Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics (대한수학교육학회지:수학교육학연구)

The Korea Society of Educational Studies in Mathematics (대한수학교육학회)
권호 표지

Secondary Mathematics Teachers' Perspectives on Didactic Transposition Described in Reflective Journal Writing

반성적 저널에 나타난 중등수학교사의 교수학적 변환에 대한 인식

  • Received : 2017.07.10
  • Accepted : 2017.08.18
  • Published : 2017.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Teachers are the primary agent of didactic transposition. In the process of transposing mathematical knowledge presented in mathematics curriculum and textbooks to mathematical knowledge for teaching in a classroom, teachers are significantly influenced by not only teachers' personal factors but also circumstances and constraints existing inside and outside of classrooms. Therefore, to understand teachers' didactic transposition, we need to analyze influence of institutional and socio-cultural factors on teachers' didactic transposition process. Identifying factors and constraints influencing teachers' didactic transposition provides important opportunities to have a deeper understanding of teachers' didactic transposition and develop their classroom practices. This study analyzed secondary mathematics teachers' perspectives on didactic transposition by exploring factors influencing their didactic transposition process using their reflective journal about their classroom practices. As a result, we identified the five factors influencing participating teachers' didactic transposition. We also found that different teachers had different extent of influence of five factors on their didactic transposition. Based on the results, we discussed ways to help mathematics teachers' didactic transposition.

교사는 교수학적 변환의 핵심적인 주체이다. 교사가 교육과정과 교과서에서 제시된 수학적 지식을 수업에서 가르칠 지식으로 변환하는 과정에는 교사의 개인적 요인들뿐만 아니라 교실 안팎의 환경과 제약들이 지대한 영향을 미치게 된다. 따라서 교사의 교수학적 변환을 이해하기 위해서는 제도적, 사회적 요인들이 교수학적 변환 과정에 어떠한 영향을 미치고 있는지를 광범위하게 파악하고 분석할 필요가 있다. 교사의 교수학적 변환 과정에 영향을 미치는 요인들과 제약들을 분석하고 확인하는 것은 교사의 교수학적 변환을 심도 깊게 이해하고 교사의 수업 실행을 향상시킬 수 있는 중요한 기회를 제공한다. 이에 본 연구는 중등수학교사들의 반성적 저널을 활용하여 교사들의 교수학적 변환에 영향을 미치는 요인을 탐색함으로써 그들의 교수학적 변환에 대한 인식을 분석하였다. 연구 결과, 교사들의 교수학적 변환에 영향을 미치는 다섯 가지 요인들을 확인하였으며, 다섯 가지 요인들이 교수학적 변환에 영향을 미치는 정도는 교사들마다 다르게 나타났다. 연구 결과를 바탕으로 교사들의 교수학적 변환에 도움을 줄 수 있는 방안들을 논의하였다.

Keywords

References

  1. 김민혁(2013). 수학교사의 교과서 및 교사용 지도서 활용도 조사. 학교수학, 15(3), 503-531.
  2. 김연.강완(2004). 초등학교 수학 교과서에 나타난 나눗셈 지도 방법에 대한 분석. 한국초등수학교육학회지, 9(1), 19-38.
  3. 박선화.문광호(2009). 학교 교육 경쟁력 강화를 위한 교육과정 실행 방안 연구. 한국교육과정평가원, 연구보고 RRC 2009-4.
  4. 배수경(2015). 중등 수학 교사의 수학적 지식의 교수학적 변환에 관한 연구. 이화여자대학교대학원 박사학위 논문.
  5. 선우진.방정숙(2014). 교사학습공동체를 기반으로 한 초등학교 수학 수업연구의 긍정적인 측면과 한계점 분석. 초등수학교육, 17(3), 189-203.
  6. 신보미(2010). 그래프의 경로에 대한 교수학적 변환 방식과 학생들의 이해 분석. 한국학교수학회논문집, 13(2), 289-301.
  7. 신보미(2012). 정규분포에 대한 교수학적 변환 방식과 학생들의 이해 분석. 수학교육학연구, 22(2), 117-136
  8. 신보미.이경화(2008). 시뮬레이션을 활용한 확률 지식의 교수학적 변환. 수학교육학연구, 18(1), 25-50.
  9. 이경화(1996). 교수학적 변환론의 이해. 대한수학교육학회 논문집, 6(1), 203-213.
  10. 이경화(2016). 교수학적 변환 연구의 동향과 과제. 수학교육학연구, 26(2), 173-188.
  11. 이경화.지은정(2008). 그래프의 교수학적 변환 방식 비교-우리나라 교과서와 MiC 교과서의 초등 통계 내용을 중심으로. 수학교육학연구, 18(3), 353-372.
  12. 이영하.신정은(2009). 교수공학 친화적, 실용적, 교수학적 변환의 실제적 연구. 학교수학, 11(1), 111-129.
  13. 조덕주.곽덕주.진석언(2008). 예비 교사의 반성적 사고 수준 향상을 위한 실제적 맥락 안에서의 저널쓰기 연구. 교육학연구, 46(1). 231-259.
  14. 최지선.이경화.김서령(2010). 선형계획법의 교수학적 분석을 통한 가설 학습 경로 탐색. 수학교육학연구, 20(1), 85-102.
  15. 최지영.강완(2003). 초등학교 수학 교과서에 나타난 약수와 배수 지도 방법 분석. 한국초등수학교육학회지, 7, 45-64.
  16. Artzt, A. F., & Armour-Thomas, E. (1999). A cognitive model for examining teachers' instructional practice in mathematics: A guide for facilitating teacher reflection. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 40(3), 211-235. doi:10.1023/A:1003871918392
  17. Barnett, C. (1998). Mathematics teaching cases as a catalyst for informed strategic inquiry. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14(1), 81-93. doi:10.1016/S0742-051X(97)00062-0
  18. Barbe, J., Bosch, M., Espinoza, L., & Gascon, J. (2005). Didactic restrictions on the teacher's practice: The case of limits of functions in Spanish high schools. In C., Laborde, M. J., Perrin-Glorian, & A., Sierpinska (Eds.). Beyond the Apparent Banality of the Mathematics Classroom (pp. 235-268). US: Springer.
  19. Bosch, M., & Gascon, J. (2006). Twenty-five years of the didactic transposition. ICMI Bulletin, 58, 51-63.
  20. Chapman, O. (2008). Narratives in mathematics teacher education. In D. Tirosh & T. Wood (Eds.), The International Handbook of Mathematics Teacher Education: Tools and Processes in Mathematics Teacher Education (pp. 15-38). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
  21. Chevallard, Y. (1985). La Transposition Didactique (95). Grenoble: Lapensee sauvage.
  22. Chevallard, Y. (1990). On mathematics education and culture: Critical afterthoughts. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 21(1), 3-27. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00311013
  23. Chevallard, Y. (1992). A theoretical approach to curricula. Journal fuer Mathematik-didaktik, 13(2-3), 215-230. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03338779
  24. Chevallard, Y. (2006). Steps towards a new epistemology in mathematics education. In Proceedings of the 4th Conference of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (CERME 4) (pp. 21-30).
  25. Chevallard, Y. (2007). Readjusting didactics to a changing epistemology. European Educational Research Journal, 6(2), 131-134. https://doi.org/10.2304/eerj.2007.6.2.131
  26. Cooney, T. J. (1994). Teacher education as an exercise in adaptation. In D. Aichele & A. Coxford (Eds.), Professional development for teachers of mathematics (pp. 9-22). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
  27. Fellows, I. (2012). wordcloud: Word Clouds. R package version 2.5. https://CRAN.R-project.org/pacage=wordcloud
  28. Franke, M. L., Carpenter, T., Fennema, E., Ansell, E., & Behrend, J. (1998). Understanding teachers' self-sustaining change in the context of professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14(1), 67-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(97)00061-9
  29. Garcia, M., Sanchez, V., & Escudero, I. (2006). Learning through reflection in mathematics teacher education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 64(1), 1-17. doi:10.1007/s10649-006-9021-9
  30. Jaworski, B. (2001). Developing mathematics teaching: Teachers, teacher educators, and researchers as co-learners. In F. L. Lin, T. J. Cooney(Eds), Making Sense of Mathematics Teacher Education (pp. 295-320). Netherlands: Springer.
  31. Jeon, H. (2016). KoNLP: Korean NLP Package. R package version 0.80.1. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=KoNLP
  32. Kleve, B. (2008). Mathematics teachers' beliefs about teaching and learning mathematics and constraints influencing their teaching practice. Paper present at the NORMA 08 Conference in Copenhagen.
  33. Maher, C. A. (2008). Video recordings as pedagogical tools in mathematics teacher education. In D. Tirosh & T. Wood (Eds.), The International Handbook of Mathematics Teacher Education: Tools and Processes in Mathematics Teacher Education (pp. 65-83). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
  34. Markovits, Z., & Smith, M. (2008). Cases as tools in mathematics teacher education. In D. Tirosh & T. Wood (Eds.), The International Handbook of Mathematics Teacher Education: Tools and Processes in Mathematics Teacher Education (pp. 39-64). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
  35. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. sage
  36. Neuwirth, E. (2014). RColorBrewer: ColorBrewer Palettes. R package version 1.1-2. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=RColorBrewer
  37. Ostergaard. K. (2013). Theory and practice in mathematics teacher education. https://www.ucviden.dk/portal/files/14221371/Theory_and_practice_in_mathematics_teacher_education_final_.pdf
  38. Pepin, B. & Haggarty. L. (2001). Mathematics textbooks and their use in English, French and German classrooms. ZDM, 33(5), 158-175.
  39. Potari, D., & Jaworski, B. (2002). Tackling complexity in mathematics teaching development: Using the teaching triad as a tool for reflection and analysis. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 5(4), 351-380. doi:10.1023/A:1021214604230
  40. Remillard, J. (1991). Abdicating authority for knowing: A teacher's use of an innovative mathematics curriculum (Elementary Subjects Center Series No. 42). East Lansing: Institute for Research on Teaching, Center for the Learning and Teaching of Elementary Subjects, Michigan State University.
  41. Remillard, J. T. (1999). Curriculum materials in mathematics education reform: A framework for examining teachers' curriculum development. Curriculum Inquiry, 29(3), 315-342. https://doi.org/10.1111/0362-6784.00130
  42. Remillard, J. T. (2000a). Can curriculum materials support teachers' learning? Elementary School Journal, 100(4), 331-350. https://doi.org/10.1086/499645
  43. Remillard, J. T. (2000b). Examining key concepts in research on teachers' use of mathematics curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75(2), 211-246. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543075002211
  44. Remillard, J. T., & Bryans, M. B. (2004). Teachers' orientations toward mathematics curriculum materials: Implications for teacher learning. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 35(5), 352 https://doi.org/10.2307/30034820
  45. Schon, D. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner. New York: Basic Books.
  46. Sowder, J. T. (2007). The mathematical education and development of teachers. In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning (pp. 157-223). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing Inc.
  47. Stein, M. K., Smith, M. S., Henningsen, M. A., & Silver, E. A. (2009). Implementing Standards-Based Mathematics Instruction: A Casebook for Professional Development (2nd ed.). New York: Columbia University.
  48. Winslow, C. (2011). Anthropological Theory of Didactic Phenomena: Some Examples and Principles of its Use in the Study of Mathematics Education. Un panorama de la TAD. An overview of ATD. CRM Documents, 10, 533-551.