IMPROVING MATHEMATICS TEACHER EDUCATION IN GERMANY: EMPIRICAL RESULTS FROM A LONGITUDINAL EVALUATION OF INNOVATIVE PROGRAMS

International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education

Volumn 11, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 949-977

  Buchholtz, Nils ^a   Kaiser, Gabriele ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HAMBURG   (Germany)

Author keywords

elementary mathematics from an advanced standpoint; evaluation study; Germany; IRT; longitudinal study; MCK; MPCK; professional knowledge; teacher training program; TEDS M; TEDS Telekom

Indexed keywords

EID: 84884518499     PISSN: 15710068     EISSN: 15731774     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10763-013-9427-7     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Ableitinger, C. & Herrmann, A. (2011). Lernen aus Musterlösungen zur Analysis und Linearen Algebra. Ein Arbeits- und Übungsbuch. Wiesbaden: Vieweg + Teubner.
2. Adams, R. J., Wilson, M. R. & Wang, W. (1997). The multidimensional random coefficients multinomial logit model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 21, 1-23.
3. Anderson, L. W. & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Addison-Wesley.
4. Beutelspacher, A., Danckwerts, R., Nickel, G., Spieß, S. & Wickel, G. (2011). Mathematik Neu Denken. Impulse für die Gymnasiallehrerausbildung an Universitäten. Wiesbaden: Vieweg + Teubner.
5. Blömeke, S. & Delaney, S. (2012). Assessment of teacher knowledge across countries: A review of the state of research. ZDM-The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 44(3), 223-247.
6. Briedis, K., Egorova, T., Heublein, U., Lörz, M., Middendorff, E., Quast, H. & Spangenberg, H. (2008). Studienaufnahme, Studium und Berufsverbleib von Mathematikern. Einige Grunddaten zum Jahr der Mathematik. Forum Hochschule Report No. F09/2008. Hannover: HIS.
7. Bromme, R. (1994). Beyond subject matter: A psychological topology of teachers' professional knowledge. In R. Biehler, R. W. Scholz, R. Straesser & B. Winkelmann (Eds.), Mathematics didactics as a scientific discipline: The state of the art (pp. 73-88). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
8. Buchholtz, N., Kaiser, G. & Blömeke, S. (2013). Die Erhebung mathematikdidaktischen Wissens - Konzeptualisierung einer komplexen Domäne. To appear in: Journal for Didactics of Mathematics. (in print).
9. Cohen, J. (1969). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. San Diego: Academic.
10. Crawford, K., Gordon, S., Nicholas, J. & Prosser, M. (1998). Qualitatively different experiences of learning mathematics at university. Learning and Instruction, 8(5), 455-468.
11. Deiser, O. & Reiss, K. (2013). Knowledge transformation between secondary school and university mathematics. In A. Peter-Koop, S. Rezat & M. Hattermann (Eds.), Transformation in mathematics education: A new approach. New York: Springer.
12. Dieter, M., Brugger, P., Schnelle, D. & Törner, G. (2008). Zahlen rund um das Mathematikstudium-Teil 3. Mitteilungen der Deutschen Mathematiker Vereinigung, 16(3), 176-182.
13. Grigutsch, S., Raatz, U. & Törner, G. (1998). Einstellung gegenüber Mathematik bei Mathematiklehrern. Journal für Mathematik-Didaktik, 19(1), 3-45.
14. Gueudet, G. (2008). Investigating the secondary-tertiary transition. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 67(3), 237-254.
15. Hartig, J. & Höhler, J. (2008). Representation of competencies in multidimensional IRT models with within-item and between-item multidimensionality. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 216(2), 89-101.
16. Hartig, J. & Kühnbach, O. (2006). Estimating change using the plausible value technique within multidimensional Rasch-models. In A. Ittel & H. Merkens (Eds.), Veränderungsmessung und Längsschnittstudien in der Erziehungswissenschaft. Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
17. Heublein, U., Schmelzer, R. & Sommer, D. (2008). Die Entwicklung der Studienabbruchquote an den deutschen Hochschulen. Ergebnisse einer Berechnung des Studienabbruchs auf der Basis des Absolventenjahrgangs 2006. Project Report 2008. Hannover: HIS.
18. Kirsch, A. (1977). Aspekte des Vereinfachens im Mathematikunterricht. Didaktik der Mathematik, 5(2), 87-101.
19. Klein, F. (1932). Elementary mathematics from an advanced standpoint. Arithmetic, algebra, analysis. Translated from the third German edition by E. R. Hedrick and C. A. Noble. New York: Macmillan. (Originally published in German in 1905).
20. KMK = Conference of [State] Ministers of Education and Cultural Affairs (2011). Lehrereinstellungsbedarf und Lehrereinstellungsangebot in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Modellrechnung 2010-2020. Retrieved February 14. 2013, from http://www. kmk. org/fileadmin/pdf/Statistik/BERICHT_MODELLRECHNUNG_online. pdf.
21. Köller, O., Baumert, J. & Schnabel, K. (1999). Wege zur Hochschulreife. Offenheit des Systems und Sicherung vergleichbarer Standards. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 2(3), 385-422.
22. 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.
23. König, J. & Blömeke, S. (2012). Future teachers' general pedagogical knowledge from a comparative perspective: Does school experience matter? ZDM-The International Journal on Mathematics Teacher Education, 41(3), 341-354.
24. Rasch, G. (1960). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Copenhagen: Danish Institute for Educational Research.
25. Reckase, M. D. (2009). Multidimensional item response theory. New York: Springer.
26. Richardson, V. (1996). The role of attitudes and beliefs in learning to teach. In J. Sikula, T. Buttery & E. Guyton (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education (2nd ed., pp. 102-119). New York: Macmillan.
27. Rose, N., von Davier, M. & Xu, X. (2010). Modeling nonignorable missing data with item response theory (IRT). ETS Research Report No. 10-11. Princeton: ETS.
28. Rost, J. (2004). Lehrbuch Testkonstruktion Testtheorie (2nd ed.). Bern: Huber.
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. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
31. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-22.
32. Tatto, M. T., Schwille, J., Senk, S. L., Ingvarson, L., Rowley, G., Peck, R., Bankov, K., Rodriguez, M. & Reckase, M. (2012). Policy, practice, and readiness to teach primary and secondary mathematics in 17 countries. Findings from the IEA Teacher and Development Study in Mathematics (TEDS-M). Amsterdam: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA).
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. Thompson, A. G. (1992). Teachers' beliefs and conceptions: A synthesis of research. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 127-146). New York: Macmillan.
35. Walker, C. M. & Beretvas, S. N. (2003). Comparing multidimensional and unidimensional proficiency classifications. Multidimensional IRT as a diagnostic aid. Journal of Educational Measurement, 40(3), 255-275.
36. Warm, T. A. (1989). Weighted likelihood estimation of ability in item response models. Psychometrika, 54(3), 427-450.
37. Weinert, F. E. (2001). Concept of competence: A conceptual clarification. In D. S. Rychen & L. H. Salganik (Eds.), Defining and selecting key competencies (pp. 45-65). Seattle: Hogrefe & Huber.
38. Wood, L. (2001). The secondary-tertiary interface. In D. Holton (Ed.), The teaching and learning of mathematics at university level: An ICMI study (pp. 87-98). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
39. Wu, M., Adams, R. & Wilson, M. (1998). ACER ConQuest. Generalised item response modelling software. Melbourne: Acer.