Instructional responsibility in mathematics education: Modelling classroom teaching using Swedish data

Educational Studies in Mathematics

Volumn 75, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 171-189

  Hansson, Åse ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GOTHENBURG   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Instructional modes; Instructional responsibility; Mathematics education; Student centred; Teacher responsibility; Teacher centred

Indexed keywords

EID: 77957888863     PISSN: 00131954     EISSN: 15730816     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10649-010-9249-2     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Amit, M., & Fried, M. N. (2005). Authority and authority relations in mathematics education: A view from an 8th grade classroom. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 58(2), 145-168.
2. Ball, D. L., & Bass, H. (2000). Making believe: The collective construction of public mathematical knowledge in the elementary classroom. In D. Phillips (Ed.), Yearbook of the national society for the study of education, constructivism in education (pp. 193-224). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
3. Barwell, R. (2003). Patterns of attention in the interaction of a primary school mathematics student with English as an additional language. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 53, 35-59.
4. Barwell, R., & Clarkson, P. C. (2004). Researching mathematics education in multilingual contexts: Theory, methodology and the teaching of mathematics. Paper presented at the The 28th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, PME, Bergen, Norway.
5. Bentley, P. O. (2003). Mathematics teachers and their teaching: A survey study. Göteborg: (Göteborg Studies In Educational Sciences 191) Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.
6. Boaler, J., & Greeno, J. G. (2000). Identity, agency, and knowing in mathematical worlds. In J. Boaler (Ed.), Multiple perspectives on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 171-200). Westport, CT: Ablex.
7. Brousseau, G. (1986). Basic theory and methods in the didactics of mathematics. In P. Verstappen (Ed.), Report of the second conference on Systematic Cooperation Between Theory and Practice in Mathematics Education (pp. 109-161). Enschede: SLO.
8. Brousseau, G. (1997). Theory of didactical situations in mathematics 1970-1990/ by Brousseau; edited and translated by N. Balacheff, M. Cooper, R. Sutherland & V. Warfield. Dordrecht; London: KLUWER Academic Publishers.
9. Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York: The Guilford Press.
10. Brown, A. L., & Palincsar, A. S. (1989). Guided, cooperative learning, and individual knowledge acquisition. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 393-451). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
11. Bryman, A. (2004). Social research methods. New York: Oxford University Press.
12. Carlgren, I., Klette, K., Myrdal, S., Schnack, K., & Simola, H. (2006). Changes in Nordic teaching practices: From individualised teaching to the teaching of individuals. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 50(3), 301-326.
13. Clarke, D. (2006). Using international comparative research to contest prevalent oppositional dichotomies. ZDM Mathematics Education, 38(5), 376-387.
14. Clarke, D., & Xu, L. H. (2008). Distinguishing between mathematics classrooms in Australia, China, Japan, Korea and the USA through the lens of the distribution of responsibility for knowledge generation: Public oral interactivity and mathematical orality. ZDM Mathematics Education, 40, 963-972.
15. Cobb, P., Wood, T., & Yackel, E. (1993). Discourse, mathematical thinking, and classroom practice. In E. A. Forman, N. Minick, & C. A. Stone (Eds.), Contexts for learning: Sociocultural dynamics in childreńs development (pp. 91-119). New York: Oxford University Press.
16. Englund, T. (1993). Utbildning som "public good" eller "private good"? [Education as public good or private good?] Uppsala, Sweden: Pedagogiska institutionen, Uppsala universitet.
17. Fried, M. N., & Amit, M. (2003). Some reflections on mathematics classroom notebooks and their relationship to the public and private nature of student practices. Educational Studies in Mathematic, 53, 91-112.
18. Gustafsson, J. E. (2006). Lika rättigheter- likvärdig utbildning? [Equal rights-equivalent education?]: Rädda Barnen. Art nr: 3284. Elanders Infologistics Väst AB.
19. Gustafsson, J. E. (2008). Effects of international comparative studies on educational quality on the quality of educational research. European Educational Research Journal, 7(1), 1-17.
20. Gustafsson, J. E., & Stahl, P. A. (2004). STREAMS User' s Guide, Version 3 for Windows 95/98/NT.
21. Häggström, J. (2008). Teaching systems of linear equations in Sweden and China: What is made possible to learn? Gothenburg: University of Gothenburg.
22. Hanushek, E. A., & Wössmann, L. (2006). Does educational tracking affekt performance and inequality? Differences-in-differences evidence across countries. The Economic Journal, 116, 63-76.
23. Hiebert, J., Gallimore, R., Garnier, H., Givvin, K. B., Hollingsworth, H., & Jacobs, J. (2003). Teaching mathamatics in seven countries: Results from TIMSS 1999 video study. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
24. Hox, J. (2002). Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
25. Huang, R., & Leung, F. K. S. (2002). How Pythagoraś theorem is taught in Czech Republic, Hong Kong and Shanghai: A case study. ZDM Mathematics Education, 34(6), 268-277.
26. Hugener, I., Pauli, C., Reusser, K., Lipowsky, F., Rakoczy, K., & Klieme, E. (2009). Teaching patterns and learning quality in Swiss and Germany mathematics lessons. Learning and Instruction, 19, 66-78.
27. King, A. (1992). Facilitating elaborative learning througth guided student-generated questioning. Educational Psychologist, 27, 111-126.
28. Kline, R. B. (1998). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guildford Press.
29. Lampert, M. (2001). Teaching problems and the problems of teaching. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
30. Lester, F. K. (2007). Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning. USA: National council of teachers of mathematics.
31. Lindblad, S., & Sahlström, F. (1999). Gamla mönster och nya gränser: Om ramfaktorer och klassrumsinteraktion. [Old patterns and new boundaries: About limitation factors and classroom interaction.]Pedagogisk Forskning i Sverige, 4(1), 73-92.
32. Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1976). On qualitative differences in learning: Outcome and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 4-11.
33. Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1997). Approaches to learning. In F. Marton, D. Hounsell, & N. Entwistle (Eds.), The experience of learning (pp. 39-58). Edingburgh: Scottish Academic Press.
34. Mok, I. A. C. (2003). A teacher-dominating lesson in Shanghai: The teacheŕs and the learneŕs perspectives. Paper presented at the The Conference of the Learneŕs Perspective Study.
35. Mok, I. A. C., & Morris, P. (2001). The metamorphosis of the "virtuoso": Pedagogic patterns in Hong Kong primary mathematics classrooms. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(4), 455-468.
36. Mok, I., Cai, J., & Fong Fung, A. (2008). Missing learning opportunities in classroom instruction: Evidence from an analysis of a well-structured lesson on comparing fractions. The Mathematics Educator, 11(1/2), 111-126.
37. Morgan, C., Tsatsaroni, A., & Lerman, S. (2002). Mathematics teachers' positions and practices in discourses of assessment. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 23(3), 445-461.
38. Moschkovich, J. (2002). A situated and sociocultural perspective on bilingual mathematics learners. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 4(2/3), 189-212.
39. Moschkovich, J. (2007). Using two languages when learning mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 64(2), 121-144.
40. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998). Mplus useŕs guide. Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén.
41. Österlind, E. (1998). Disciplinering via frihet: Elevers planering av sitt eget arbete. [Disciplination by liberty: Sudents planning of their own work.] Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis.
42. Porter, A. C. (1989). A curriculum out of balance: The case of elementary school mathematics. Educational Researcher, 18(5), 9-15.
43. Saxe, G. B., Gearhart, M., Note, M., & Paduano, P. (1993). Peer interaction and the development of mathematical understanding. In H. Daniels (Ed.), Charting the agenda: Educational activity after Vygotsky (pp. 107-144). London: Routledge.
44. Seidel, T., & Shavelson, R. J. (2007). Teaching effectiveness research in the past decade: The role of theory and research design in disentangling meta-analysis results. Review of Educational Research, 77(4), 454-499.
45. Shayer, M., & Adhami, M. (2007). Fostering cognitive development through the context of mathematics: Results of the CAME project. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 64(3), 265-291.
46. Silver, E. A., & Smith, M. S. (1996). Building discourse communities in mathematics classrooms: A worthwhile but challenging journey. In P. Elliott (Ed.), Communication in mathematics, K-12 and beyond (pp. 20-28). Yearbook, Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
47. Skolverket. (2004). Nationella utvärderingen av grundskolan 2003. [The national evaluation of the compulsory school.] Stockholm: Skolverket.
48. Skolverkets Rapport nr. 323. (2008). TIMSS. Svenska grundskoleelevers kunspaker i matematik och naturvetenskap i ett internationellt perspektiv. [TIMSS. Swedish compulsory school students' knowledges is an international perspective.] Stockholm: Skolverket.
49. Ståhle, Y. (2006). Pedagogiken i tiden: Om framväxten av nya underviningsformer under tidigt 2000-tal, exemplet Kunskapsskolan. [The pedagogy in our time: About the growth of new instructional practises during early 2000th, the example "The knowledge school".] Lärarhögskolan i Stockholm, Stockholm.
50. Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (1997). Understanding and improving classroom mathematics instruction. Phi Delta Kappan, 79, 14-21.
51. Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (1999). The teaching gap: Best ideas from the world́s teachers for improving education in the classroom. New York, NY: The Free Press.
52. Webb, N. (1991). Task-related verbal interaction and mathematics learning in small groups. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 22(5), 366-389.
53. Vinterek, M. (2006). Individualisering i ett skolsammanhang. [Individualization in a school context.] Stockholm: Myndigheten för skolutveckling, forskning i fokus, nr 31. Liber.
54. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
55. Vygotsky, L. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
56. Yackel, E., Cobb, P., Wood, T., Wheatley, G., & Merkel, G. (1990). The importance of social interaction in childreńs construction of mathematical knowledge. In T. J. Cooney & C. R. Hirsch (Eds.), Teaching and learning mathematics in the 1990s. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.