Advertisement

Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education

, Volume 18, Issue 2, pp 141–172 | Cite as

Developing prospective teachers’ conceptions with well-designed tasks: explaining successes and analyzing conceptual difficulties

  • Eva Thanheiser
Article

Abstract

Several researchers have documented prospective teachers’ (PTs’) conceptions of various mathematical topics. However, less is known about how PTs’ conceptions develop. To address this gap, I designed two tasks with the goals of addressing the PTs’ initial conceptions of multidigit whole numbers and helping them develop more sophisticated ones. I examined how PTs’ conceptions changed while working on these tasks in two settings (a teaching experiment with 6 PTs and a mathematics methods course with 33 PTs) and modified the tasks on the basis of the results. Consistent with prior findings, this study showed that PTs entered with limited conceptions. This study showed further that (a) well-designed tasks (addressing the PTs’ incoming conceptions as well as focusing on the desired conceptions) can help PTs develop content knowledge, (b) conceptual difficulties may persist even with well-designed tasks, and (c) artifacts of children’s mathematical thinking can be used to develop mathematical content knowledge. Instructional implications are discussed.

Keywords

Prospective teacher Teacher education Content knowledge Whole number Place value Task design 

Notes

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank my mentor and advisor Randy Philipp for his continued interest in my work and for the walks during which we brainstorm ideas. I would also like to thank Bonnie Schappelle, who has also continuously supported my work by sharing my interest and giving me feedback. In addition, I would like to thank Signe Kastberg, who helped with the enactment of the teaching experiment, as well as Briana Mills, Krista Stand, and Jodi Fasteen, who work(ed) with me tirelessly to understand prospective teachers better.

References

  1. Ambrose, R. (1998). A classroom study of invented subtraction strategies. Doctoral dissertation, 1998. Dissertation Abstracts International, 59(05), 1497.Google Scholar
  2. Ball, D. (1988a). Knowledge and reasoning in mathematical pedagogy: Examining what prospective teachers bring to teacher education (doctoral dissertation, 1988). 50 doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
  3. Ball, D. (1988b). The subject-matter preparation of prospective mathematics teachers: Challenging the myths. Lansing: Michigan State University.Google Scholar
  4. Ball, D. L. (1991). Research on teaching mathematics: Making subject-matter knowledge part of the equation. In J. Brophy (Ed.), Advances in research on teaching: Teachers’ knowledge of subject matter as it relates to their teaching practice (Vol. 2, pp. 1–48). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  5. Ball, D., & Bass, H. (2000). Interweaving content and pedagogy in teaching and learning to teach: Knowing and using mathematics. In J. Boaler (Ed.), Multiple perspectives on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 83–104). Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing.Google Scholar
  6. Bennett, A. B., & Nelson, L. T. (2007). Mathematics for elementary teachers: A conceptual approach. Boston, MA: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  7. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (1999). How people learn. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  8. Brown, S., Cooney, T., & Jones, D. (1990). Mathematics teacher education. In W. Houston (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 87–109). New York, NY: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  9. Cobb, P., Wood, T., Yackel, E., & McNeal, B. (1992). Characteristics of classroom mathematics traditions: An interactional analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 29(3), 573–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Comiti, C., & Ball, D. (1996). Preparing teachers to teach mathematics: A comparative perspective. In A. Bishop, K. Clements, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick, & C. Laborde (Eds.), International handbook of mathematics education (pp. 1123–1153). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  11. Conference Board of Mathematical Sciences. (2001). The mathematical education of teachers. Washington, DC: Mathematical Association of America.Google Scholar
  12. Ell, F., Hill, M., & Grudnoff, L. (2012). Finding out more about teacher candidates’ prior knowledge: Implications for teacher educators. [Article]. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 40(1), 55–65. doi: 10.1080/1359866x.2011.643760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Freudenthal, H. (1973). Mathematics as an educational task. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
  14. Fuson, K. C. (1990). A forum for researchers: Issues in place-value and multidigit addition and subtraction learning and teaching. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 21, 273–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fuson, K. C., Wearne, D., Hiebert, J. C., Murray, H. G., Human, P. G., Olivier, A. I., et al. (1997). Children’s conceptual structures for multidigit numbers and methods of multidigit addition and subtraction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28, 130–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Graeber, A. O., Tirosh, D., & Glover, R. (1989). Preservice teachers’ misconceptions in solving verbal problems in multiplication and division. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20(1), 95–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Harkness, S. S., & Thomas, J. (2008). Reflections on “multiplication as original sin”: The implications of using a case to help preservice teachers understand invented algorithms. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 27(2), 128–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hiebert, J. (1997). Making sense: Teaching and learning mathematics with understanding. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  19. Hiebert, J., & Lefevre, P. (1986). Conceptual and procedural knowledge in mathematics: An introductory analysis. In J. Hiebert (Ed.), Conceptual and procedural knowledge: The case of mathematics (pp. 1–27). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  20. Hiebert, J., & Morris, A. K. (2012). Teaching, rather than teachers, as a path toward improving classroom instruction. Journal of Teacher Education, 63(2), 92–102.Google Scholar
  21. Hiebert, J., & Wearne, D. (1996). Instruction, understanding, and skill in multidigit addition and subtraction. Cognition and Instruction, 14, 251–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kamii, C. (1986). Place value: An explanation of its difficulty and educational implications for the primary grades. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 1(2), 75–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kamii, C. (1994). Young children continue to reinvent arithmetic—3rd-grade-implications of Piaget’s theory. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Kamii, C., & Dominick, A. (1998). The harmful effects of algorithms in grades 1–4. In L. J. Morrow & M. J. Kenney (Eds.), The teaching and learning of algorithms in school mathematics. 1998 yearbook of the national council of teachers of mathematics (pp. 130–140). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  25. Kamii, C., Lewis, B. A., & Livingston, S. J. (1993). Primary arithmetic: Children inventing their own procedures. Arithmetic Teacher, 41, 200–203.Google Scholar
  26. Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J., & Findell, B. (Eds.). (2001). Adding it up. Helping children learn mathematics. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  27. Liljedahl, P., Chernoff, E., & Zazkis, R. (2007). Interweaving mathematics and pedagogy in task design: A tale of one task. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 10(4–6), 239–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lo, J.-J., Grant, T. J., & Flowers, J. (2008). Challenges in deepening prospective teachers’ understanding of multiplication through justification. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 11(1), 5–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ma, L. (1999). Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics: Teachers’ understanding of fundamental mathematics in china and the United States. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  30. McClain, K. (2003). Supporting preservice teachers’ understanding of place value and multidigit arithmetic. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 5(4), 281–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Murphy, C. (2011). Comparing the use of the empty number line in england and the Netherlands. British Educational Research Journal, 37(1), 147–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. National Governors Association, & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common core standards initiative. Retrieved February, 10, 2012, from http://www.corestandards.org/.
  33. Nugent, P. M. (2007). Lattice multiplication in a preservice classroom. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 13(2), 110–113.Google Scholar
  34. Overbay, S. R., & Brod, M. J. (2007). Magic with mayan math. Teaching Mathematics in the Middle School, 12, 340–347.Google Scholar
  35. Pesek, D. D., & Kirshner, D. (2000). Interference of instrumental instruction in subsequent relational learning. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31, 524–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Philipp, R., Schappelle, B., Siegfried, J., Jacobs, V., & Lamb, L. (2008). The effects of professional development on the mathematical content knowledge of k-3 teachers. NY: Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Reserach Association New York.Google Scholar
  37. San Diego State Foundation, Philipp, R., Cabral, C., & Schappelle, B. (2012). Imap: Integrating mathematics and pedagogy: Searchable collection of children’s mathematical thinking video clips and facilitator’s guide. Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  38. Simon, M. (1993). Prospective elementary teachers’ knowledge of division. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 24(3), 233–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Simon, M. (2006). Key developmental understandings in mathematics: A direction for investigating and establishing learning goals. Mathematical Thinking & Learning, 8(4), 359–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Simon, M., & Blume, G. W. (1992). Mathematization as a component of the concept of ratio-as-measure: A study of prospective elementary teachers. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA. http://stats.lib.pdx.edu/proxy.php?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=ED349175&site=ehost-live.
  41. Smith, M. S., & Stein, M. K. (1998). Selecting and creating mathematical tasks: From research to practice. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 3(5), 344–350.Google Scholar
  42. Southwell, B., & Penglase, M. (2005). Mathematical knowledge of pre-service primary teachers. In H. L. Chick & J. L. Vincent (Eds.), Proceedings of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education (Vol. 4, pp. 209–216). Melbourne, Australia: University of Melbourne.Google Scholar
  43. Sowder, J., & Schappelle, B. (1994). Research into practice: Number sense-making. Arithmetic Teacher, 41, 342–345.Google Scholar
  44. Steffe, L. P., & Cobb, P. (1988). Construction of arithmetical meanings and strategies. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Steffe, L., & Thompson, P. W. (2000). Teaching experiment methodology: Underlying principles and essential elements. In A. E. Kelly & R. A. Lesh (Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 267–306). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  46. Stein, M. K., & Lane, S. (1996). Instructional tasks and the development of student capacity to think and reason: An analysis of the relationship between teaching and learning in a reform mathematics project. Educational Reseach and Evaluation, 2, 50–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Thanheiser, E. (2009a). Developing preservice teachers’ conceptions of numbers in our base-ten numeration system. San Diego, CA: Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Reserach Association.Google Scholar
  48. Thanheiser, E. (2009b). Preservice elementary school teachers’ conceptions of multidigit whole numbers. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 40(3), 251–281.Google Scholar
  49. Thanheiser, E. (2010). Investigating further preservice teachers’ conceptions of multidigit whole numbers: Refining a framework. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 75(3), 241–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Thanheiser, E. (2012). Understanding multidigit whole numbers: The role of knowledge pieces, connections, and context in understanding regrouping 3 + digit numbers. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 31(2), 220–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Thanheiser, E., & Philipp, R. (2012). Using interviews with preservice teachers as a tool to motivate them to learn mathematics. Paper presented at the AMTE.Google Scholar
  52. Thanheiser, E., Browning, C. A., Lo, J. J., Kastberg, S., & Edson, A. J. (2013a). Building a knowledge base: Understanding prospective elementary school teachers' mathematical content knowledge. International Journal for Mathematics Teaching and Learning. Retrieved from http://www.cimt.plymouth.ac.uk/journal/thanheiser.pdf.
  53. Thanheiser, E., Philipp, R., Fasteen, J., Strand, K., & Mills, B. (2013b). Preservice-teacher interviews: A tool for motivating mathematics learning. Mathematics Teacher Educator, 1(2), 137–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Thanheiser, E., & Rhoads, K. (2009). Exploring preservice teachers’ conceptions of numbers via the Mayan number system. In S. Swars, D. Stinson, & S. Lemons-Smith (Eds.), North American chapter of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education (Vol. 5, pp. 1220–1227). Atlanta, GA: ERIC Clearinghouse for Science, Mathematics, and Environmental Education.Google Scholar
  55. Tirosh, D., & Graeber, A. O. (1989). Preservice elementary teachers’ explicit beliefs about multiplication and division. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 20(1), 79–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Valeras, M., & Becker, J. (1997). Children’s developing understanding of place value: Semiotic aspects. Cognition and Instruction, 15, 265–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Verschaffel, L., Greer, B., & De Corte, E. (2007). Whole number concepts and operations. In F. K. Lester & M. National Council of Teachers (Eds.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning: A project of the national council of teachers of mathematics (pp. 577–628). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Pub.Google Scholar
  58. Watson, A., & Mason, J. (2007). Taken-as-shared: A review of common assumptions about mathematical tasks in teacher education. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 10(4–6), 205–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Weber, K. (2001). Student difficulties in constructing proofs: The need for strategic knowledge. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 48, 101–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Yackel, E., Underwood, D., & Elias, N. (2007). Mathematical tasks designed to foster a reconceptualized view of early arithmetic. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 10(4–6), 351–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Zaslavsky, O. (2007). Mathematics-related tasks, teacher education, and teacher educators: The dynamics associated with tasks in mathematics teacher education. Journal for Mathematics Teacher Education, 10(4–6), 433–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Zazkis, R., & Campbell, S. (1996). Divisibility and multiplicative structure of natural numbers: Preservice teachers’ understanding. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27, 540–563.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Portland State UniversityPortlandUSA

Personalised recommendations