Abstract
This chapter draws attention to different methods being used in the preservice training of teachers of mathematics in the United States of America, Australia, Japan, and the Netherlands. The analysis presented reveals that there are qualitative and quantitative differences in the approaches the nations are taking to the preparation of future teachers of mathematics, especially in relation to practicum experience during teacher education courses. In some nations, great emphasis is placed on giving student teachers as much time as possible in front of real classes of students, but in other nations (e.g., Japan), more emphasis is given to the quality of lesson planning and less to the amount of time actually spent in classrooms. There are also between-nations differences in the extent to which preservice teachers collaborate with their peers in their practicum experiences.
By focusing on two U S. reports issued in the year 2000, the chapter makes clear that there is a contemporary crisis in preservice and inservice mathematics teacher education in the United States. It is argued that many other countries are already experiencing, or are likely to experience, a similar crisis. In many nations, more and more students are studying school mathematics in classes taught by unqualified teachers, or partly qualified teachers. There are simply not enough qualified young people choosing to become mathematics teachers, and various temporary ‘solutions’, some of them quite creative, are being hastily trialled. But those responsible for staffing school systems urgently need to devise long-term strategies for solving the problem, and also decide what new teachers should be expected to learn during their initial training. There is also a need to decide what is non-negotiable for the ongoing professional development of practising teachers of mathematics.
The chapter closes with a glimpse into the mathematics department of a typical secondary school in the year 2010.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Ball, D. L. (1993). With an eye on the mathematical horizon: Dilemmas of teaching elementary school mathematics. Elementary School Journal, 93(4), 373–397.
Carpenter, T. P., & Levi, L. (2000). Developing conceptions of algebraic thinking in the elementary grades. Research report. Madison, WI: National Center for Improving Student learning and Achievement in Mathematics and Science (see also http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/ncisla/publications/index.html)
College Board for the Mathematical Sciences (CBMS) (2000). Mathematical Education of Teachers Project (draft report). Washington, D. C.: Author.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1999). Supply, demand and quality in mathematics and science teaching. Briefing for the National Commission on Mathematics and Science Teaching for the 21st Century, National Commission for Mathematics and Science Teaching, Washington, D. C.
Davis, R. B. (1964). Discovery in mathematics: A text for teachers. Palo Alto, CA: Addison-Wesley.
Kaput, J. (1998). Transforming algebra from an engine of inequity to an engine of mathematical power by ‘algebrafying’ the K-12 curriculum. In National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, The nature and role of algebra in the K-14 curriculum. Washington, D. C.: National Academy Press.
Keitel, C., & Kilpatrick, J. (1999). The rationality and irrationality of international comparative studies. In G. Kaiser, E. Luna & I. Huntley (Eds.), International comparisons in mathematics education (pp. 241–256). London: Falmer Press.
Kieran, C. (1992). The learning and teaching of school algebra. In D. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 390–419). New York: Macmillan.
Martin, M. O., & Mullis, I. V. S. (2000). International comparisons of student achievement: Perspectives from the TIMSS International Study Center. In D. Shorrocks-Taylor & E. W. Jenkins (Eds.), Learning from others (pip. 29–47). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Matz, M. (1982). Towards a process model for school algebra errors. In D. Sleeman & J. S. Brown (Eds.), Intelligent tutoring systems (pp. 25–50). New York: Academic Press.
National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (2000). A distinction that matters: Why national teacher certification makes a difference. Arlington, VA: Author.
National Office of Overseas Skills Recognition (NOOSR) (1992). Country education profiles: Netherlands — A comparative study. Canberra: Department of Employment, Education and Training (DEET), Australian Government Publishing Service.
National Research Council (2000). Educating teachers of science, mathematics and technology: New practices for the new millennium. Washington, D. C.: National Academy Press.
Olsen, S. (1999, May/June,). Candid camera. Teacher Magazine on the Web.
Popkewitz, T. S. (1998). Struggling for the soul: The politics of schooling and the construction of the teacher. New York: Teachers College Press.
Schmidt, W. H., McKnight, C. C., Valverde, G. A., Houang, R. T., & Wiley, D. E. (1997). Many visions, many aims, Volume 1: A cross-national investigation of curricular intentions in school mathematics. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Schmidt, W. H., McKnight, C. C., & Raizen, S. A. (1997). An investigation of U.S. science and mathematics education. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Schmidt, W. H., McKnight, C. C., Houang, R. T., Wang, H. C., Wiley, D. E., Cogan, L. S., & Wolfe, R. G. (2000). Why schools matter: A cross-national comparison of curriculum and learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Seago, N. (1999). Eighth-grade mathematics lessons: United States, Japan, and Germany (videotape). Washington, D. C.: U.S. Department of Education.
Shifter, D. (1999). Reasoning about algebra: Early algebraic thinking in Grades K-6. In L. V. Stiff & F. R. Curcio (Eds.), Developing mathematical reasoning in Grades K-12 (pp. 62–81). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Shimizu, Y. (2001). Personal communication.
Shulman, L. S. (1984). The practical and the eclectic: A deliberation on teaching and educational research. Curriculum Inquiry, 14(2), 183–200.
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review,57(1), 1–17.
Silver, E. A. (1997). Algebra for all — Increasing students’ access to algebraic ideas, not just algebra courses. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 2(4), 204–207.
Stevenson, H. W., & Stigler, J. W. (1992). The learning gap: Why our schools are failing and what we can learn from Chinese and Japanese education. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Stigler, J. W. (1999). Briefing for the National Commission on Mathematics and Science Teaching for the 21st Century. Washington, D. C: United States Department of Education.
Stigler, J. W., Gonzales, P., Kawanaka, T., Knoll, S., & Serrano, A. (1999). The TIMSS Videotape Classroom Study: Methods and findings from an exploratory research project on eighth grade mathematics instruction in Germany, Japan and the United States. Washington, D. C.: National Center for Educational Statistics.
Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (1999). The teaching gap: Best ideas from the world’s teachers for improving education in the classroom. New York: The Free Press.
Teo, C. H. (2000 May). 21 stcentury education: Embracing change yet remaining constant and timeless. Keynote address by Radm Teo Chee Hean, Minister for Education and 2nd Minister for Defence of Singapore, to the 30th International Management Symposium, University of St. Gallen, Switzerland (see http://www1.moe.sg/speeches/sp26052000c.html).
United States Department of Education (2000). Before it’s too late: A report to the nation from the National Commission on Mathematics and Science Teaching for the 21st Century (Glenn Report). Washington, D. C.: Author.
Van den Heuvel–Panhuizen, M., & Broekman, H. (2002). Personal communication.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2003 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Stephens, M. (2003). Regulating the Entry of Teachers of Mathematics into the Profession: Challenges, New Models, and Glimpses into the Future. In: Bishop, A.J., Clements, M.A., Keitel, C., Kilpatrick, J., Leung, F.K.S. (eds) Second International Handbook of Mathematics Education. Springer International Handbooks of Education, vol 10. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0273-8_25
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0273-8_25
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-010-3951-2
Online ISBN: 978-94-010-0273-8
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive