Homogeneity or heterogeneity? Profiles of opportunities to learn in primary teacher education and their relationship to cultural context and outcomes

ZDM - Mathematics Education

Volumn 44, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 249-264

  Blömeke, Sigrid ^a   Kaiser, Gabriele ^b  

^a HUMBOLDT UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF HAMBURG   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84884507922     PISSN: 18639690     EISSN: 18639704     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11858-011-0378-6     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Bishop, A. J. (2004). Mathematics education in its cultural context. In T. P. Carpenter, J. A. Dossey, & J. L. Koehler (Eds.), Classics in mathematics education research (pp. 200-207). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
2. Blömeke, S., Kaiser, G., & Lehmann, R. (Eds.). (2010). TEDS-M 2008-Professionelle Kompetenz und Lerngelegenheiten angehender Primarstufenlehrkräfte im internationalen Vergleich. Münster, Germany: Waxmann.
3. Blömeke, S., & Paine, L. (2008). Getting the fish out of the water: Considering benefits and problems of doing research on teacher education at an international level. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(4), 2027-2037.
4. Blömeke, S., Paine, L., Houang, R. T., Hsieh, F.-J., Schmidt, W. H., Tatto, M. T., et al. (2008). Future teachers' competence to plan a lesson. First results of a six-country study on the efficiency of teacher education. ZDM-The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 40(5), 749-762.
5. Blömeke, S., Suhl, U., & Kaiser, G. (2011). Teacher education effectiveness: Quality and equity of future primary teachers' mathematics and mathematics pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Teacher Education, 62(2), 154-171.
6. Blömeke, S., Suhl, U., Kaiser, G., & Döhrmann, M. (2012). Family background, entry selectivity and opportunities to learn: What matters in primary teacher education? An international comparison of fifteen countries. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28, 44-55.
7. Cochran-Smith, M., & Zeichner, K. M. (Eds.). (2005). Studying teacher education. The report of the AERA Panel on research and teacher education. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
8. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
9. Criblez, L. (1999). Neue Schwerpunkte für die Lehrerbildungspolitik. Einige Konsequenzen aus dem Nationalfondsprojekt zur "Wirksamkeit derLehrerbildungssysteme" für diekünftigeLehrerinnenund Lehrerbildung. Beiträge zur Lehrerbildung, 17(2), 162-173.
10. Cronbach, L. J. (1976). Research on classrooms and schools: Formulation of questions, design, and analysis. Stanford: Stanford Evaluation Consortium, Stanford University.
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. Fielker, D. (1986). An analysis of geometry teaching in the United Kingdom. In R. Morris (Ed.), Studies in mathematics education, volume 5: Geometry in schools. Paris: UNESCO.
13. Klieme, E., & Baumert, J. (2001). Identifying national cultures of mathematics education: Analysis of cognitive demands and differential item functioning in TIMSS. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 16(3), 385-402.
14. KMK. (2005). Bildungsstandards im Fach Mathematik für den Primarbereich. Beschluss vom 15.10. 2004. München, Germany: Wolters Kluwer.
15. König, J., Blömeke, S., Paine, L., Schmidt, W. H., & Hsieh, F.-J. (2011). General pedagogical knowledge of future middle school teachers: On the complex ecology of teacher education in the United States, Germany, and Taiwan. Journal of Teacher Education, 62(2), 188-201.
16. Leung, F. K. S., Graf, K.-D., & Lopez-Real, F. J. (Eds.). (2006). Mathematics education in different cultural traditions-A comparative study of the East Asia and the West. The 13th ICMI Study (pp. 21-46). New York: Springer.
17. Lim-Theo, S. K. (2009). Mathematics teacher education: Pre-service and in-service programmes. In K. Y. Wong, P. Y. Lee, B. Kaur, P. Y. Foong, & S. F. Ng (Hrsg.), Mathematics education. The Singapore journey (pp. 48-84). Singapore: World Scientific.
18. Marsh, H. W., Hau, K. T., & Wen, Z. (2004). In search of golden rules: Comment on hypothesis testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralising Hu & Bentler's (1999) findings. Structural Equation Modeling, 11, 320-341.
19. McDonnell, L. M. (1995). Opportunity to learn as a research concept and a policy instrument. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 17(3), 305-322.
20. McLachlan, G. J., & Peel, D. (2000). Finite Mixture Models. New York: Wiley.
21. Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., & Foy, P. (2008). TIMSS 2007. International Mathematics Report. Findings from IEA's Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study at the Fourth and Eighth Grades. Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College.
22. Muthén, B. O., & Muthén, L. K. (2008). Mplus (Version 5.21) [Computer software]. CA: Los Angeles.
23. NCATE. (2001). NCATE's ten-year progress report-Accrediting body changing the status quo in teacher preparation: Many states adopt profession's standards. Washington, DC: NCATE.
24. NCTM. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston: NCTM.
25. Niss, M. (1999). Aspects of the nature and state of research in mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 40(1), 1-24.
26. NOKUT (Nasjonalt Organ for Kvalitet i Utdanningen). (2006). Evaluering av Allmennlæ-rerutdanningen i Norge 2006. Hovedrapport. http://www.nokut.no/Documents/NOKUT/Artikkelbib liotek/Norsk_utdanning/SK/alueva/ALUEVA_Hovedrapport.pdf. Download 2010, January 25.
27. Nylund, K. L., Asparouhov, T., & Muthen, B. (2007). Deciding on the number of classes in latent class analysis and growth mixture modeling: A Monte Carlo simulation study. Structural Equation Modeling, 14, 535-569.
28. Ramaswamy, V., De Sarbo, W., Reibskin, D., & Robinson, W. (1993). An empirical pooling approach for estimating marketing mix elasticities with PIMS data. Marketing Science, 12, 103-124.
29. Schmidt, W. H., Blömeke, S., & Tatto, M. T. (2011). Teacher education matters. A study of the mathematics teacher preparation from six countries. New York: Teacher College Press.
30. Schmidt, W. H., Houang, R. T, Cogan, L., Blömeke, S., Tatto, M. T., Hsieh, F. J., Paine, L. (2008). Opportunity to learn in the preparation of mathematics teachers: its structure and how it varies across six countries. ZDM-The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 40(5), 735-747.
31. Schwarz, G. E. (1978). Estimating the dimension of a model. Annals of Statistics, 6(2), 461-464.
32. Stark, J., & Lattuca, L. R. (1997). Shaping the College Curriculum: Academic Plans in Action. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
33. Tatto, M. T., Schwille, J., Senk, S., Ingvarson, L., Peck, R., & 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 Study Center, College of Education, Michigan State University.
34. Tatto, M. T., Schwille, J., Senk, S. L., Rodriguez, M., Bankov, K., Reckase, M. et al. (2011). The Mathematics Teacher Education and Development Study (TEDS-M). Policy, practice, and readiness to teach primary and secondary mathematics: First findings. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: IEA (in press).
35. Terhart, E. (Ed.). (2000). Perspektiven der Lehrerbildung in Deutschland. Abschlussbericht der von der Kultusministerkonferenz eingesetzten Kommission. Weinheim: Beltz.
36. UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural 10. Organization). (1997). International Standard Classification of Education ISCED 1997. Paris: UNESCO.
37. van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Leung, K. (1997). Methods and data analysis for cross-cultural research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.