Erratum to The mathematics education of future primary and secondary teachers: Methods and findings from the Teacher Education and Development Study in Mathematics (Journal of Teacher Education, (2011), 62, 2, (121-137), 10.1177/0022487110391807);The mathematics education of future primary and secondary teachers: Methods and findings from the teacher education and development study in mathematics

Journal of Teacher Education

Volumn 62, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 121-137

  Tatto, Maria Teresa ^a   Senk, Sharon ^a  

^a MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

international comparative; mathematics education; methodology; teacher education development

Indexed keywords

EID: 79953689957     PISSN: 00224871     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0022487111408550     Document Type: Erratum

References (35)

1. Ball, D.L. (1991). Research on teaching mathematics: Making subject matter knowledge part of the equation. In J. Brophy (Ed.), Advances in research on teaching Vol. 2. Teachers' knowledge of subject matter as it relates to their teaching practice (pp. 1-48). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
2. Ball, D.L., & Bass, H. (2003). Making mathematics reasonable in school. In J. Kilpatrick, W. G. Martin, & D. Schifter (Eds.), A research companion to principles and standards for school mathematics (pp. 27-44). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
3. Barber, M., & Mourshed, M. (2007). How the world's best performing school systems come out on top. London, England: McKinsey.
4. Baumert, J., Kunter, M., Blum, W., Brunner, M., Voss, T., Jordan, A.,Tsai, Y-M. (2010). Teachers' mathematical knowledge, cognitive activation in the classroom, and student progress. American Educational Research Journal, 47(1), 133-180.
5. Britton, T., Paine, L., Raizen, S., & D. Pimm, Eds. (2003). Comprehensive teacher induction: Systems for early career learning. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.
6. Commission on Mathematics and Science Education. (2009). The opportunity equation: Transforming mathematics and science education for citizenship and the global economy. New York, NY: Carnegie Corporation.
7. Conference Board of Mathematical Sciences. (2001). The mathematical education of teachers (Vol. 2). Washington, DC: American Mathematical Society.
8. Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy evidence. Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 8(1). Available athttp://epaa.asu.edu.
9. Darling-Hammond, L. (2010). The flat world and education. New York, NY: Teacher College Press.
10. De Ayala, R.J. (2009). The theory and practice of item response theory. New York, NY: Guilford.
11. Even, R., & Ball, D. L. (Eds.). (2009). The professional education and development of teachers of mathematics: The 15th ICMI Study. New York, NY: Springer.
12. Fennema, E., & Franke, M.L. (1992). Teachers' knowledge and its impact. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 147-164). New York, NY: Macmillan.
13. Floden, R.E. (2002). The measurement of opportunity to learn. In A. C. Porter & A. Gamoran (Eds.), Methodological advances in cross-national surveys of educational achievement (pp. 231-266). Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
14. Hiebert, J., Gallimore, R., Garnier, H., Givvin, K.B., Hollingsworth, H., Jacobs, J.,et al.(2003). Teaching mathematics in seven countries: Results from the TIMSS 1999 video study (NCES 2003-013). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
15. Hill, H.C., Sleep, L., Lewis, J.M., & Ball, D.L. (2007). Assessing teachers' mathematical knowledge: What matters and what evidence counts? In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 111-156). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
16. Husen, T. (Ed.). (1967). International study of achievement in mathematics: A comparison of twelve countries. New York, NY: Wiley.
17. Ingersoll, R.M. (1999). The problem of underqualified teachers in American secondary schools. Educational Researcher, 28(2), 26-37.
18. Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J., & Findell, B. (Eds.). (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
19. Ma, L. (1999). Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
20. Masters, G.N. (1982). A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrika, 47(2), 149-174.
21. National Center for Education Statistics. (2009). Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Available athttp://nces.ed.gov/TIMSS.
22. National Research Council. (2010). Preparing teachers: Building evidence for sound policy (Committee on the Study of Teacher Preparation Programs in the United States, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
23. Post, T.R., Harel, G., Behr, M.J., & Lesh, R. (1991). Intermediate teachers' knowledge of rational number concepts. In E. Fennema, T. P. Carpenter, & S. J. Lamon (Eds.), Integrating research on teaching and learning mathematics (pp. 177-198). New York: State University of New York Press.
24. Rasch, G. (1980). Probabilistic Models for some Intelligence and Attainment Tests. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
25. Schmidt, W.H., Tatto, M.T., Bankov, K., Blömeke, S., Cedillo, T., Cogan, L.,Schwille, J. (2007). The preparation gap: Teacher preparation for middle school mathematics in six countries (MT21 report). East Lansing, MI: Center for Research in Mathematics and Science Education. Retrieved from http://usteds.msu.edu/MT21Report.pdf.
26. Tatto, M.T. (1996). Examining values and beliefs about teaching diverse students: Understanding the challenges for teacher education. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 18(2), 155-180.
27. Tatto, M.T. (2001). Empirical measures of teacher quality: Comparative perspectives. Washington, DC: National Research Council, Board on International and Comparative Studies in Education. Available athttp://www.4.nationalacademies.org/dbasse/bicse.nsf/web/current_projects.
28. Tatto, M. T. (Ed.). (in press). Teacher Education Study in Mathematics (TEDS-M) technical report. East Lansing: Michigan State University, TEDS-M. International Study Center.
29. Tatto, M.T., Nielsen, H.D., Cummings, W.C., Kularatna, N.G., & Dharmadasa, D.H. (1993). Comparing the effectiveness and costs of different approaches for educating primary school teachers in Sri Lanka. Teaching and Teacher Education, 9(1), 41-64.
30. Tatto, M.T., Schwille, J., Senk, S.L., Bankov, K., Rodriguez, M., Reckase, M., Ingvarson, L., Rowley, G., & Peck, R. (in press). The Teacher Education Study In Mathematics (TEDS-M), International Report: Findings From The IEA Study of The Mathematics Preparation of Future Teachers. East Lansing: Michigan State University, TEDS-M International Study Center.
31. Tatto, M.T., Schwille, J., Senk, S.L., Ingvarson, L., Peck, R., & Rowley, G. (2008). Teacher Education Study in Mathematics (TEDS-M), conceptual framework. East Lansing: Michigan State University, International Study Center.
32. Tatto, M.T., Senk, S.L., Bankov, K., Rodriguez, M., & Peck, R. (2011). TEDS-M 2008 Assessment Frameworks: Measuring future primary and secondary teachers mathematics and mathematics pedagogy knowledge. East Lansing: Michigan State University, TEDS-M International Study Center.
33. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (1997, November). International Standard Classification of Education. Available athttp://www.unesco.org/education/information/nfsunesco/doc/isced_1997.htm.
34. Wilson, S.M., Floden, R.E., & Ferrini-Mundy, J. (2002). Teacher preparation research: An insider's view from the outside. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(3), 190-204.
35. Wu, M., Adams, R., Wilson, M., & Haldane, S. (2007). ACER Conquest: Generalised item response modelling software (Version 2.0) [computer software]. Melbourne, Australia: ACER.