Advertisement

The Constructivist Researcher as Teacher and Model Builder

  • Paul CobbEmail author
  • Leslie P. Steffe
Chapter
Part of the Mathematics Education Library book series (MELI, volume 48)

Abstract

The constructivist teaching experiment is used in formulating explanations of children’s mathematical behavior. Essentially, a teaching experiment consists of a series of teaching episodes and individual interviews that covers an extended period of time—anywhere from 6 weeks to 2 years. The explanations we formulate consist of models—constellations of theoretical constructs—that represent our understanding of children’s mathematical realities. However, the models must be distinguished from what might go on in children’s heads. They are formulated in the context of intensive interactions with children. Our emphasis on the researcher as teacher stems from our view that children’s construction of mathematical knowledge is greatly influenced by the experience they gain through interaction with their teacher. Although some of the researchers might not teach, all must act as model builders to ensure that the models reflect the teacher’s understanding of the children.

Keywords

Constructivist teaching experiment Model building Clinical interview Teaching episode Counting scheme Teacher as researcher 

References

  1. Confrey, J. Examining ninth-grade students’ mathematical abilities through clinical interviews. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York City, March 1982.Google Scholar
  2. Davydov, V. V. The psychological characteristics of the “prenumerical” period of mathematics instruction. In L. P. Steffe (Ed.), Soviet studies in the psychology of learning and teaching mathematics (Vol. 7). Stanford, CA: School Mathematics Study Group, 1975.Google Scholar
  3. El’konin, D. B. The problem of instruction and development in the works of L. S. Vygotsky. Soviet Psychology, 1967, 5(3), 34–41.Google Scholar
  4. Erlwanger, S. H. Benny’s concept of rules and answers in IPI mathematics. Journal of Children’s Mathematical Behavior, 1973, 1, 7–26.Google Scholar
  5. Hawkins, D. What it means to teach. Teachers College Record, 1973, 75, 7–16. (a)Google Scholar
  6. Hawkins, D. Nature, man and mathematics. In A. G. Howson (Ed.), Developments in mathematical education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973. (b)Google Scholar
  7. Kantowski, M. G. Processes involved in mathematical problem solving. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 1977, 8, 163–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kantowski, M. G. The teaching experiment and Soviet studies of problem solving. In L. L. Hatfield (Ed.), Mathematical problem solving. Columbus, OH: ERIC Center for Science, Mathematics, and Environmental Education, 1978.Google Scholar
  9. Kieran, C. The Soviet teaching experiment. In T. A. Romberg (Ed.), (1985). Research methods for studies in mathematics education: Some considerations and alternatives (pp. 71–86). Madison: University of Wisconsin, Wisconsin Education Research Center.Google Scholar
  10. Lakatos, I. Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programmes. In I. Lakatos & A. Musgrave (Eds.), Criticism and the growth of knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970.Google Scholar
  11. MacKay, D. M. Information, mechanism, and meaning. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institution of Technology Press, 1969.Google Scholar
  12. Menchinskaya, N. A. Fifty years of Soviet instructional psychology. In J. Kilpatrick & I. Wirszup (Eds.), Soviet studies in the psychology of learning and teaching mathematics (Vol. 1). Stanford, CA: School Mathematics Study Group, 1969. (a)Google Scholar
  13. Menchinskaya, N. A. The psychology of mastering concepts: Fundamental problems and methods of research. In J. Kilpatrick & I. Wirszup (Eds.), Soviet studies in the psychology of learning and teaching mathematics (Vol. 1). Stanford, CA: School Mathematics Study Group, 1969. (b)Google Scholar
  14. Plunkett, S. Fundamental questions for teachers. For the Learning of Mathematics. 1982, 2 (2), 46–48.Google Scholar
  15. Schubert, W. H., & Lopez Schubert, A. L. Towards curricula that are of, by, and therefore for students. Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, 1981, 3(1), 239–251.Google Scholar
  16. Skemp, R. R. Intelligence, learning, and action. New York: Wiley, 1979.Google Scholar
  17. Steffe, L. P. (1983). The teaching experiment methodology in a constructivist research program. In M. Zweng, T. Green, J. Kilpatrick, H. Pollak, & M. Suydam (Eds.), Proceedings of the fourth international congress of mathematical education (pp. 469–471). Boston, Birkhauser.Google Scholar
  18. Steffe, L. P., Richards, J., & von Glasersfeld, E. Experimental models for the child’s acquisition of counting and of addition and subtraction. In K. C. Fuson & W. E. Geeslin (Eds.), Explorations in the modeling of the learning of mathematics. Columbus, OH: ERIC Center for Science, Mathematics, and Environmental Education, 1978.Google Scholar
  19. Steffe, L. P., von Glasersfeld, E., Richards, J., & Cobb, P. Children’s counting types: Philosophy, theory, and applications. New York: Praeger Scientific, 1983.Google Scholar
  20. von Glasersfeld, E. Radical constructivism and Piaget’s concept of knowledge. In F. B. Murray (Ed.), Impact of Piagetian theory. Baltimore: University Park Press, 1978.Google Scholar
  21. von Glasersfeld, E. The concept of equilibration in a constructivist theory of knowledge. In F. Benseler, P. M. Hejl, & W. K. Kock (Eds.), Autopoiesis, communication, and society. New York: Campus, 1980.Google Scholar
  22. von Glasersfeld, E. An attentional model for the conceptual construction of units and number. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 1981, 12, 83–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. von Glasersfeld, E. (1991). Abstraction, re-presentation, and reflection: An interpretation of experience and Piaget’s approach. In L. P. Steffe (Ed.), Epistemological foundations of mathematical experience (pp. 45–67). New York: Springer.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Vanderbilt UniversityNashvilleUSA
  2. 2.University of GeorgiaAthensUSA

Personalised recommendations