scholarly journals Planning with curriculum materials: Interactions between prospective secondary mathematics teachers’ attention, interpretations and responses

2019 ◽  
Vol 93 ◽  
pp. 153-167 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lorraine M. Males ◽  
Ariel Setniker
2014 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-56
Author(s):  
Dorian Stoilescu

This paper describes challenges encountered by three experienced secondary mathematics teachers when they try to integrate ICT in their classrooms. This study is based on the four dimension framework developed by Niess: 1) overarching conceptions of integrating ICT, 2) knowledge of instructional strategies and representations for teaching, 3) knowledge of students’ knowledge of technology; and 4) knowledge of curriculum and curriculum materials that integrate technology with learning. By using this analysis, we explore the challenges that teachers face on each of the four levels of integration ICT and suggest waysof improving these strategies in mathematical instruction.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Rebecca Bruton

In this study I examined the development of pedagogical content knowledge of three beginning secondary mathematics teachers. My analysis included the development of the teachers' knowledge of curriculum and their knowledge of student understanding during their first two years of teaching. The participants began the study with little or no experience or education regarding the teaching of mathematics. During the first year of the study, all three participants were enrolled in graduate level mathematics methods courses and were under the guidance of a mentor teacher. Using existing research, I analyzed pre and post interviews as well as 12 interviews conducted during 4 observation cycles. Beyond participant interviews, I analyzed interviews with the mentor teachers and researcher notes regarding their observation of the participants' PCK. Analysis revealed that participants demonstrated little knowledge of curriculum at the beginning of the study. Throughout the study, their knowledge of the curriculum developed differently as they approached teaching in different ways (seen through their goals for instruction) and engaged with their curriculum materials differently. Two of the participants developed detailed knowledge of their students' understanding, which they gained through use of their standards-based curriculum materials and their use of assessment, while the third participant was only able to speak to student understanding at the whole-class level.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document