H. (1994). Interviewing: the art of science. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 36–376). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  24. Garbett, D. (2003). Science education in early childhood teacher education: Putting forward a case to enhance student teachers’ confidence and competence. Research in Science Education, 33(4), 467–481.Google Scholar
  25. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
  26. Goldstein, E. B. (2007). Sensation and perception (7th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  27. Hamlett, B. (2009). Supporting pre-service primary teachers to improve their mathematics content knowledge. eCulture, 2, 76–82.Google Scholar
  28. Herrington, J., Oliver, R., & Reeves, T. (2003). Patterns of engagement in authentic online learning environments. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 19(1), 59–71.Google Scholar
  29. Hine, G. S. C. (2015). Strengthening pre-service teachers’ mathematical content knowledge. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 12(4), 5.Google Scholar
  30. Ho, A., Watkins, D., & Kelly, M. (2001). The conceptual change approach to improving teaching and learning: An evaluation of a Hong Kong staff development programme. Higher Education, 42(2), 143–169.Google Scholar
  31. Holsti, O. R. (1969). Content analysis for the social sciences & humanities. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  32. Kennedy, J., Lyons, T., & Quinn, F. (2014). The continuing decline of science and mathematics enrolments in Australian high schools. Teaching Science, 60(2), 34–46.Google Scholar
  33. Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J., & Findell, B. (Eds.). (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. Washington DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  34. Kuntze, S., Siller, H. S., & Vogl, C. (2013). Teachers’ self-perceptions of their pedagogical content knowledge related to modelling: An empirical study with Austrian teachers. In G. Stillman, G. Kaiser, W. Blum, & J. Brown (Eds.), Teaching mathematical modelling: Connecting to research and practice (pp. 317–326). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  35. Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.Google Scholar
  36. Laursen, S. L., Hassi, M. L., & Hough, S. (2016). Implementation & outcomes of inquiry-based learning in mathematics content courses for pre-service teachers. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science & Technology, 47(2), 256–275.Google Scholar
  37. Livy, S. M., Vale, C., & Herbert, S. (2016). Developing primary pre-service teachers’ mathematical content knowledge during practicum teaching. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 41(2), 152–173.Google Scholar
  38. Lowrie, T., & Jorgensen, R. (2015). Pre-service teachers’ mathematics content knowledge: Implications for how mathematics is taught in higher education. Teaching Mathematics and its Applications Advance Access: An International Journal of the IMA, 35(4), 202–215.Google Scholar
  39. Maass, K. (2010). Modelling in class and the development of beliefs about the usefulness of mathematics. In R. Lesh, P. Gailbraith, P. Haines, & A. Hurford (Eds.), Modelling Students’ Mathematical Modelling Competencies, ICTMA 13 (pp. 409–420). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  40. Maass, K., & Artigue, M. (2013). Implementation of inquiry-based learning in day-to-day teaching: A synthesis. ZDM Mathematics Education, 45(6), 779–795.Google Scholar
  41. Marshman M, & Porter G (2013). Pre-service teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge: Implications for teaching. In V Steinle, L Ball, & C Bardini (Eds.), Proceedings of the 36th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australia (pp. 474–481). Melbourne: MERGA (Mathematics Education Research Group of Australia Inc.).Google Scholar
  42. Martin, D. A., Grimbeek, P., & Jamieson-Proctor, R. (2013). Measuring problem-based learning’s impact on pre-service teachers’ mathematics pedagogical content knowledge. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Higher Education Teaching And Learning Conference (IEAA 2013): Engaging Innovative Pedagogical Practice and Research in Higher Education. Sarawak, Malaysia: International Education Association of Australia (IEAA).Google Scholar
  43. Matthews, M., Rech, J., & Grandgenett, N. (2010). The impact of content courses on pre-service elementary teachers’ mathematical content knowledge. Issues in the Undergraduate Mathematics Preparation of School Teachers, 1(Dec), 1–11.Google Scholar
  44. McDonald, J. H. (2014). Handbook of biological statistics (3rd ed.). Baltimore: Sparky House Publishing.Google Scholar
  45. McGregor, D. (2016). Exploring the impact of inquiry learning on students’ beliefs and attitudes towards mathematics. (Ph.D.), The University of Queensland, St Lucia.Google Scholar
  46. Meiners, J., Schiller, W., & Orchard, J. (2004). Children and the arts: Developing educational partnerships between preschool, school and tertiary sectors. Journal of In-Service Education, 30(3), 463–476.Google Scholar
  47. Merriam, S. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.Google Scholar
  48. Mewborn, D. (2001). Teachers content knowledge, teacher education, and their effects on the preparation of elementary teachers. United States Mathematics Education, 3(1), 28–36.Google Scholar
  49. Mitton Kukner, J., & Murray Ore, A. (2015). Inquiring into pre-service content area: Teachers’ development of literacy practices and pedagogical content knowledge. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 40(5), 41–60.Google Scholar
  50. Morgan, D. L. (1997). Focus groups as qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks; London: SAGE.Google Scholar
  51. Murphy, C., Neil, P., & Beggs, J. (2007). Primary science teacher confidence revisited: Ten years on. Educational Research, 49(4), 415–430.Google Scholar
  52. Ng, K. E. (2013). Teacher readiness in mathematical modelling: Are there differences between pre-service and in-service teachers? In G. Stillman, G. Kaiser, W. Blum, & J. Brown (Eds.), Teaching mathematical modelling: Connecting to research and practice. International perspectives on the teaching and learning of mathematical modelling (pp. 339–348). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  53. Office of the Chief Scientist. (2012). Mathematics, engineering & science in the national interest. Canberra: Australian Government, Office of the Chief Scientist. Retrieved from http://www.chiefscientist.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/Office-of-the-Chief-Scientist-MES-Report-8-May-2012.pdf.
  54. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  55. Pereira de Oliveira, A. M., & Barbosa, J. C. (2013). Mathematical modelling and the teachers’ tensions. In R. Lesh, P. Gailbraith, P. Haines, & A. Hurford (Eds.), Modelling students’ mathematical modelling competencies: International perspectives on the teaching and learning of mathematical modelling, ICTMA 13 (pp. 511–571). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  56. Perrenet, J., & Adan, I. (2010). The academic merits of modelling in higher mathematics education: A case study. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 22(2), 121–140.Google Scholar
  57. Pollak, H. O. (2015). The place of mathematical modelling in the system of mathematics education: Perspective and prospect. In G. Stillman, W. Blum, & M. S. Biembengut (Eds.), Mathematical Modelling in Education Research and Practice: Cultural, Social and Cognitive Influences (pp. 265–276). Switzerland: Springer.Google Scholar
  58. Posavac, E. J. (2011). Program evaluation: Methods and case studies (8th ed.). Boston: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  59. Postareff, L., & Lindblom-Ylänne, S. (2011). Emotions and confidence within teaching in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 36(7), 799–813.Google Scholar
  60. Postareff, L., Lindblom-Ylänne, S., & Nevgi, A. (2007). The effect of pedagogical training on teaching in higher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(5), 557–571.Google Scholar
  61. Potter, W. J., & Levine-Donnerstein, D. (1999). Rethinking validity and reliability in content analysis. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 27(3), 258–284.Google Scholar
  62. Ramey-Gassert, L., & Shroyer, G. (1992). Enhancing science teaching self-efficacy in pre-service elementary teachers. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 4(1), 26–34.Google Scholar
  63. Robbins, S. P., Judge, T. A., Millett, B., & Boyle, M. (2014). Organisational behaviour (7th ed.). Frenchs Forest: Pearson.Google Scholar
  64. Russell-Bowie, D. E. (2012). Developing pre-service primary teachers’ confidence and competence in arts education using principles of authentic learning. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 37(1), 60–74.Google Scholar
  65. Shilling, L. N. (2010). An exploration of pre-service elementary teachers’ mathematical beliefs. (Ph.D.), University of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Retrieved from http://d-scholarship.pitt.edu/8451/1/ETD_LeahNShilling.pdf. Accessed Nov 2017.
  66. Soon, T. L., & Cheng, A. K. (2013). Pre-service secondary school teachers’ knowledge in mathematical modelling: A case study. In G. Stillman, G. Kaiser, W. Blum, & J. Brown (Eds.), Teaching mathematical modelling: connecting to research and practice (pp. 373–383). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  67. Stillman, G., Galbraith, P., Brown, J., & Edwards, I. (2007). A framework for success in implementing mathematical modelling in the secondary classroom. Mathematics: Essential research, essential practice, 2, 688–697.Google Scholar
  68. Streb, K. (2010). Exploratory case study. In A. J. Mills, G. Durepos, & E. Wiebe (Eds.), Encyclopedia of case study research (pp. 373–374). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
  69. Thomas, K., & Hart, J. (2013). Pre-service teachers’ perceptions of model eliciting activities. In R. Lesh, P. Gailbraith, P. Haines, & A. Hurford (Eds.), Modelling students’ mathematical modelling competencies: International perspectives on the teaching and learning of mathematical modelling, ICTMA 13 (pp. 531–538). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  70. Tobin, K., & Ritchie, S. M. (2012). Multi-method, multi-theoretical, multi-level research in learning sciences. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 21(1), 117–129.Google Scholar
  71. Trigwell, K. (2012). Relations between teachers’ emotions in teaching and their approaches to teaching in higher education. Instructional Science, 40(3), 607–621.Google Scholar
  72. Trigwell, K., Ellis, R. A., & Han, F. (2011). Relations between students’ approaches to learning, experienced emotions and outcomes of learning. Studies in Higher Education, 37(7), 811–824.Google Scholar
  73. Tsang, E. W. (2014). Generalizing from research findings: The merits of case studies references. International Journal of Malmanagement Reviews, 16(4), 369–383.Google Scholar
  74. Tschannen-Moran, M., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(7), 782–805.Google Scholar
  75. Victorian Auditor-General. (2012). Science and mathematics participation rates and initiatives. Melbourne: Victorian Auditor-General’s Office (VAGO). Retrieved from http://www.audit.vic.gov.au/publications/20120606-Science-and-Maths/20120606-Science-and-Maths.pdf. Accessed Nov 2017.
  76. Villarreal, M. E., Esteley, C. B., & Smith, S. (2015). Pre-service mathematics teachers’ experiences in modelling projects from a socio-critical modelling perspective. In G. Stillman, W. Blum, & M. S. Biembengut (Eds.), Mathematical modelling in education research and practice: Cultural, social and cognitive influences (pp. 567–578). Switzerland: Springer.Google Scholar
  77. Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegan, A. (1985). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 1063–1070.Google Scholar
  78. Woolcott, G., Whannell, R., Pfeiffer, L., Yeigh, T., Donnelly, J., & Scott, A. (2017). Enhancing science and mathematics teacher education: Evaluating an enhancement module for science pre-service teachers. International Journal of Learning and Change, 9(2), 131–144.Google Scholar
  79. Yeigh, T., Woolcott, G., Donnelly, J., Whannell, R., Snow, M., & Scott, A. (2016). Emotional literacy and pedagogical confidence in pre-service science and mathematics teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 41(6), 107–121.Google Scholar
  80. Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, London: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
  81. Yin, R. K. (2012). Applications of case study research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  82. Yu, S. Y., & Chang, C. K. (2011). What did Taiwan mathematics teachers think of model-eliciting activities and modelling teaching? In G. Kaiser, W. Blum, R. Borromeo Ferri, & G. Stillman (Eds.), Trends in teaching and learning of mathematical modelling, ICTMA 14 (Vol. 1, pp. 147–156). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  83. Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (2001). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: theoretical perspectives. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Health, Engineering and SciencesUniversity of Southern QueenslandToowoombaAustralia
  2. 2.School of Agricultural, Computational and Environmental Sciences, Toowoomba CampusUniversity of Southern QueenslandToowoombaAustralia
  3. 3.School of Agricultural, Computational and Environmental Sciences, Springfield CampusUniversity of Southern QueenslandSpringfield CentralAustralia
  4. 4.Springfield Central State High SchoolSpringfield CentralAustralia
  5. 5.School of EducationThe University of Queensland, St Lucia CampusSt LuciaAustralia
  6. 6.School of Education, Lismore CampusSouthern Cross UniversityLismoreAustralia

Personalised recommendations