Understanding the influence of two mathematics textbooks on prospective secondary teachers' knowledge

Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education

Volumn 12, Issue 5, 2009, Pages 365-389

  Davis, Jon D ^a  

^a WESTERN MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Content knowledge; Curriculum; Exponential functions; Lesson planning; Pedagogical content knowledge; Prospective teachers

Indexed keywords

EID: 70350539050     PISSN: 13864416     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10857-009-9115-2     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Ball, D. L. (1990). Prospective elementary and secondary teachers' understanding of division. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 21, 132-144. doi: 10.2307/749140.
2. Ball, D. L., & Cohen, D. K. (1996). Reform by the book: What is-or might be-the role of curriculum materials in teacher learning and instructional reform? Educational Researcher, 25, 6-8.
3. Brown, C. A., Smith, M. S., & Stein, M. K. (1996, April). Linking teacher professional development to enhanced classroom instruction. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York.
4. Bruner, J. (1960/1977). The process of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
5. College Board of Mathematical Sciences. (2001). The mathematical education of teachers (Vol. 11). Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society.
6. Collopy, R. (2003). Curriculum materials as a professional development tool: How a mathematics textbook affected two teachers' learning. The Elementary School Journal, 103, 287-311. doi: 10.1086/499727.
7. Confrey, J., & Smith, E. (1994). Exponential functions, rates of change, and the multiplicative unit. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 26, 135-164. doi: 10.1007/BF01273661.
8. Confrey, J., & Smith, E. (1995). Splitting, covariation, and the role in the development of exponential functions. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 26, 66-86. doi: 10.2307/749228.
9. Coxford, A. F., Fey, J. T., Hirsch, C. R., Schoen, H. L., Burrill, G., Hart, E. W., et al. (2003). Contemporary mathematics in context: A unified approach. Chicago, IL: Glencoe/McGraw-Hill.
10. Davis, J. D. (2007). Exponent property conditions: Understanding connections among the written curriculum, enacted curriculum, and achieved curriculum. Unpublished manuscript.
11. Denzin, N. K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
12. Dreyfus, T. (1991). Advanced mathematical thinking processes. In D. Tall (Ed.), Advanced mathematical thinking (pp. 25-41). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
13. Eisenhart, M., Borko, H., & Underhill, R. (1993). Conceptual knowledge falls through the cracks: Complexities of learning to teach mathematics for understanding. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 24, 8-40. doi: 10.2307/749384.
14. Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (Vol. 3, pp. 119-161). New York: Macmillan.
15. Even, R. (1990). Subject matter knowledge for teaching and the case of functions. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 21, 521-544. doi: 10.1007/ BF00315943.
16. Even, R. (1993). Subject matter knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge: Prospective secondary teachers and the function concept. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 24, 94-116. doi: 10.2307/ 749215.
17. Frykholm, J. (2004). Teachers' tolerance for discomfort: Implications for curricular reform in mathematics. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 19(2), 125-149.
18. Frykholm, J. (2005). Innovative curricula: Catalysts for reform in mathematics teacher education. Action in Teacher Education, 26(4), 20-36.
19. Garfunkel, S., Godbold, L., & Pollak, H. (1998). Mathematics: Modeling our world: Course 1: Annotated Teacher's Edition. Bedford, MA: Comap, Inc.
20. Herbel-Eisenmann, B. A. (2007). From intended curriculum to written curriculum: Examining the "voice" of a mathematics textbook. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38, 344-369.
21. Herbel-Eisenmann, B. A., Lubienski, S. T., & Id-Deen, L. (2006). Reconsidering the study of mathematics instructional practices: The importance of curricular context in understanding local and global teacher change. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 9, 313-345. doi: 10.1007/s10857-006-9012-x.
22. Hirsch, C. R., Coxford, A. F., Fey, J. T., & Schoen, H. L. (1995). Teaching sensible mathematics in sense-making ways with the CPMP. Mathematics Teacher, 88, 694-700.
23. Hirsch, C. R., Fey, J. T., Hart, E. W., Schoen, H. L., Watkins, A. E., Ritsema, B. E., et al. (2008). Core-Plus mathematics: Contemporary mathematics in context. New York: Glencoe/McGraw Hill.
24. Keiser, J. M., & Lambdin, D. V. (1996). The clock is ticking: Time constraint issues in mathematics teaching reform. The Journal of Educational Research, 90, 23-30.
25. Lakoff, G., & Nunez, R. E. (2000). Where mathematics comes from. New York: Basic Books.
26. Lambdin, D., & Preston, R. (1995). Caricatures in innovation: Teacher adaptation to an investigation-oriented middle school mathematics curriculum. Journal of Teacher Education, 46, 130-140. doi: 10.1177/0022487195046002007.
27. Larson, R., Boswell, L., Kanold, T. D., & Stiff, L. (2001). Algebra one. Evanston, IL: McDougal Littell.
28. Lloyd, G. M. (1999). Two teachers' conceptions of a reform-oriented curriculum: Implications for mathematics teacher development. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 2, 227-252. doi: 10.1023/A:1009965804662.
29. Lloyd, G. M. (2006). Using K-12 mathematics curriculum materials in preservice teacher education: Rationale, strategies, and teachers' experiences. In K. Lynch-Davis & R. L. Rider (Eds.), The work of mathematics teacher educators: Continuing the conversation (Vol. 3, pp. 11-27)., AMTE monograph series San Diego, CA: Association of Mathematics Teacher Educators.
30. Lloyd, G. M. (2008). Curriculum use while learning to teach: One student teacher's appropriation of mathematics curriculum materials. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 39, 63-94.
31. Lloyd, G. M., & Wilson, M. R. (1998). Supporting innovation: The impact of a teacher's conceptions of functions on his implementation of a reform curriculum. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 29, 248-274. doi: 10.2307/749790.
32. Manouchehri, A., & Goodman, T. (1998). Mathematics curriculum reform and teachers: Understanding the connections. The Journal of Educational Research, 92, 27-41.
33. Markovits, Z., Eylon, B., & Bruckheimer, M. (1986). Functions today and yesterday. For the Learning of Mathematics, 6(2), 18-24, 28.
34. Merseth, K. K. (2003). Windows on teaching math: Cases of middle and secondary classrooms. New York: Teachers College Press.
35. Murdock, J., Kamischke, E., & Kamischke, E. (2002). Discovering algebra: An investigative approach. Emeryville, CA: Key Curriculum Press.
36. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
37. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
38. Norman, A. (1992). Teachers' mathematical knowledge of the concept of function. In G. Harel & E. Dubinsky (Eds.), The concept of function: Aspects of epistemology and pedagogy (MAA Notes, Vol. 25, pp. 215-232). Washington, DC: Mathematical Association of America.
39. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
40. Remillard, J. T. (1999). Curriculum materials in mathematics education reform: A framework for examining teachers' curriculum development. Curriculum Inquiry, 29, 315-342. doi: 10.1111/0362-6784.00130.
41. Remillard, J. T. (2000). Can curriculum materials support teachers' learning? Two-fourth-grade teachers' use of a new mathematics text. The Elementary School Journal, 100, 315-341. doi: 10.1086/499645.
42. Remillard, J. T. (2005). Examining key concepts in research on teachers' use of mathematic curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75, 211-246. doi: 10.3102/00346543075002211.
43. Remillard, J. T., & Bryans, M. (2004). Teachers' orientations toward mathematics curriculum materials: Implications for teacher learning. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 35, 352-388.
44. Robinson, E. E., Robinson, J. F., & Maceli, J. C. (2000). The impact of Standards -based instructional materials in mathematics in the classroom. In M. J. Burke & F. R. Curcio (Eds.), Learning mathematics for a new century (pp. 112-126). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
45. Saxon, J. (1989). Advanced mathematics: An incremental development. Norman, OK: Saxon Publications, Inc.
46. Sherin, M. G., & Drake, C. (in press). Curriculum strategy framework: Investigating patterns in teachers' use of a reformbased elementary mathematics curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies.
47. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15, 4-14.
48. Simon, M. A. (1993). Prospective elementary teachers' knowledge of division. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 25, 472-494. doi: 10.2307/749486.
49. Spielman, L. J., & Lloyd, G. M. (2004). The impact of enacted mathematics curriculum models on prospective elementary teachers' course perceptions and beliefs. School Science and Mathematics, 104(1), 32-44.
50. Spillane, J. C. (1999). External reform initiatives and teachers' efforts to reconstruct their practice: The mediating role of teachers' zones of enactment. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 31(2), 1-33. doi: 10.1080/002202799183205.
51. Spillane, J. C. (2000). A fifth-grade teacher's reconstruction of mathematics and literacy teaching: Exploring interactions among identity, learning, and subject matter. The Elementary School Journal, 100, 307-330. doi: 10.1086/499644.
52. Stein, M. K., Remillard, J., & Smith, M. S. (2007). How curriculum influences student learning. In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 319-369). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
53. Strauss, A. L. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
54. Tarr, J. E., & Papick, I. J. (2004). Collaborative efforts to improve the mathematical preparation of middle grades mathematics teachers. In T. Watanabe & D. R. Thompson (Eds.), The work of mathematics teacher educators: Exchanging ideas for effective practice, AMTE Monograph 1 (pp. 19-34). San Diego: AMTE.
55. Tirosh, D., & Even, R. (1997). To define or not to define: The case of (-8) 1/3. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 33, 321-330. doi: 10.1023/A:1002916606955.
56. Van Zoest, L. R., & Bohl, J. V. (2002). The role of reform curricular materials in an internship: The case of Alice and Gregory. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 5, 265-288. doi: 10.1023/ A:1019816329185.
57. Wilson, M. R. (1994). One preservice secondary teacher's understanding of function: The impact of a course integrating mathematical content and pedagogy. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 25, 346-370. doi: 10.2307/749238.
58. Wilson, M. R., & Lloyd, G. M. (2000). Sharing mathematical authority with students: The challenge for high school teachers. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 15, 146-169.