Advertisement

Educating New Mathematics Teachers: Integrating Theory and Practice, and the Roles of Practising Teachers

  • Barbara Jaworski
  • Uwe Gellert
Chapter
Part of the Springer International Handbooks of Education book series (SIHE, volume 10)

Abstract

This chapter addresses issues of integration of theory and practice in the education of new mathematics teachers and tries to achieve an appropriate blend of theory and practice in its approach. Thus, it begins with an episode from practice, proposes a set of theoretical models of ‘integration’, situates these models in examples from teacher education around the world and follows with a discussion of theoretical issues and the associated literature. A case study from a current programme of initial teacher education in the UK follows, where issues of integration are re-addressed from a practical perspective. We end with a short review of the status quo as we see it currently in terms of relationships between those involved in the educational process.

Keywords

Teacher Education Mathematics Teaching Teaching Practice Mathematics Teacher Student Teacher 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Artzt, A. F. (1999). A structure to enable preservice teachers of mathematics to reflect on their teaching. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 2(2), 143–166.Google Scholar
  2. Askew, M., Brown, M., Rhodes, V., Johnson, D., & Wiliam, D. (1997). Effective teachers of numeracy. London: King’s College.Google Scholar
  3. Aubrey, C. (1997). Mathematics teaching in the early years: An Investigation of teachers’ subject knowledge. London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  4. Barnett, C. S. (1998). Mathematics case methods project. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 1(3), 349–356.Google Scholar
  5. Bauer, K.-O., & Rolff, H.-G. (1978). Vorarbeiten zu einer theorie der schulentwicklung [Towards a theory of school development]. In K.-O. Bauer & H.-G Rolff (Eds.), Innovation und schulent- wicklung [Innovation and school development] (pp. 219–266). Weinheim: Beltz.Google Scholar
  6. Bishop, A. J. (1988). Mathematical enculturation: A cultural perspective on mathematical education. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  7. Bobis, J., & Cusworth, R. (1995). Attitudinal shifts towards mathematics of preservice teachers. In B. Atweh & S. Flavel (Eds.), Proceedings of the 18th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp.109–114). Darwin: Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia.Google Scholar
  8. Brousseau, G. (1986). Fondements et méthodes de la didactique des mathématiques. Recherches en Didactique des Mathématiques, 7(2), 33–115.Google Scholar
  9. Brown, S., & Mclntyre, D. (1993). Making sense of teaching. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Burn, K., Hagger, H., Mutton, T., & Everton, T. (2000). Beyond concerns with self: The sophisticated thinking of beginning student teachers. Journal of Education for Teaching, 26(3), 259–278.Google Scholar
  11. Calderhead, J., & Shorrock, S. B. (1997). Understanding teacher education: Case studies in the professional development of beginning teachers. London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  12. Clarke, B, Clarke, D., & Sullivan, P. (1996). The mathematics teacher and curriculum development. In A. J. Bishop, K. Clements, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick & C. Laborde (Eds.), International handbook of mathematics education (pp.1207–1234). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  13. Clarke, D. (2000). Guest editorial: Time to reflect. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 3(3), 201–203.Google Scholar
  14. Cooney, T. J. (1996). Conceptualizing the professional development of teachers. In C. Alsina, J. M. Alvarez, B. Hodgson, C. Laborde & A. Pérez (Eds.), Selected lectures, 8th International Congress on Mathematical Education (pp. 101–117) Sevilla, Spain: SAEM Thales.Google Scholar
  15. Cooney, T. J., & Shealy, B. (1997). On understanding the structure of teachers’ beliefs and their relationship to change. In E. Fennema & B. N. Nelson (Eds.), Mathematics teachers in transition (pp. 87–110). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  16. Cooney, T. J., Shealy, B. E., & Arvold, B. (1998). Conceptualizing belief structures of pre-service secondary mathematics teachers. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 29(3), 306–333.Google Scholar
  17. Davis, B. (1999). Basic irony: Examining the foundations of school mathematics with preservice teachers. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 2(1), 25–48.Google Scholar
  18. Dawson, A. J. (1999). The enactive perspective on teacher development: A path laid while walking. In B. Jaworski, T. Wood & A. J. Dawson (Eds.), Mathematics teacher education: Critical international perspectives. London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  19. Dolk, M., Faes, W., Goffree, F., Hermsen, H., & Oonk, W. (1996). A multimedia interactive learning environment for (future) primary school teachers with content for primary mathematics teachers education programs. Utrecht: Freudenthal Instituut/NVORWO.Google Scholar
  20. Eraut, M. (1995). Schön shock: A case for refraining reflection-in-action? Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 1(1), 9–22.Google Scholar
  21. Even, R. (1999). The development of teacher leaders and inservice teacher educators. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 2, 3–24.Google Scholar
  22. Even, R., & Tirosh, D. (1995). Subject-matter knowledge and knowledge about students as sources of teacher presentations and subject matter. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 29, 1–20.Google Scholar
  23. Fennema, E., Sowder, J., & Carpenter, T. (1999). Creating classrooms that promote understanding. In E. Fennema & T. Romberg (Eds.), Mathematics classrooms that promote understanding (pp. 185–199). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  24. Freudenthal, H. (1991). Revisiting mathematics education: China lectures. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  25. Frykholm, J. A. (1999). The impact of reform: Challenges for mathematics teacher preparation. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 2(1), 79–105.Google Scholar
  26. Gellert, U. (2000). Mathematics instruction in safe space: Prospective elementary teachers’ views of mathematics education. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 3(3), 251–270.Google Scholar
  27. Gellert, U., Jablonka, E., & Keitel, C. (2001). Mathematical literacy and common sense in mathematics education. In B. Atweh, H. Forgasz & B. Nebres (Eds.), Sociocultural research on mathematics education: An international perspective (pp. 57–73). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  28. Giacquinta, J. B. (1998). Seduced and abandoned: Some lasting conclusions about planned change from the Cambire school study. In A. Hargreaves, A. Lieberman, M. Fullan & D. Hopkins (Eds.), International handbook of educational change (pp. 163–180). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  29. Goffree, F., & Oonk, W. (1999). Educating primary school mathematics teachers in the Netherlands: Back to the classroom. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 2(2), 207–214.Google Scholar
  30. Goulding, M., & Suggate, J. (2001). Opening a can of worms: Investigating primary teachers’ subject knowledge in mathematics. Mathematics Education Review, 13,41–54.Google Scholar
  31. Griffin, P. (1988). Preparing to teach ratio. Project Mathematics Update, PM753B. Milton Keynes, UK: The Open University.Google Scholar
  32. Gutiérrez, A., & Jaime, A. (1999, Preservice primary teachers’ understanding of the concept of altitude of a triangle. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 2(3), 253–275.Google Scholar
  33. Haggarty, L. (1995). New ideas for teacher education: A mathematics framework. London: Cassell.Google Scholar
  34. HMI (1982). The new teacher in school. London: HMSO.Google Scholar
  35. Howson, A. G., & Wilson, B. J. 1986). School mathematics in the 1990s. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Jaworski, B. (1998). Mathematics teacher research: Process, practice and the development of teaching. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 1(1), 3–31.Google Scholar
  37. Jaworski, B. (2001). Developing mathematics teaching: Teachers, teacher-educators and researchers as co-learners. In F-L Lin & T. J. Cooney (Eds.), Making sense of mathematics teacher education. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  38. Jaworski, B., & Watson, A. (Eds.) (1994a). Mentoring in mathematics teaching. London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  39. Jaworski, B., & Watson, A. (1994b). Mentoring, co-mentoring and the inner mentor. In B. Jaworski & A. Watson (Eds.), Mentoring in mathematics teaching. London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  40. Jaworski, B., & Watson, A. (2002). PGCE Mathematics: Mathematics course handbook. Oxford: University of Oxford Department of Educational Studies.Google Scholar
  41. Keitel, C. (1992). The education of teachers of mathematics: An overview. Zentralblatt für Didaktik der Mathematik, 24(1), 265-273.Google Scholar
  42. Keitel, C, & Hopmann, S. (1995). Editorial. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 27(1), 1-2.Google Scholar
  43. Keitel, C, & Kilpatrick, J. (1999). Rationality and irrationality of international comparative studies. In G. Kaiser, I. Huntley & E. Luna (Eds.), International comparative studies in mathematics education (pp. 241-257). London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  44. Klafki, W. (1995a). Didactic analysis as the core of preparation of instruction. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 27(1), 13-30.Google Scholar
  45. Klafki, W. (1995b). On the problem of teaching and learning contents from the standpoint of critical-constructive didaktik. In S. Hopmann & K. Riquarts (Eds.), Didaktik and/or curriculum (pp. 187-200). Kiel: Institute für die Pädagogik der Naturwissenschaften.Google Scholar
  46. Krainer, K., & Posch, P. (Eds.) (1996). Lehrerfortbildung zwischen prozessen und produkten [‘Teacher inservice education between processes and products’, reviewed by A. Peter, in Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education 1(1), 113-116]. Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt.Google Scholar
  47. Krummheuer, G. (1999). Die analyse von unterrichtsepisoden im rahmen von grundschullehrerausbildung’ [The analysis of classroom episodes in the frame of primary teacher education’]. In F. Ohlhaver & A. Wernet (Eds.), Schulforschung - Fallanalyse - Lehrerbildung [‘Research on schools - Case method - Teacher education’] (pp. 99-120). Opladen: Leske + Budrich.Google Scholar
  48. Krummheuer, G. (2000). Mathematics learning in narrative classroom cultures: Studies of argumentation in primary mathematics education. For the Learning of Mathematics, 20(1), 22-32.Google Scholar
  49. Lampert, M., & Ball, D. L. (1998). Teaching, multimedia and mathematics: Investigations of real practice. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  50. Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice: Mind, mathematics and culture in everyday life. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Lave, J. (1997). The culture of acquisition and the practice of understanding. In D. Kirshner & J. A. Whitson (Eds.), Situated cognition: Social, semiotic, and psychological perspectives (pp. 17-35). London: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  52. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Lortie, D. C. (1998). Unfinished work: Reflections on schoolteachers. In A. Hargreaves, A. Lieberman, M. Fullan & D. Hopkins (Eds.), International handbook of educational change (pp. 145-162). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  54. Luhmann, N., & Schorr, K.-E. (1979). Reflexionsprobleme im erziehungssystem [‘Issues for reflection within the system of education’]. Stuttgart, Germany: Klett-Cotta.Google Scholar
  55. Ma, L. (1999). Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics: Teachers’ understanding of fundamental mathematics in China and the United States. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  56. Marks, R. (1990). Pedagogical content knowledge: From a mathematical case to a modified conception. Journal of Teacher Education, 41(3), 3-11.Google Scholar
  57. Mason, J., & Waywood, A. (1996). The role of theory in mathematics education and research. In A. J. Bishop, K. Clements, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick & C. Laborde (Eds.), International handbook of mathematics education (pp. 1055-1089). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  58. Mathematical Association (1991). Develop your teaching. Cheltenham, UK: Stanley Thornes.Google Scholar
  59. Mclntyre, D., Hagger, H., & Wilkin, M (Eds.) (1993). Mentoring: Perspectives on school-based teacher education. London: Kogan Page.Google Scholar
  60. McNamara, D. (1991). Subject knowledge and its application: Problems and possibilities for teacher educators. Journal of Education for Teaching, 27(2), 113-128.Google Scholar
  61. Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  62. Merseth, K. K. (1996). Cases and case methods in teacher education. In J. Sikula, T. J. Buttery & E. Guyton (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education (2nd ed.) (pp. 722-744). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  63. Mousley, J. (1999). Bringing teaching to teacher education. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 22(2), 149-153.Google Scholar
  64. Nicol, C. (1999). Learning to teach mathematics: Questioning, listening, and responding. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 37, 45-66.Google Scholar
  65. Noddings, N. (1992). Professionalization and mathematics teaching. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 197-208). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  66. Nolder, R., Smith, S., & Melrose, J. (1994). Working together: Roles and relationships in the mentoring process. In B. Jaworski & A. Watson (Eds.), Mentoring in Mathematics Teaching (pp. 41-51). London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  67. Norman, N. (2000). The use of television for the teaching and learning of mathematics insecondary school. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Oxford.Google Scholar
  68. Polanyi, M. (1967). The tacit dimension. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
  69. Potari, D., & Jaworski, B. (2002). Tackling complexity in mathematics teaching development: Using the teaching triad as a tool for reflection and analysis. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 5(4), 351-380.Google Scholar
  70. Prestage, S., & Perks, P. (2001). Models and super models: Ways of thinking about professional knowledge. In C. Morgan & K. Jones (Eds.), Research in Mathematics Education, Volume 3: Papers of the British Society for Research into Learning Mathematics (pp. 101-114). London: British Society for Research into Learning Mathematics.Google Scholar
  71. Romberg, T. A., & Carpenter, T. P. (1986). Research on teaching and learning mathematics: Two disciplines of scientific enquiry. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed.) (pp. 850-873). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  72. Rowland, T., Martyn, S., Barber, P., & Heal, C. (2000). Primary teacher trainees’ mathematics subject knowledge and classroom performance. In T. Rowland & C. Morgan (Eds.), Research in Mathematics Education, Volume 2: Papers of the British Society for Research into Learning Mathematics (pp. 3-18). London: British Society for Research into Learning Mathematics.Google Scholar
  73. Schifter, D. (1998). Learning mathematics for teaching: From a teachers’ seminar to the classroom. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 1(1), 55-87.Google Scholar
  74. Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. London: Maurice Temple Smith.Google Scholar
  75. Seeger, F., & Steinbring, H. (1992). The practical phase in teacher training: Preparing for professional practice under changing conditions. Zentralblatt für Didaktik der Mathematik, 24(1), 280-286.Google Scholar
  76. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 75(2), 4-14.Google Scholar
  77. Skemp, R. R. (1978). Relational understanding and instrumental understanding. Arithmetic Teacher, 26(3), 9-15.Google Scholar
  78. Skott, J. (2001). The emerging practices of a novice teacher: The roles of his school mathematics images. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 4, 3-28.Google Scholar
  79. Smith, D. N. (Jim) (2001). The influence of mathematics teachers on student teachers of secondary mathematics. Mathematics Education Review 13, 22-40.Google Scholar
  80. Smyth, J. (1998). Three rival versions and a critique of teacher staff development. In A. Hargreaves, A. Lieberman, M. Fullan & D. Hopkins (Eds.), International handbook of educational change (pp. 1242-1256). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  81. Soeffner, H.-G. (1989). Auslegung des alltags — Der alltag der auslegung [The interpretation of everyday life — Daily routines of interpreting’]. Frankfurt, Germany: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  82. Stigler, J. W., Gonzales, P., Kawanaka, T., Knoll, S., & Serrano, A. (1999). The TIMSS Videotape Classroom Study: Methods and findings from an explanatory research project on Eighth-Grade Mathematics instruction in Germany, Japan, and the United States. Washington, D. C: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  83. Stigler, J. W, & Hiebert, J. (1999). The teaching gap. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  84. Sullivan, P., & Mousley, J. (1996). Learning about teaching: The potential of specific mathematics teaching examples, presented on interactive media. In L. Puig & A Gutiérrez (Eds.), Proceedings of the 20th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 283-290). Valencia, Spain: International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education.Google Scholar
  85. Tzur, R. (2001). Becoming a mathematics teacher educator: Conceptualising the terrain through self-reflective analysis. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 4(4), 259-283.Google Scholar
  86. Van Zoest, L. R., & Bohl, J. V. (2002). The role of reform curricular materials in an internship: The case of Alice and Gregory. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 5, 265 288Google Scholar
  87. Voigt, J. (1995). Thematic patterns of interaction and sociomathematical norms. In P. Cobb & H. Bauersfeld (Eds.), The emergence of mathematical meaning: Interaction in classroom cultures (pp. 163-201). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  88. Walen, S. B., & Williams, S. R. (2000). Validating classroom issues: Case method in support of teacher change. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 3(1), 3-26.Google Scholar
  89. Watson, A. (1994). A mentor’s eye view. In B. Jaworski & A. Watson (Eds.), Mentoring in mathematics teaching (pp. 1-12). London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  90. Wilson, S., Shulman, L., & Richert, A. (1987). 150 ways of knowing: Representations of knowledge in teaching. In J. Calderhead (Ed.), Exploring teachers’ thinking (pp. 104-124). London: Cassell.Google Scholar
  91. Wood, T., Cobb, P., Yackel, E., & Dillon, D. (Eds.) (1993). Rethinking elementary school mathematics: Insights and issues. Reston, VA: NCTM.Google Scholar
  92. Zaslavsky, O., & Leikin, R. (1999). Interweaving the training of mathematics teacher-educators and the professional development of mathematics teachers. In O. Zaslavsky (Ed.), Proceedings of the 23rd Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, pp. 143-158). Haifa, Israel: Israel Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
  93. Zeichner, K. M., & Gore, J. M. (1990). Teacher socialization. In W. R. Houston, M. Haberman & J. Sikula (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 329-348). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Barbara Jaworski
    • 1
  • Uwe Gellert
    • 2
  1. 1.Agder University CollegeKristiansandNorway
  2. 2.Freie Universität BerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations