Advertisement

Teaching Mathematics

  • Michael L. Connell
Part of the Springer International Handbooks of Education book series (SIHE, volume 21)

Mathematics education has long experienced a large gap between conceptions regarding mathematics held by practicing mathematicians and the school environment where mathematics is taught. These diverse belief systems have lead to the creation of a dichotomy in which there is the world of “school mathematics” of the teacher and that of the “real mathematics” of the mathematician and scientist. This dichotomy causes severe problems for education as practicing teachers are only aware of school mathematics.

As such, they are only able to teach from this perspective. Yet, to be adequately prepared for the demands of the evolving society, there must be a significant change in the view of “School” mathematics to enable an induction into “Real” mathematics as envisioned and practiced by mathematicians and scientists. This is an induction which cannot occur without an active and willing participation of the teachers themselves.

Keywords

Mathematics Instruction Mathematics Teacher School Mathematics Teacher Candidate Real Mathematics 
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. Ball, D. L. (2003). What mathematical knowledge is needed for teaching mathematics. Washington, DC: Secretary's Summit on Mathematics, U.S. Department of Education.Google Scholar
  2. Ball, D. L., & Bass, H. (2000). Interweaving content and pedagogy in teaching and learning to teach: Knowing and using mathematics. In J. Boaler (Ed.), Multiple perspectives on the teaching and learning of mathematics (pp. 83–104). Westport, CT: Ablex.Google Scholar
  3. Cobb, P., Yackel, E., & McClain, K. (Eds.). (2000). Communicating and symbolizing in mathematics: Perspectives on discourse, tools, and instructional design. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  4. Connell, M. L. (2001). Actions upon objects: A metaphor for technology enhanced mathematics instruction. In D. Tooke & N. Henderson (Eds.), Using information technology in mathematics (pp. 143–171). Binghamton, NY: Hawarth Press.Google Scholar
  5. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. J. (2004). Assessing students in groups: Promoting group responsibility and individual accountability. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
  6. Sfard, A. (1991). On the dual nature of mathematical conceptions: Reflections on processes and objects as different sides of the same coin. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 22, 1–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Stipek, D. J., Givvin, K. B., Salmon, J. M., & MacGyvers, V. L. (2001). Teachers' beliefs and practices related to mathematics instruction. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 213–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Stoddart, T., Connell, M. L., Stofflett, R., & Peck, D. M. (1993). Reconstructing elementary teacher candidates' understanding of mathematics and science. Teacher and Teacher Education, 9, 229–241.Google Scholar
  9. Walmsley, A. L., & Muniz, J. (2003). Cooperative learning and its effects in a high school geometry classroom. Mathematics Teacher, 96(2), 112.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael L. Connell
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Curriculum and InstructionUniversity of HoustonHouston77204

Personalised recommendations