Building District Capacity for Teacher Development in Algebraic Reasoning

Algebra in the Early Grades

Volumn , Issue , 2017, Pages 361-388

  Blanton, Maria L ^a   Kaput, James J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS DARTMOUTH   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85144444628     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9781315097435-17     Document Type: Chapter

References (33)

1. Blanton, M., and Kaput, J. (2003). Developing elementary teachers’ algebra eyes and ears. Teaching Children Mathematics, 10(2), 70-77.
2. Blanton, M., and Kaput, J. (2004). Design principles for instructional contexts that support students’ transition from arithmetic to algebraic reasoning: Elements of task and culture. In R. Nemirovsky, B. Warren, A. Rosebery, and J. Solomon (Eds.), Everyday matters in science and mathematics (pp. 211-234). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
3. Blanton, M., and Kaput, J. (2005a). Characterizing a classroom practice that promotes algebraic reasoning. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 36(5), 412-446.
4. Blanton, M., and Kaput, J. (2005b). Helping elementary teachers build mathematical generality into curriculum and instruction. In J. Cai and E. Knuth (Eds.), Zentralblatt Didaktik der Mathematik, 37(1), 34-42. (International Reviews on Mathematical Education)[Special issue].
5. Brown, A. L., Ellery, S., and Campione, J. C. (1998). Creating zones of proximal development electronically. In J. G. Greeno and S. V. Goldman (Eds.), Thinking practices in mathematics and science learning (pp. 341-367). Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
6. Carpenter, T. P., and Fennema, E. (1992). Cognitively guided instruction: Building on the knowledge of students and teachers. In W. Secada (Ed.), Curriculum reform:The case of mathematics education in the U.S. [Special issue]. International Journal of Educational Research, 17(5), 457-470.
7. Carraher, D., Brizuela, B., and Earnest, D. (2001). The reification of additive differences in early algebra: Viva La Différence! In H. Chick, K. Stacey, J. Vincent, and J. Vincent (Eds.), The future of the teaching and learning of algebra (Proceedings of the 12th ICMI study conference, pp. 163-170). Melbourne, Australia: University of Melbourne.
8. Cobb, P., and McClain, K. (2001). An approach for supporting teachers’ learning in social context. In F.-L. Lin and T. Cooney (Eds.), Making sense of mathematics teacher education (pp. 207-232). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
9. Cobb, P., McClain, K., deSilva Lamberg, T., and Dean, C. (2003). Situating teachers’ instructional practices in the institutional setting of the school and district. Educational Researcher, 32(6), 13-24.
10. Coburn, C. (2003). Rethinking scale: Moving beyond numbers to deep and lasting change. Educational Researcher, 32(6), 3-12.
11. Cooney, T. (2001). Considering the paradoxes, perils and purposes of conceptualizing teacher development. In F. Lin and T. Cooney (Eds.), Making sense of mathematics teacher education (pp. 9-31). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
12. Elmore, R. F. (1996). Getting to scale with successful educational practice. In S. Furhman and J. O’Day (Eds.), Rewards and reform: Creating educational incentives that work (pp. 294-329). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
13. Franke, M. L., Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Ansell, E., and Behrend, J. (1998).Understanding teachers’ self-sustaining, generative change in the context of professional development. International Journal of Teaching and Teacher Education, 14, 67-80.
14. Franke, M. L., Carpenter, T. P., Levi, L., and Fennema, E. (2001). Capturing teachers’ generative growth: A follow-up study of professional development in mathematics. American Educational Research Journal, 38(3), 653-690.
15. Gamoran, A. (2001). American schooling and educational inequality: A forecast for the 21st century. Sociology of Education, pp. 135-153.
16. Gamoran, A. (2005). Organizational support for teaching for understanding in mathematics and science. In T. A. Romberg, T. P. Carpenter, and F. Dremock (Eds.), Understanding mathematics and science matters. Mahwah, (pp. 307-321). NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
17. Gamoran, A., Anderson, C. W., Quiroz, P. A., Secada, W. G., Williams, T., and Ashman, S. (2003). Transforming teaching in math and science: How schools and districts can support change. New York: Teachers College Press.
18. Gamoran, A., Secada, W. G., and Marrett, C. (2000). The organizational context of teaching and learning: Changing theoretical perspectives. In M. T. Hallinan (Ed.), Handbook of the sociology of education (pp. 37-63). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.
19. Garet, M., Porter, A., Desimone, L., Birman, B., and Yoon, K. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915-945.
20. Grant, C. M., Nelson, B. S., Davidson, E., Sassi, A., Weinberg, A., and Bleiman, J. (2003). Lenses on Learning, Module 1: Instructional leadership in mathematics. Parsippany, NJ: Dale Seymour.
21. Kaput, J. (1999). Teaching and learning a new algebra. In E. Fennema and T. A. Romberg (Eds.), Mathematics classrooms that promote understanding (pp. 133-155). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
22. Kaput, J. (2001, October). Learning algebra using dynamic simulations and visually editable graphs of rate and totals quantities. In J. Abramsky (Ed.), Reasoning, explanation and proof in school mathematics and their place in the intended curriculum:Proceedings of the QCA international seminar (pp. 88-100). London, England:Qualifications and Curriculum Authority.
23. Kaput, J., and Blanton, M. (2005). Algebrafying the elementary mathematics experience in a teacher-centered, systemic way. In T. A. Romberg, T. P. Carpenter, and F. Dremock (Eds.), Understanding mathematics and science matters, (pp. 99-125). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
24. Lave, J., and Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
25. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principle and standards for school mathematics. Washington, DC: Author.
26. National Research Council. (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
27. National Research Council. (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
28. Nelson, B. (1998). Lenses on learning: Administrators’ views on reform and the professional development of teachers. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 1, 191-215.
29. Nelson, B. (1999). Building new knowledge by thinking: How administrators can learn what they need to know about mathematics education reform. Paper series published by the Educational Development Center.
30. Schifter, D., Bastable, V., and Russell, S. J. (1999). Developing mathematical ideas. Casebooks, facilitators guides, and videotapes for two modules: Building a system of tens and making meaning for operations. Parsippany, NJ: Dale Seymour.
31. Spillane, J. P., Halverson, R., and Diamond, J. B. (2001). Towards a theory of leadership practice: Implications of a distributed perspective. Educational Researcher, 30(3), 23-28.
32. Stein, M. K., Silver, E. A., and Smith, M. S. (1998). Mathematics reform and teacher development: A community of practice perspective. In J. G. Greeno and S. V. Goldman (Eds.), Thinking practices in mathematics and science learning (pp. 17-52). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
33. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. New York:Cambridge University Press.