Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education

, Volume 16, Issue 2, pp 105–124 | Cite as

Effects of a coding intervention on what teachers learn to notice during whole-group discussion

Article

Abstract

This article examines how a coding scheme for mathematics classroom discussion that was created to highlight how teachers negotiate student responses during whole-class discussion around high-level, cognitively demanding tasks was used to help teachers shift what they notice when analyzing classroom discourse. Data from an intervention that trained teachers how to use the coding scheme and then provided them opportunities to use the scheme to code transcripts of classroom discussion are presented. Results suggest that teachers’ ability to notice interactions between teacher and students when analyzing classroom discussion (as opposed to focusing on one actor or the other) can be increased and that teachers can learn to identify specific discourse moves teachers use to negotiate student responses. However, teachers’ capacity to identify how students’ opportunities to learn are related to teacher discourse moves did not change as a result of the intervention. The article goes on to examine how discussion during the intervention itself may have contributed to what teachers learned to notice. This research contributes to the body of work on teachers’ noticing by examining the feasibility and efficacy of using transcripts and a coding scheme to foster teachers’ ability to notice how they can increase their students’ opportunities to learn through mathematics discourse.

Keywords

Mathematics discourse Patterns of interaction Classroom discussion Noticing Coding Teacher tools Toulmin 

References

  1. Ball, D. L. (2000). Bridging practices: Intertwining content and pedagogy in teaching and learning to teach. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(3), 241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ball, D. L. (2001). Teaching, with respect to mathematics and students. In T. Wood, B. Nelson & J. Warfield (Eds.), Beyond classical pedagogy: Teaching elementary school mathematics (pp. 11–22). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  3. Bellack, A. A., Kliebard, H. M., Hyman, R. T., & Smith, F. L. (1966). The language of the classroom. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  4. Chapin, S., O’Connor, C., & Anderson, N. (2003). Classroom discussions: Using math talk to help students learn. Sausalito, CA: Math Solutions.Google Scholar
  5. Christensen, L. (2007). Experimental methodology (10th ed.). Boston: Pearson.Google Scholar
  6. Dantonio, M., & Beisenherz, P. (2001). Learning to question, questioning to learn: Developing effective teacher questioning practices. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  7. Franke, M. L., Carpenter, T., Fennema, E., Ansell, E., & Behrend, J. (1998). Understanding teachers’ self-sustaining, generative change in the context of professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14(1), 67–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gee, J. P., & Green, J. L. (1998). Discourse analysis, learning, and social practice: A methodological study. Review of Research in Education, 23(1), 119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Goldsmith, L. T., & Schifter, D. (1997). Understanding teachers in transition: Characteristics of a model for the development of mathematics teaching. In E. Fennema & B. Nelson (Eds.), Mathematics teachers in transition (pp. 19–54). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  10. Goldstein, E. (2007). Sensation and perception. Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  11. Jacobs, J. K., & Morita, E. (2002). Japanese and American teachers’ evaluations of videotaped mathematics lessons. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 33(3), 154–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jacobs, J., Yoshida, M., Stigler, J., & Fernandez, C. (1997). Japanese and American teachers’ evaluations of mathematics lessons: A new technique for exploring beliefs. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 16(1), 7–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Lampert, M. (2001). Teaching problems and the problems of teaching. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Nelson, B. S. (1999). Building new knowledge by thinking: How administrators can learn what they need to know about mathematics education reform. Newton, MA: Education Development Center, Center for Development for Teaching.Google Scholar
  15. Palincsar, A. S. (1998). Social constructivist perspectives on teaching and learning. In J. Spence, J. Darley, & D. Foss (Eds.), Annual review of psychology (pp. 345–375). Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews.Google Scholar
  16. Peterson, B., & Leatham, K. (2009). Learning to use students’ mathematical thinking to orchestrate a class discussion. In L. Knott (Ed.), The role of mathematics discourse in producing leaders of discourse (pp. 99–128). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  17. Putnam, R. T., & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning? Educational Researcher, 29(1), 4–15.Google Scholar
  18. Rodgers, C. (2002). Defining reflection: Another look at John Dewey and reflective thinking. The Teachers College Record, 104(4), 842–866.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Sawyer, R. K. (2006). Analyzing collaborative discourse. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 187–204). Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1998). Toward a theory of teaching-in-context. Issues in Education, 4(1), 1–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Sherin, M., & van Es, E. (2005). Using video to support teachers’ ability to notice classroom interactions. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(3), 475–491.Google Scholar
  22. Smith, M., & Stein, M. K. (2011). 5 practices for orchestrating productive mathematics discussions. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  23. Star, J. R., & Strickland, S. K. (2008). Learning to observe: Using video to improve preservice mathematics teachers’ ability to notice. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 11(2), 107–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Stein, M. K., Engle, R. A., Smith, M. S., & Hughes, E. K. (2008). Orchestrating productive mathematical discussions: Five practices for helping teachers move beyond show and tell. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 10(4), 313–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Stein, M. K., & Smith, M. S. (1998). Mathematical tasks as a framework for reflection: From research to practice. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 3(4), 268–275.Google Scholar
  26. Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (1998). Teaching is a cultural activity. American Educator, 22(4), 4–11.Google Scholar
  27. Toulmin, S., Rieke, R., & Janik, A. (1984). An introduction to reasoning. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  28. van Es, E., & Sherin, M. (2008). Mathematics teachers’ “learning to notice” in the context of a video club. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 244–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.830 Learning Research and Development CenterUniversity of PittsburghPittsburghUSA
  2. 2.828 Learning Research and Development CenterUniversity of PittsburghPittsburghUSA

Personalised recommendations