Abstract
Making connections between advanced mathematical content, such as abstract algebra, and the mathematics of the school curriculum is a critical component of the mathematical education of future secondary teachers. In this chapter, I argue that engagement in mathematical practices (e.g., constructing arguments, attending to precision) can serve as a link for preservice teachers from their study of abstract algebra to the content they will teach as high school teachers. Using a multiple case study approach, I describe how four preservice teachers had opportunities to learn to engage in mathematical practices in their abstract algebra course. Participants were taking an abstract algebra course specifically designed for future teachers. Data sources include video records from the abstract algebra course and problem-solving interviews with each participant before and after the course. Each participant showed improvement in their mathematical practice engagement and reflected on how valuable a focus on mathematical practices would be in their teaching. These findings demonstrate the key role that mathematical practices play in the preparation of future teachers. There are valuable implications for the design of content courses for teachers and for the ongoing research into connections between advanced mathematics and the school curriculum.
Keywords
Author Note: An earlier version of this paper was presented at the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education Annual Meeting, in November 2015, in East Lansing, MI. The research for this paper was conducted as part of a dissertation study at Stanford University, and was supported in part by a Stanford Graduate School of Education Dissertation Support Grant.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Baldinger, E. E. (2014). Opportunities to develop mathematical knowledge for teaching in a math content course (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Stanford, CA: Stanford University.
Ball, D. L. (Ed.). (2003). Teaching and learning mathematical practices. In Mathematical proficiency for all students: Toward a strategic research and development program in mathematics education (pp. 29–41). Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
Bass, H. (2011). A vignette of doing mathematics: A meta-cognitive tour of the production of some elementary mathematics. Montana Mathematics Enthusiast, 8(1&2), 3–34.
Burton, L. (1999). The practices of mathematicians: What do they tell us about coming to know mathematics? Educational Studies in Mathematics, 37(2), 121–143. https://doi.org/10.2307/3483312
Cobb, P., & Bowers, J. (1999). Cognitive and situated learning perspectives in theory and practice. Educational Researcher, 28(2), 4–15.
Cuoco, A., Goldenberg, E. P., & Mark, J. (1996). Habits of mind: An organizing principle for mathematics curricula. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 15(4), 375–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0732-3123(96)90023-1
Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1980). Verbal reports as data. Psychological Review, 87(3). https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.87.3.215
Ginsburg, H. P. (1981). The clinical interview in psychology research on mathematical thinking: Aims, rationales, techniques. For the Learning of Mathematics, 1(3), 4–11.
Goldin, G. A. (1997). Chapter 4: Observing mathematical problem solving through task-based interviews. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education. Monograph, 9(1997), 40–62. https://doi.org/10.2307/749946
Goulding, M., Hatch, G., & Rodd, M. (2003). Undergraduate mathematics experience: its significance in secondary mathematics teacher preparation. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 6, 361–393. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026362813351
Graham, K. J., Li, Y., & Buck, J. C. (2000). Characteristics of mathematics teacher preparation programs in the United States: An exploratory study. Mathematics Educator, 5(1/2), 5–31.
Hodge, A. M., Gerberry, C. V., Moss, E. R., & Staples, M. E. (2010). Purposes and perceptions: What do university mathematics professors see as their role in the education of secondary mathematics teachers? PRIMUS: Problems, Resources, and Issues in Mathematics Undergraduate Studies, 20(8), 646–663. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511970902810733
Katz, V. J., & Barton, B. (2007). Stages in the history of algebra with implications for teaching. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 66, 185–201. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-006-9023-7
Knuth, E. J. (2002a). Secondary school mathematics teachers’ conceptions of proof. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 33(5), 379–405. https://doi.org/10.2307/4149959
Knuth, E. J. (2002b). Teachers’ conceptions of proof in the context of secondary school mathematics. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 5, 61–88.
Lakatos, I. (1976). In J. Worrall & E. Zahar (Eds.), Proofs and refutations. UK: Cambridge University Press.
Larsen, S. P., & Zandieh, M. (2007). Proofs and refutations in the undergraduate mathematics classroom. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 67(3), 205–216. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-007-9106-0
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2013). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Moschkovich, J. N. (2004). Appropriating mathematical practices: A case study of learning to use and explore functions through interaction with a tutor. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 55(1–3), 49–80. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EDUC.0000017691.13428.b9
Moschkovich, J. N. (2013). Issues regarding the concept of mathematical practices. In Y. Li & J. N. Moschkovich (Eds.), Proficiency and Beliefs in Learning and Teaching (pp. 257–275). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Murray, E., Baldinger, E. E., Wasserman, N. H., Broderick, S., & White, D. (2017). Connecting advanced and secondary mathematics. Issues in the Undergraduate Mathematics Preparation of School Teachers, 1(August), 1–10.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics Author.
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common Core State Standards for Mathematics. Washington, DC: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, & Council of Chief State School Officers.
Novotná, J., & Hoch, M. (2008). How structure sense for algebraic expressions or equations is related to structure sense for abstract algebra. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 20(2), 93–104.
Pólya, G. (1957). How to solve it (2nd ed.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University Press.
Silver, E. A., Clark, L. M., Ghousseini, H. N., Charalambous, C. Y., & Sealy, J. T. (2007). Where is the mathematics? Examining teachers’ mathematical learning opportunities in practice-based professional learning tasks. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 10(4–6), 261–277. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-007-9039-7
Simon, M. A. (1994). Learning mathematics and learning to teach: Learning cycles in mathematics teacher education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 26(1), 71–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01273301
Speer, N. M., Smith III, J. P., & Horvath, A. (2010). Collegiate mathematics teaching: An unexamined practice. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 29(2), 99–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2010.02.001
Staples, M. E., Bartlo, J., & Thanheiser, E. (2012). Justification as a teaching and learning practice: Its (potential) multifaceted role in middle grades mathematics classrooms. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 31(4), 447–462. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2012.07.001
Stylianides, A. J., & Ball, D. L. (2008). Understanding and describing mathematical knowledge for teaching: knowledge about proof for engaging students in the activity of proving. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 11(4), 307–332. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-008-9077-9
Stylianides, G. J., Stylianides, A. J., & Philippou, G. N. (2007). Preservice teachers’ knowledge of proof by mathematical induction. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 10(3), 145–166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-007-9034-z
Tabach, M., Levenson, E., Barkai, R., Tsamir, P., Tirosh, D., & Dreyfus, T. (2011). Secondary teachers’ knowledge of elementary number theory proofs: the case of general-cover proofs. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 14(6), 465–481. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-011-9185-9
Taylor, K. L., & Dionne, J.-P. (2000). Accessing problem-solving strategy knowledge: The complementary use of concurrent verbal protocols and retrospective debriefing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(3), 413–425. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-0663.92.3.413
TEDS-M International Study Center. (2010). Released Items: Future teacher mathematics content knowledge and mathematics pedagogical content knowledge - secondary. MI: East Lansing.
Usiskin, Z. (1988). Conceptions of school algebra and uses of variables. In A. F. Coxford & A. P. Shulte (Eds.), The Ideas of Algebra, K-12 (pp. 8–19). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Wasserman, N. H. (2016). Abstract algebra for algebra teaching: Influencing school mathematics instruction. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 16(1), 28–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/14926156.2015.1093200
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendices
Appendix 1: Possible Algebra Pre-task Solution
-
Prove the following statement:
-
If the graphs of linear functions f(x) = ax + b and g(x) = cx + d intersect at a point P on the x-axis, the graph of their sum function (f + g)(x) must also go through P.
We are given that f(x) = ax + b and g(x) = cx + d. These two functions intersect at a point P on the x-axis. Define P as (p, 0).
The fact that the two functions intersect at point P implies that both contain (p, 0). In other words, f(p) = 0 and g(p) = 0.
To determine whether the sum function also passes through point P, we must consider (f + g)(x) and see if the value of the sum function at p is 0.
Since the sum function is defined as the sum of the value of the functions f and g at every point in the domain, we can calculate the value of the sum function at p as shown above. The fact that f and g contain (p, 0) guarantees that their sum also contains (p, 0). ■
Appendix 2: Possible Algebra Post-task Solution
Take a point (p, q) on the Cartesian plane. Reverse the coordinates to obtain a second point (q, p). Prove that on the line between these two points, the x-intercept and the y-intercept are the sum of the coordinates.
Consider the points (p, q) and (q, p) for p ≠ q. Then the equation of the line between the two points is:
The y-intercept occurs when x = 0. Plugging in 0 for x gives:
And so the y-intercept is the sum of the coordinates p and q.
Similarly, the x-intercept occurs when y = 0. Plugging in 0 for y gives:
And so the x-intercept is the sum of the coordinates p and q.
If p = q, then (p, q) and (q, p) are the same point, and an infinite number of lines could pass through it. Thus the proposition stated in the problem holds only for p ≠ q. ■
Appendix 3: Tim’s Scratch Work and Formal Proof, Algebra Post-task
Scratch work
Formal work
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Baldinger, E.E. (2018). Learning Mathematical Practices to Connect Abstract Algebra to High School Algebra. In: Wasserman, N. (eds) Connecting Abstract Algebra to Secondary Mathematics, for Secondary Mathematics Teachers. Research in Mathematics Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99214-3_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99214-3_11
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-99213-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-99214-3
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)