Knowledge of algebra for teaching: A framework of knowledge and practices

Journal for Research in Mathematics Education

Volumn 43, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 584-615

  McCrory, Raven ^a   Floden, Robert ^a   Ferrini Mundy, Joan ^b   Reckase, Mark D ^a   Senk, Sharon L ^a  

^a MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION   (United States)

Author keywords

Algebra; Assessment; Content knowledge; Secondary mathematics; Teacher knowledge

Indexed keywords

EID: 84870379136     PISSN: 00218251     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5951/jresematheduc.43.5.0584     Document Type: Article

References (95)

1. Adler, J., & Davis, Z. (2006). Opening another black box: Researching mathematics for teaching in mathematics teacher education. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 37, 270-296. doi:10.2307/30034851. (Pubitemid 44059559)
2. Allensworth, E. M., & Nomi, T. (2009). College-preparatory curriculum for all: The consequences of raising mathematics graduation requirements on students 'course taking and outcomes in Chicago. Chicago, IL: Consortium on Chicago School Research, University of Chicago.
3. Annenberg/CPB Math and Science Project, & WGBH Boston (1996). Teaching math: A video library, 9-12. Boston, MA: WGBH Boston, http://www.learner.org/resources/series34.html
4. Arzt, A., & Sultan, A. (2010). The mathematics that every secondary school math teacher needs to know. New York, NY: Routledge.
5. Askey, R. (1999). Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics. American Educator, 23(3), 1-8. http://www.aft.org/pdfs/americaneducator/fall1999/amed 1.pdf
6. Ball, D. L. (1988). Knowledge and reasoning in mathematical pedagogy: Examining what prospective teachers bring to teacher education (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI.
7. Ball, D. L. (1990). The mathematical understandings that prospective teachers bring to teacher education. Elementary School Journal, 90, 449-166. doi:10.1086/461626
8. Ball, D. L., & Bass, H. (2000a). Making believe: The collective construction of public mathematical knowledge in the elementary classroom. In D. C. Phillips (Ed.), Ninety-ninth yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education: Part I. Constructivism in education: Opinions and second opinions on controversial issues (pp. 193-224). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
9. Ball, D. L., & Bass, H. (2000b). Interweaving content and pedagogy in teaching and learning to teach: Knowing and using mathematics. In J. Boaler (Ed.), Multiple perspectives on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 83-104). Westport, CT: Ablex.
10. Ball, D. L., & Bass, H. (2003). Toward a practice-based theory of mathematical knowledge for teaching. In B. Davis & E. Simmt (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2002 Annual Meeting of the Canadian Mathematics Education Study Group (pp. 3-14). Edmonton, AB: CMESG/GCEDM. htrp://wwwpersonal.umich.edu/ ~dball/chapters/BallBassTowardAPracticeBased.pdf
11. Ball, D. L., & McDiarmid, G. W. (1990). The subject matter preparation of prospective mathematics teachers. In W. R. Houston, M. Haberman, & J. Sikula (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 437-449). New York, NY: Macmillan.
12. Barker, W., Bressoud, D., Epp, S., Ganter, S., Haver, B., & Pollatsek, H. (2004). Undergraduate programs and courses in the mathematical sciences: CUPM curriculum guide 2004. A report by the Committee on the Undergraduate Program in Mathematics of the Mathematical Association of America. Washington, DC: Mathematical Association of America.
13. Bellman, A., Bragg, S. C, Chapin, S. H., Gardella, T. J., Hall, B. C, Handlin, W. G., Sr., & Manfre, E. (1998). Algebra: Tools for a changing world. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
14. Blume, G. W., & Heckman, D. S. (1997). What do students know about algebra and functions? In P. A. Kenney & E. A. Silver (Eds.), Results of the sixth mathematics assessment of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (pp. 225-278). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
15. Brophy, J. (2006). Observational research on generic aspects of classroom teaching. In P. A. Alexander & P. H. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (2nd ed., pp. 755-780). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
16. Brown, R. G., Dolciani, M. P., Sorgenfrey, R. H., & Cole, W. L. (2000). Algebra: Structure and method. Evanston, IL: McDougal Littell.
17. Brumfiel, C. (1980). Teaching the absolute value function. Mathematics Teacher, 73, 24-30. http://www.nctm.org/publications/mt.aspx
18. Bruner, J. S. (1960). The process of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
19. Bush, W. S. (2009). Diagnostic mathematics assessments for middle school teachers. Retrieved from http://louisville.edu/education/research/centers/ crmstd/diag-math-assess-middle-teachers.html
20. California Mathematics Professional Development Institutes. (2002). Mathematics Professional Development Institutes, Algebra Foundations Institute, Survey, Form B. Retrieved January 16, 2012, from http://bit.ly/zt30X5
21. Carlson, M., Oehrtman, M., & Engelke, N. (2010). The Precalculus Concept Assessment: A tool for assessing students' reasoning abilities and understandings. Cognition and Instruction, 28, 113-145. doi:10.1080/ 07370001003676587
22. Chazan, D., Larriva, C, & Sandow, D. (1999). What kind of mathematical knowledge supports teaching for "conceptual understanding"? Preservice teachers and the solving of equations. In O. Zaslavsky (Ed.), Proceedings of the 23rd Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 193-200). Haifa, Israel: Technion Printing Center.
23. Chazan, D., Yerushalmy, M., & Leikin, R. (2008). An analytic conception of equation and teachers' views of school algebra. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 27, 87-100. doi:10.1016/j. jmathb.2008.07.003
24. Clement, J., Lochhead, J., & Monk, G. S. (1981). Translation difficulties in learning mathematics. The American Mathematical Monthly, 88, 286-290. doi: 10.2307/2320560
25. Cohen, D. K. (2004). Teaching and its predicaments. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
26. Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences. (2001). Issues in Mathematics Education: Vol. 11. The mathematical education of teachers. Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society, in cooperation with Mathematical Association of America.
27. Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences. (2012). The mathematical education of teachers II: Draft for public discussion. Retrieved February 13, 2012, from http://www.cbmsweb.org
28. Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy evidence. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8 (1). http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/392/515
29. Delaney, S. F., Sleep, L., Ball, D. L., Bass, H., Hill, H. C, & Dean, C. (2005, April). Validating "specialized mathematics knowledge for teaching": Evidence from mathematicians. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montréal, Canada.
30. Doerr, H. M. (2006). Examining the tasks of teaching when using students' mathematical thinking. Educational Studies in Mathematics. 62, 3-24. doi: 10.1007/s 10649-006-4437-9 (Pubitemid 44116389)
31. Dolciani, M. P., Berman, S. L., & Freilich, J. (1965). Modern algebra. Book one. Structure and method. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
32. Dubinsky, E., & McDonald, M. A. (2001). APOS: A constructivist theory of learning in undergrad mathematics education research. In D. Holton (Ed.), New ICMI Study Series: Vol. 7. The teaching and learning of mathematics at university level: An ICMI study (pp. 275-282). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer.
33. 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
34. Even, R.. & Ball, D. L. (Eds.). (2008). New ICMI Study Series: Vol. II. The professional education and development of teachers of mathematics: The 15 th ICMI study. New York, NY: Springer.
35. Fendel, D., Resek, D., Alper, L., & Fraser, S. (1999). Interactive mathematics program: Year 3. Berkeley, CA: Key Curriculum Press.
36. Ferguson, P., & Womack, S. T. (1993). The impact of subject matter and education coursework on teaching performance. Journal of Teacher Education, 44, 55-63. doi: 10.1177/0022487193044001008
37. Goldhaber, D. D., & Brewer, D. J. (2000). Does teacher certification matter? Educational Evaluation & Policy Analysis, 22, 129-145. doi:10.2307/l 164392
38. Güçler, B. (2010). Development of discourse on limits: Connecting history and classroom practice through a communicational approach to learning (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI.
39. Hawk, P. P., Coble, C. R., & Swanson, M. (1985). Certification: It does matter. Journal of Teacher Education, 36, 13-15. doi:10.1177/ 002248718503600303
40. Hill, H. C, Ball, D. L., Blunk, M., Goffney, I. M., & Rowan, B. (2007). Validating the ecological assumption: The relationship of measure scores to classroom teaching and student learning. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research & Perspective, 5, 107-118. doi:10.1080/15366360701481138
41. Hill, H. C, Ball, D. L., & Schilling, S. G. (2008). Unpacking pedagogical content knowledge: Conceptualizing and measuring teachers' topic-specific knowledge of students. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 39, 372-400. http://www.jrme.org/publications/jrme.aspx
42. Hill, H. C, Rowan, B., & Ball, D. L. (2005). Effects of teachers' mathematical knowledge for teaching on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 42, 371-406. doi:10.3102/00028312042002371 (Pubitemid 40882630)
43. Hill, H. C, Sleep, L., Lewis, J. M., & Ball, D. L. (2007). Assessing teachers' mathematical knowledge: What knowledge matters and what evidence counts? In F. K. Lester Jr. (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 111-156). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
44. Howe, R. (1999). Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics. [Review of the book Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics: Teachers' understanding of fundamental mathematics in China and the United States, by L. Ma]. Notices of the AMS, 46, 881-887. http://www.ams.org/notices/199908/rev-howe.pdf
45. Kennedy, M. M., Ball, D. L., & McDiarmid, G. W. (1993). A study package for examining and tracking changes in teachers' knowledge. East Lansing, MI: National Center for Research on Teacher Education, College of Education, Michigan State University. Retrieved from http://ncrtl.msu.edu/http/tseries/ ts931.htm
46. Kieran, C. (1992). The learning and teaching of school algebra. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 390-419). New York, NY: Macmillan.
47. Kieran, C. (2007). Learning and teaching algebra at the middle school through college levels: Building meaning for symbols and their manipulation. In F. K. Lester Jr. (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 707-762). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
48. Knuth, E. J. (2002). Secondary school mathematics teachers' conceptions of proof. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 33, 379-405. doi: 10.2307/4149959
49. Krauss, S., Brunner, M., Kunter, M., Baumert, J., Blum, W., Neubrand, M., & Jordan, A. (2008). Pedagogical content knowledge and content knowledge of secondary mathematics teachers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 716-725. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.100.3.716
50. Lampert, M. (2001). Teaching problems and the problems of teaching. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
51. Leitzel, J. R. C. (Ed.). (1991). A call for change: Recommendations for the mathematical preparation of teachers of mathematics. Washington, DC: Mathematical Association of America.
52. Lester, F. K., Jr., & Ferrini-Mundy, J. (2004). Proceedings of the NCTM Research Catalyst Conference. Reston, VA: NCTM.
53. Lobato, J., Ellis, A. B., & Muñoz, R. (2003). How "focusing phenomena" in the instructional environment support individual students' generalizations. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 5, 1-36. (Pubitemid 36116843)
54. Loveless, T. (2008, September). The 2008 Brown Center Report on American education: The misplaced math student: Lost in eighth-grade algebra (Special Release). Washington, DC: The Brown Center on Educational Policy.
55. Ma, L. (1999). Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics: Teachers 'understanding of fundamental mathematics in China and the United States. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
56. MacGregor, M., & Stacey, K. (1997). Students' understanding of algebraic notation: 11-15. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 33, 1-19. doi:10.1023/A:1002970913563 (Pubitemid 127074691)
57. Marcus, R., & Chazan, D. (2010). What experienced teachers have learned from helping students think about solving equations in the one-variable-first algebra curriculum. In R. Leikin & R. Zazkis (Eds.), Mathematics teacher education: Vol. 5. Learning through teaching mathematics: Development of teachers' knowledge and expertise in practice (pp. 169-186). New York, NY: Springer, doi:10.1007/978-90-481-3990-3
58. Milgram, R. J. (2004). The mathematics pre-service teachers need to know. Stanford, CA: Stanford University, http://hub.mspnet.org/index.cfm/13083
59. Monk, D. H. (1994). Subject area preparation of secondary mathematics and science teachers and student achievement. Economics of Education Review, 13, 125-145. doi:10.1016/0272-7757 (94) 90003-5
60. Nathan, M. J., & Koedinger, K. R. (2000). An investigation of teachers' beliefs of students' algebra development. Cognition and Instruction, 18, 209-237. doi:10.1207/S1532690XCI1802-03.
61. Nathan, M. J., & Petrosino, A. (2003). Expert blind spot among preservice teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 40, 905-928. doi:10.3102/00028312040004905 (Pubitemid 38355124)
62. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1991). Professional standards for teaching mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
63. National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). Foundations for success: Final report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Education.
64. National Research Council. (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics (J. Kilpatrick, J. Swafford, & B. Findell, Eds.). Washington, DC: National Research Council, Mathematics Learning Study Committee, National Academy Press.
65. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. (2010). PISA 2009 assessment framework: Key competencies in reading, mathematics and science. OECD Publishing. doi:10.1787/9789264062658-en.
66. Quality Counts. (2006). Quality counts at 10: A decade of standards-based education. Education Week, 25 (17).
67. Quinlan, C. (2001). Importance of view regarding algebraic symbols. In H. Chick, K. Stacey, J. Vincent, & J. Vincent (Eds.), Proceedings of the 12th ICMI Study Conference: The Future of the Teaching and Learning of Algebra (Vol. 2, pp. 507-514). Melbourne, Australia: University of Melbourne.
68. RAND Mathematics Study Panel. (2002). Mathematical proficiency for all students: Toward a strategic research and development program in mathematics education (No. MR-1643.0-OERI). Washington, DC: Office of Education Research and Improvement, U. S. Department of Education.
69. Reys, B. J., Dingman, S., Nevels, N., & Teuscher, D. (2007). High school mathematics: State-level curriculum standards and graduation requirements. East Lansing, MI: Center for the Study of Mathematics Curriculum.
70. Schilling, S. G., Blunk, M., & Hill, H. C. (2007). Test validation and the MKT measures: Generalizations and conclusions. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research & Perspectives, 5, 118-128. doi:10.1080/ 15366360701487146
71. Seago, N., Mumme, J., & Branca, N. (2004). Learning and teaching linear functions: Video cases for mathematics professional development. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
72. Senk, S. L., Thompson, D. R., Viktora, S. S., Usiskin, Z., Abel, N. P., Levin, S.,... Pillsbury, G. (1996). The University of Chicago School Mathematics Project advanced algebra (2nd ed.). Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman.
73. Sfard, A. (1991). On the dual nature of mathematical conceptions: Reflections on processes and objects as different sides of the same coin. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 22, 1-36. doi:10.1007/BF00302715
74. Sfard, A. (2008). Thinking as communicating: Human development, the growth of discourses, and mathematizing. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
75. Sfard, A., & Linchevski, L. (1994). The gains and the pitfalls of reification-the case of algebra. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 26, 191-228. doi: 10.1007/BF01273663
76. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14. doi:10.2307/1175860
77. Silverman, J., & Thompson, P. W. (2008). Toward a framework for the development of mathematical knowledge for teaching. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 11, 499-511. doi:10.1007/S10857-008-9089-5
78. Simon, M. (2006). Key developmental understandings in mathematics: A direction for investigating and establishing learning goals. Mathematical Thinking & Learning, 8, 359-371. doi:10.1207/sl5327833mtl0804-l
79. Stein, M. K., Kaufman, J. H., Sherman, M., & Hillen, A. F. (2011). Algebra: A challenge at the crossroads of policy and practice. Review of Educational Research, 81, 453-492. doi:10.3102/0034654311423025
80. 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 (NCES 99-074). Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office.
81. Sullivan, P., & Wood, T. (Eds.). (2008). The international handbook of mathematics teacher education: Vol. 1. Knowledge and beliefs in mathematics teaching and teacher development. Rotterdam, the Netherlands: Sense.
82. Tatto, M. T., Schwille, J., Senk, S. L., Ingvarson, L., Peck, R., and & Rowley, G. (2008). Teacher Education and Development Study in Mathematics (TEDS-M): Policy, practice and readiness to teach primary and secondary mathematics. Conceptual framework. East Lansing, MI: Teacher Education and Development International Center, College of Education, Michigan State University.
83. Tatto, M. T., Schwille, J., Senk, S. L., Ingvarson, L., Rowley, G., Peck, R..... Reckase, M. (2012). Policy, practice, and readiness to teach primary and secondary mathematics in 17 countries: Findings from the IEA Teacher Education and Development Study in Mathematics (TEDS-M). International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA). Retrieved July 1, 2012, from http://www.iea.n1
84. Tyler, R. W. (1949). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
85. U. S. Department of Education, & National Center for Education Statistics. (1998). Pursuing excellence: A study of U. S. twelfth-grade: Mathematics and science achievement in international context (NCES 98-049). Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office.
86. U. S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2008). Education and certification qualifications of departmentalized public high school level teachers of core subjects: Evidence from the 2003-04 Schools and Staffing Survey (Report No. 2008-338). Washington, DC: Author.
87. U. S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development, Policy and Program Studies Service. (2010). Recent trends in mean scores and characteristics of test-takers on Praxis II licensure tests. Washington, D. C.: Author.
88. Usiskin, Z. (2001, November). Teachers' mathematics: A collection of content deserving to be afield. Presentation at National Summit on the Mathematical Education of Teachers Meeting the Demand for High Quality Mathematics Education in America, Tysons Corner, VA. Retrieved from http://cbmsweb.org/NationalSummitAVG-Speakers/usiskin.htm
89. Usiskin, Z., Peressini, A., Marchisotto, E. A., & Stanley, D. (2003). Mathematics for high school teachers: An advanced perspective. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
90. Valverde, G. A., Bianchi, L. J., Wolfe, R. G., Schmidt, W. H., & Houang, R. T. (2002). According to the book: Using TIMSS to investigate the translation of policy into practice through the world of textbooks. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer.
91. Van Dooren, W, Verschaffel, L., & Onghena, P. (2002). The impact of preservice teachers' content knowledge on their evaluation of students' strategies for solving arithmetic and algebra word problems. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 33, 319-351. doi:10.2307/4149957
92. Wilson, P. S., & Heid, M. K. (Eds.) (2010). Framework for mathematical proficiency for teaching. Unpublished manuscript.
93. Wilson, S. M., Floden, R. E., & Ferrini-Mundy, J. (2001). Teacher preparation research: Current knowledge, gaps, and recommendations (Document R-01-3). East Lansing, MI: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy.
94. Wu, H. (1999). Professional development of mathematics teachers. Notices of the AMS, 46(5), 535-542. http://www.ams.org/notices/199905/fea-wu.pdf
95. Wu, H. (2001). How to prepare students for algebra. American Educator, 25(2), 10-17.