Examining the task and knowledge demands needed to teach with representations

Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education

Volumn 17, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 37-60

  Mitchell, Rebecca ^a   Charalambous, Charalambos Y ^b   Hill, Heather C ^c  

^a BOSTON COLLEGE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CYPRUS   (Cyprus)

^c HARVARD GRADUATE SCHOOL OF EDUCATION   (United States)

Author keywords

Case study; Integer operations; Knowledge; Representations; Teaching; Teaching tasks

Indexed keywords

EID: 84893685959     PISSN: 13864416     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10857-013-9253-4     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Ball, D. L. (1992). Magical hopes: Manipulatives and the reform of math education. American Educator, 16(2), 14-18., 46-47.
2. 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, Alberta, Canada: Canadian Mathematics Education Study Group.
3. Ball, D. L., & Forzani, F. (2009). The work of teaching and the challenge for teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 60, 497-511.
4. Ball, D. L., Lubienski, S., & Mewborn, D. (2001). Research on teaching mathematics: The unsolved problem of teachers' mathematical knowledge. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed.). New York: Macmillan.
5. Ball, D., Thames, M. H., & Phelps, G. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special? Journal of Teacher Education, 59(5), 389-407.
6. Clements, D. H., & McMillen, S. (1996). Rethinking concrete manipulatives. Teaching Children Mathematics, 2(5), 270-279.
7. Charalambous, C. Y., Hill, H. C., & Ball, D. (2011). Prospective teachers' learning to provide instructional explanations: How does it look and what might it take? Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 14 (6), 441-461.
8. Charalambous, C. Y., Hill, H. C., & Mitchell, R. (2012). Two negatives don't always make a positive: Exploring how limitations in teacher knowledge and curriculum materials affect the quality of instruction. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 44(4), 489-513.
9. Clivaz, S. (2013, February). Mathematical knowledge for teaching and teaching multidigit multiplication. Paper presented at the Eighth Congress of European Research in Mathematics Education. Antalya, Turkey.
10. Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
11. Davis, B., & Simmt, E. (2006). Mathematics-for-teaching: An ongoing investigation of the mathematics that teachers (need to) know. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 61(3), 293-319.
12. Diezmann, C. M., & English, L. D. (2001). Promoting the use of diagrams as tools for thinking. In A. A. Cuoco & F. R. Curcio (Eds.), The roles of representation in school mathematics-2001 NCTM yearbook (pp. 77-89). Reston, VA: NCTM.
13. Dufour-Janvier, B., Bednarz, N., & Belanger, M. (1987). Pedagogical considerations regarding the problem of representation. In C. Janvier (Ed.), Problems of representation in the teaching and learning of mathematics (pp. 109-122). Hillside, NJ: Erlbaum.
14. Duval, R. (2006). A cognitive analysis of problems of comprehension in a learning of mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 61, 103-131.
15. Flores, A. (2002). Geometric representations in the transition from arithmetic to algebra. In F. Hitt (Ed.), Representations and mathematics visualization (pp. 9-29). Mexico: North American Chapter or IGPME, Cinvestav-IPN.
16. Goldin, G. (2003). Representation in school mathematics: A unifying perspective. In J. Kilpatrick, W. G. Martin, & D. Shifter (Eds.), A research companion to principles and standards for school mathematics (pp. 275-285). Reston, VI: NCTM.
17. Goldin, G. A., & Kaput, J. (1996). A joint perspective on the idea of representation in learning and doing mathematics. In L. P. Steffe, P. Nesher, P. Cobb, G. A. Golding, & J. Greer (Eds.), Theories of mathematical learning (pp. 397-430). Hillside, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
18. Gravemeijer, K., & Stephan, M. (2002). Emergent models as an instructional design heuristic. In K. Gravemeijer, R. Lehrer, B. van Oers, & L. Verschaffel (Eds.), Symbolizing, modeling and tool use in mathematics education (pp. 145-169). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
19. Grbich, C. (2007). Qualitative data analysis: An introduction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
20. Gregg, J., & Gregg, D. U. (2007). A context for integer computation. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 13(1), 46-50.
21. Grossman, P., & McDonald, M. (2008). Back to the future: Directions for research in teaching and teacher education. American Educational Research Journal, 45(1), 184-205.
22. Hativa, N., & Cohen, D. (1995). Self learning of negative number concepts by lower division elementary students through solving computer-provided numerical problems. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 28(4), 401-431.
23. Hiebert, J., & Carpenter, T. (1992). Learning and teaching with understanding. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research in on mathematics teaching and learning: A project of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (pp. 65-97). New York: Macmillan.
24. Hill, H. C., Umland, K., Litke, E., & Kapitula, L. R. (2012). Teacher quality and quality teaching: Examining the relationship of a teacher assessment to practice. American Journal of Education, 118(4), 489-519.
25. Hitt, F. (2002). Construction of mathematical concepts and cognitive frames. In F. Hitt (Ed.), Representation and mathematics visualization (pp. 241-262). Mexico: Departamento de Matemática Educativa.
26. Izsák, A. (2003). "We want a statement that is always true": Criteria for good algebraic representations in the development of modeling knowledge. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 34(3), 191-227.
27. Janvier, C. (1987). Representation and understanding: The notion of function as an example. In C. Janvier (Ed.), Problems of representation in the teaching and learning of mathematics (pp. 67-71). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
28. Kaput, J. (1985). Represention and problem solving: Issues related to modeling. In E. A. Silver (Ed.), Teaching and learning mathematical problem solving: Multiple research perspectives (pp. 381-398). Hillside, NJ: Erlbaum.
29. Kinach, B. (2002). Understanding and learning-to-explain by representing mathematics: Epistemological dilemmas facing teacher educators in the secondary mathematics "methods" course. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 5, 153-186.
30. Lamb, L., Bishop, J. P., Philipp, R. A., Schappelle, B. P., Whitacre, I., et al. (2012). Developing symbol sense for the minus sign. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 18(1), 5-9.
31. Lampert, M. (2010). Learning teaching in, from, and for practice: What do we mean? Journal of Teacher Education, 61(1-2), 21-34.
32. Lappan, G., Fey, J., Fitzgerald, W., Friel, S., & Phillips, E. (2006). Accentuate the negative: Integers and rational numbers (teacher's guide). Boston: Pearson Prentice Hall.
33. Lesh, R., Post, T., & Behr, M. (1987). Representations and translations among representations in mathematics. In C. Janvier (Ed.), Problems of representation in the teaching and learning of mathematics (pp. 33-40). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
34. Linchevski, L., & Williams, J. (1999). Using intuition from everyday life in 'filling' the gap in children's extension of their negative number concept to include the negative numbers. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 39, 131-147.
35. Martin, L. C. (2008). Folding back and the dynamical growth of mathematical understanding: Elaborating the Pirie-Kieren theory. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 27, 64-85.
36. Meira, L. (1998). Making sense of instructional devices: The emergence of transparency in mathematical activity. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 29(2), 121-142.
37. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.
38. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
39. Rowland, T. (2008). The purpose, design and use of examples in the teaching of elementary mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 69(2), 149-163.
40. Rowland, T., Turner, F., Thwaites, A., & Huckstep, P. (2009). Developing primary mathematics teaching: Reflecting on practice with the knowledge quartet. London: Sage.
41. Rowland, T., Huckstep, P., & Thwaites, A. (2005). Elementary teachers' mathematics subject knowledge: The knowledge quartet and the case of Naomi. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, (8), 255-281.
42. Sacristán Rock, A. I. (2002). Coordinating representations through programming activities: An example using LOGO. In F. Hitt (Ed.), Representation and mathematics visualization (pp. 241-262). Mexico: Departamento de Matemática Educativa.
43. Schwarz, B. B., Kohn, A. S., & Resnick, L. B. (1993/4). Positives about negatives: A case student of an intermediate model for signed numbers. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(1), 37-92.
44. 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.
45. Shulman, L. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
46. Sleep, L. (2012). The work of steering instruction toward the mathematical point: A decomposition of teaching practice. American Educational Research Journal, 49(5), 935-970.
47. Solomon, Y. (1989). The practice of mathematics. London: Routledge.
48. Stein, M., & Bovalino, J. (2001). Manipulatives: One piece of the puzzle. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 6, 356-359.
49. Steiner, C. (2009). A study of pre-service elementary teachers' conceptual understanding of integers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Kent State University, Kent, Ohio.
50. Stephan, M., & Akyuz, D. (2011). A proposed instructional theory for integer addition and subtraction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 43(4), 428-464.
51. Tatto, M. T., Schwille, J., Senk, S. L., Ingvarson, L., & Peck, R., et al. (2008). Teacher education and development study in Mathematics (TEDS-M): Policy, practice and readiness to teach primary and secondary mathematics. Conceptual framework. East Lansing, Michigan: Teacher education and development international study center, College of Education, Michigan State University.
52. Thames, H. M. (2009). Coordinating mathematical and pedagogical perspectives in practice-based and discipline-grounded approaches to studying mathematical knowledge for teaching (K-8). Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
53. Thompson, A. G., & Thompson, P. W. (1996). Talking about rates conceptually, part II: Mathematical knowledge for teaching. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27, 2-24.
54. Vest, F. (1976). Teaching problem solving as viewed through a theory of models. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 6(4), 395-408.
55. Zopf, D. (2010). Mathematical knowledge for teaching teachers: The mathematical work of and knowledge entailed by teacher education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.