한국수학교육학회지시리즈D:수학교육연구 (Research in Mathematical Education)

  • 제22권3호
  • /
  • Pages.203-222
  • /
  • 2019
  • /
  • 1226-6191(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2287-9943(eISSN)
한국수학교육학회 (Korean Society of Mathematical Education)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Elementary Mathematics Prospective Teachers' Intended Contingent Teaching in Small Groups

  • 투고 : 2019.09.03
  • 심사 : 2019.09.30
  • 발행 : 2019.09.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Despite its importance when it is employed in classrooms, scaffolding is limited in the classrooms. Many researchers have focused on contingent teaching, which is the first component of scaffolding. Given a lack of research on contingent teaching with prospective teachers (PSTs), this paper explores how PSTs intend to do contingent teaching in small groups when they engage in mathematics teaching. Building on research on contingent teaching, I analyzed 26 PSTs' written responses to scenarios in an online open-ended survey. The focus of the analysis was on how the PSTs would do contingent teaching that might support students to learn the subject matter. I present findings in relation to what the PSTs' responses showed in relation to contingent teaching with the subject matter. The findings will be discussed along with implications.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Anwar, A., Yuwono, I., Irawan, E. B., & As’ari, A. R. (2017). Investigation of contingency patterns of teachers' scaffolding in teaching and learning mathematics. Journal on Mathematics Education, 8(1), 65-76.
  2. Buchbinder, O., & Cook, A. (2018). Examining the mathematical knowledge for teaching of proving in scenarios written by pre-service teaches. In O. Buchbinder & S. Kuntze (Eds.), Mathematics teachers engaging with representations of practice. (pp. 131-154). New York: Springer.
  3. Chapin, S., O'Connor, C., & Anderson, N. (2009). Classroom discussions: Using math talk to help students learn, grades K-6 (2nd ed.). Sausalito, CA: Math Solutions Publications.
  4. Chiu, M. M. (2004). Adapting teacher interventions to student needs during cooperative learning: How to improve student problem solving and time on-task. American Educational Research Journal, 41(2), 365-399. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312041002365
  5. Cohen, E. G., & Lotan, R. A. (2014). Designing groupwork: Strategies for the heterogeneous classroom (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
  6. Davidson, N. (1990). Cooperative learning in mathematics: A handbook for teachers. Menlo Park, CA: Addison-Wesley.
  7. Dekker, R., & Elshout-Mohr, M. (2004). Teacher interventions aimed at mathematical level raising during collaborative learning. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 56(1), 39-65. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EDUC.0000028402.10122.ff
  8. Ding, M., Li, X., Piccolo, D., & Kulm, G. (2007). Teacher interventions in cooperative-learning mathematics classes. The Journal of Educational Research, 100(3), 162-175. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOER.100.3.162-175
  9. Elbers, E., Hajer, M., Jonkers, M., Koole, T., & Prenger, J. (2008). Instructional dialogues: participation in dyadic interactions in multicultural classrooms. In J. Deen, M. Hajer, & T. Koole (Eds.), Interaction in two multicultural mathematics classrooms: Mechanisms of inclusion and exclusion (pp. 141-172). Amsterdam: Aksant.
  10. Esmonde, I., & Langer-Osuna, J. M. (2013). Power in numbers: Student participation in mathematical discussions in heterogeneous spaces. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 44(1), 288-315. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.44.1.0288
  11. Glesne, C. (1999). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (2nd ed.). New York: Longman.
  12. Hammerness, K., Darling-Hammond, L., Bransford, J., Berliner, D., Cochran-Smith, M., McDonald, M., et al. (2005). How teachers learn and develop. In L. Darling-Hammond & J. Bransford (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do. (pp. 358-389). San Francisco: John Wiley.
  13. Kazemi, E., Franke, M., & Lampert, M. (2009). Developing pedagogies in teacher education to support novice teachers' ability to enact ambitious instruction. In R. Hunter, B. Bicknell & T. Burgess (Eds.), Crossing divides: Proceedings of the 32nd annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (Vol. 1, pp. 12-30). Palmerston North, NZ: MERGA.
  14. Lindquist, M. M. (1989). Mathematics content and small-group instruction in grades four through six. The Elementary School Journal, 89(5), 625-632. https://doi.org/10.1086/461596
  15. Mercer, N., & Littleton, K. (2007). Dialogue and the development of children's thinking. London: Routledge.
  16. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
  17. Smith, M., & Stein, M. K. (2011). Five practices for orchestrating productive mathematics discussions. Reston, VA: NCTM.
  18. TeachingWorks (n.d.). High-leverage practices. Retrieved from http://www.teachingworks.org/workof-teaching/high-leverage-practices.
  19. Van de Pol, J., Volman, M., & Beishuizen, J. (2010). Scaffolding in teacher-student interaction: a decade of research. Educational Psychology Review, 22(3), 271-296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9127-6
  20. Van de Pol, J., Volman, M., & Beishuizen, J. (2011). Patterns of contingent teaching in teacher-student interaction. Learning and Instruction, 21(1), 46-57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.10.004
  21. Van de Pol, J., Volman, M., Oort, F., & Beishuizen, J. (2014). Teacher scaffolding in small-group work: An intervention study. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 23(4), 600-650. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2013.805300
  22. Van de Pol, J., Volman, M., Oort, F., & Beishuizen, J. (2015). The effects of scaffolding in the classroom: Support contingency and student independent working time in relation to student achievement, task effort and appreciation of support. Instructional Science, 43(5), 615-641. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-015-9351-z
  23. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  24. Wood, D., Bruner, J., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(2), 89-100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x
  25. Wood, M. B., & Kalinec, C. A. (2012). Student talk and opportunities for mathematical learning in small group interactions. International Journal of Educational Research, 51-52, 109-127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2011.12.008
  26. Yackel, E., Cobb, P., & Wood, T. (1991). Small-group interactions as a source of learning opportunities in second-grade mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 22(5), 390-408. https://doi.org/10.2307/749187

피인용 문헌

  1. Understanding Prospective Teachers' Verbal Intervention through Teachers' Group Work Monitoring Routines vol.23, pp.4, 2019, https://doi.org/10.7468/jksmed.2020.23.4.219