Mathematics teachers, reform, and equity: results from the Brazilian national assessment

Journal for Research in Mathematics Education

Volumn 38, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 393-419

  Franco, Creso ^a   Sztajn, Paola ^b   Ortigão, Maria Isabel Ramalho ^a  

^a PONTIFICAL CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF RIO DE JANEIRO   (Brazil)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Equity; Multivariate techniques; Reform in mathematics education; Survey data; Teaching

Indexed keywords

EID: 34447524006     PISSN: 00218251     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Andrade, M., Franco, C., & Carvalho, J. B. P. (2003). Gênero e Desempenho em Matemática ao Final do Ensino Médio: Quais as relações? [Gender and achievement in mathematics at the end of high school: What are the relations?]. Estudos em Avaliação Educational, 27 (Jan-Jun), 77-95.
2. Ball, D. L. (1995). Transforming pedagogy-Classrooms as mathematics communities: A response to Lensmire and Pryor. Harvard Educational Review, 65, 670-677.
3. Boaler, J. (1998). Open and closed mathematics: Students' experiences and understandings. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 29, 41-62.
4. Boaler, J. (2002). Learning from teaching: Exploring the relationship between reform curriculum and equity. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 33, 239-258.
5. Boaler, J. (2003). When learning no longer matters-Standardized testing and the creation of inequality. Phi Delta Kappan, 84, 502-506.
6. Boaler J. (2004, June). Promoting equity in mathematics classrooms-Important teaching practices and their impact on student learning. Paper presented at the International Conference in Mathematics Education, Copenhagen, Denmark. Retrieved August 29, 2005 from http://www.stanford.edu/ ∼joboaler/pubs.html
7. Boaler J., & Staples, M. (in press). Creating mathematical futures through an equitable teaching approach: The case of Railside school. Teachers College Record. Retrieved April 2, 2007, from http://www.stanford.edu/ ∼joboaler/pubs.html
8. Carvalho, J. B. P. (1994). Avaliação e perspectives na área de ensino da matemática no Brazil [Evaluation and perspective in mathematics education in Brazil]. Em Aberto, 62, 74-88.
9. Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences (CBMS). (2001). The mathematical education of teachers (Vol. 11). Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society.
10. Delpit, L. (1995). Other people 's children: Cultural conflict in the classroom. New York: The New Press.
11. Fernandes, D. N., & Garnica, A. V. M. (2002). Concepções do professor de matemática: contribuições para um referencial teórico [Mathematics teachers' conceptions: Contributions to a theoretical framework]. Boletim do GEPEM, 40, 11-36.
12. Ferreira, F. H. B., & Barros, R. P. (2000). Education and income distribution in urban Brazil, 1976-1996. Cepal Review, 71, 41-71.
13. Goldstein, H. (1995). Multilevel statistical models. London: Edward Arnold.
14. Haberman, M. (1991). The pedagogy of poverty versus good teaching. Phi Delta Kappan, 73, 290-294.
15. Henningsen, M., & Stein, M. K. (1997). Mathematical tasks and student cognition: Classroom-based factors that support or inhibit high-level mathematical thinking and reasoning. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28, 524-549.
16. Hoff, M. (1996). A matemática na escola nos anos 80-90: Críticas e tendências renovadoras. [Mathematics in the schools in 1980s and 1990s: Critiques and reform trends]. Cadernos de Pesquisa, 98, 72-84.
17. Instituto de Nacional de Estudos Pedagógicos. (2003). Qualidade da educação: Uma nova leitura dos estudantes da 8a série do Ensino Fundamental [Educational quality: A new view of 8th grade students]. Brasília, Brasil: Author. Retrieved October 2, 2006, from http://www.inep.gov.br/basica/saeb/
18. Instituto National de Estudos Pedagógicos. (2002). Relatório Nacional 2001-SAEB [National report 2001-SAEB]. Brasília, Brasil: Author. Retrieved October 2, 2006, from http://www.inep.gov.br/pesquisa/publicacoes/
19. Knapp, M. S., Shields, P. M., & Turnbull, B. J. (1995). Academic challenge in high-poverty classrooms. Phi Delta Kappan, 76, 770-776.
20. Lampert, M. (1990). When the problem is not the question and the solution is not the answer: Mathematical knowing and teaching. American Educational Research Journal, 27, 29-63.
21. Lee, V. E. (2001). Restructuring high schools for equity and excellence: What works. New York: Teachers College Press.
22. Lee, V. E., Franco, C., & Albernaz, A. (2004, April). Quality and equality in Brazilian secondary schools: A multilevel cross-national school effects study. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
23. Lubienski, S. T. (2000). Problem solving as a means toward mathematics for all: An exploratory look through a class lens. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31, 454-482.
24. Lubienski, S. T. (2003). Celebrating diversity and denying disparities: A critical assessment. Educational Researcher, 32(8), 30-37.
25. Lubienski, S. T., & Bowen, A. (2000). Who is counting? A survey of mathematics education research 1982-1998. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31, 626-633.
26. Molenaar, I. W. (1997). Nonparametric models for polytomous responses. In W. J. van der Linden & R. K. Hambleton (Eds.), Handbook of modern item response theory (pp. 369-380). New York: Springer.
27. National Commission on Mathematics and Science Teaching for the 21st Century. (2000). Before it's too late. Retrieved October 10, 2000, from http://www.ed.gov/inits/Math/glenn/report.doc
28. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). (1991). Professional standards for teaching mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
29. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
30. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2005). OECD Economic Surveys-Brazil. Brasília, Brazil: Author.
31. OECD, & UNESCO. (2003). Literacy skills for the world of tomorrow: Further results from PISA 2000. Paris: OECD.
32. Porter, A. C. (1989). A curriculum out of balance: The case of elementary school mathematics. Educational Researcher, 18(5), 9-15.
33. RAND Mathematics Study Panel. (2003). Mathematical proficiency for all students: Toward a strategic research and development program in mathematics education. Santa Monica, CA: Author.
34. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
35. Raudenbush, S. W., Fortiu, R., & Cheong, Y. (1998). Inequality of access to educational resources: A national report card for eighth-grade math. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 20, 253-267.
36. Samejima, F. (1969). Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores. Princeton, NJ: Psychometric Society.
37. Secada, W. G. (1989). Educational equity versus equality of education: An alternative conception. In W. G. Secada (Ed.), Equity in education (pp. 68-88). New York: Falmer Press.
38. Secada, W. G. (1992). Race, ethnicity, social class, language, and achievement in mathematics. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 623-660). New York: Macmillan.
39. a series) [National Curriculum Guidelines: Mathematics (grades 5-8)]. Brasilia, Brazil: Author.
40. Silver, E. A., & Stein, M. K. (1996). The QUASAR project: The "revolution of the possible" in mathematics instruction reform in urban middle schools. Urban Education, 30, 476-521.
41. Stein, M. K., Grover, B. W., & Henningsen, M. (1996). Building student capacity for mathematical thinking and reasoning: An analysis of mathematical tasks used in reform classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 33, 455-488.
42. Sztajn, P., Bonamino, A., & Franco, C. (2003). Formação docente nos surveys de avaliação educacional [Teacher education as it appears in assessment surveys]. Cadernos de Pesquisa, 118 , 11-39.