Communications of Mathematical Education (한국수학교육학회지시리즈E:수학교육논문집)

Korean Society of Mathematical Education (한국수학교육학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

What Teachers Consider Important in Lesson Design: Focusing on the Analysis of a Lesson Plan of Elementary Mathematics

교사가 수업 설계에서 중요하게 고려하는 요소: 초등 수학 수업지도안에 대한 분석을 중심으로

  • Received : 2021.02.16
  • Accepted : 2021.03.26
  • Published : 2021.03.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

A well-designed mathematics lesson is the foundation for effective mathematics instruction. Given this significance, this paper focused on analyzing what would be important elements for in-service teachers in planning an elementary mathematics lesson. For this purpose, a total of 27 in-service teachers were asked to write down whatever they would consider important in designing a mathematics lesson. A mathematics lesson plan prepared by a pre-service teacher was provided for the in-service teachers. They were then asked to analyze the strengths of the lesson plan and to provide detailed feedback on how to improve it. The results of this study showed that the in-service teachers tended to analyze the given mathematics lesson plan in terms of what they considered important regarding lesson design. Such elements were specified when the in-service teachers described the strengths and feedback for improvement of the lesson plan. In particular, the aspects of instructional strategies and materials were explained in detail. Based on these results, this paper is expected to provoke discussions on lesson design of in-service teachers and subsequent research.

수학 수업을 잘 설계하는 능력은 좋은 수학 수업을 구현할 수 있는 토대라는 점에서 중요하다. 이에 본 연구에서는 현직교사들이 초등학교 수학 수업의 설계에서 중요하게 고려하는 요소를 분석하는 데 초점을 두었다. 이를 위해 현직교사 27명을 대상으로 수학 수업을 설계할 때 중요하게 고려하는 요소가 무엇인지 자유기술식으로 응답하게 했고, 현직교사들에게 예비교사가 작성한 수학 수업지도안을 제공한 후 그 수업지도안의 장점과 개선사항을 분석하게 하였다. 교사들의 응답을 분석한 결과, 현직교사들은 자신이 평소 중요하게 생각하는 요소를 중심으로 예비교사가 작성한 수학 수업지도안을 분석하는 경향을 보였다. 그리고 수업지도안의 장점을 분석하거나 개선사항에 대한 피드백 의견을 제안할 때 수학 수업의 설계에서 중요하게 고려하는 요소들이 더욱 구체적으로 드러났으며, 특히 수업 전략 및 자료의 측면을 자세하게 고려하는 경향을 보였다. 현직교사의 수학 수업 설계에 대한 주요 결과를 토대로 교사교육에의 시사점을 논의하였다.

Keywords

References

  1. Ministry of Education (2015). Mathematics curriculum (No. 2015-74). Seoul: Author.
  2. Ku, N. Y., & Lee, K. H. (2020). A study on middle school teachers' geometric unit curriculum material use: A case of a teacher community. School Mathematics, 22(2), 251-275. https://doi.org/10.29275/sm.2020.06.22.2.251
  3. Kwon, S. I. (2017). Developing the criteria for elementary mathematics class: Focused on introduction. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 17(11), 757-773. https://doi.org/10.22251/jlcci.2017.17.11.757
  4. Kim, G. Y., & Jeon, M. H. (2017). Exploring teachers' pedagogical design capacity: How mathematics teachers plan and design their mathematics lessons. The Mathematical Education, 56(4), 365-385. https://doi.org/10.7468/mathedu.2017.56.4.365
  5. Kim, S. H., Kim, Y. S., & Han, S. Y. (2016). A study of criteria for self-assessment of lesson planning and teaching performance. The Mathematical Education, 55(2), 171-192. https://doi.org/10.7468/mathedu.2016.55.2.171
  6. Kim, J. W., & Pang, J. S. (2013, November). Elementary school mathematics lesson plan analysis: Focused on the thinking through a lesson protocol (TTLP). Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference of the Korean Society of Mathematical Education. Vol. 2, pp. 183-186.
  7. Pang, J. S. (2010). Evaluation standards for elementary school mathematics lessons to educate classroom-friendly teachers. Education Research Institute at Korea National University of Education (Ed.), Classroom-friendly practicum program: Elementary school (pp. 140-162).
  8. Pang, J. S., & Cho, S. Y. (2014). A survey of lesson plan for mathematics instruction by elementary school teachers. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 14(4), 365-390.
  9. Sunwoo, J., & Pang, J. S. (2019). Domestic research trends of mathematics teacher education: Focused on the journals published since 2000 by the Korean Society of Mathematics Education. The Mathematical Education, 58(1), 121-138. https://doi.org/10.7468/MATHEDU.2019.58.1.121
  10. Lee, Y. J. (2015). The effects of functional features of peer feedback on pre-service teachers' classroom observations and instructional design. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 15(5), 187-206.
  11. Lee, J. E., Lim, W., & Kim, H. J. (2016). Lesson planning: How do pre-service teachers benefit from examining lesson plans with mathematics teaching practices as an analytical lens?. Education of Primary School Mathematics, 19(3), 211-222. https://doi.org/10.7468/jksmec.2016.19.3.211
  12. Yim, Y. B., & Hong, J. G. (2019). Discuss on the finishing patterns of elementary math instructions. School Mathematics, 21(3), 591-606. https://doi.org/10.29275/sm.2019.09.21.3.591
  13. Choi, H. S. (2020). Exploration of instructional design changes of pre-service mathematics teachers by restructuring the lesson plan. Journal of the Korean School Mathematics Society, 23(1), 159-177.
  14. Amador, J. M. (2016). Teachers' considerations of students' thinking during mathematics lesson design. School Science and Mathematics, 116(5), 239-252. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12175
  15. Beyer, C., & Davis, E. (2012). Developing preservice elementary teachers' pedagogical design capacity for reform‐based curriculum design. Curriculum Inquiry, 42(3), 386-413. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-873X.2012.00599.x
  16. Brown, M. W. (2009). The teacher-tool relationship: Theorizing the design and use of curriculum materials. In J. T. Remillard, B. A. Herbel-Eisenmann & G. M. Lloyd (Eds.), Mathematics teachers at work: Connecting curriculum materials and classroom instruction (pp. 17-36). Routledge: New York.
  17. Forbes, C. T., & Davis, E. A. (2010). Curriculum design for inquiry: Preservice elementary teachers' mobilization and adaptation of science curriculum materials. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(7), 820-839. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20379
  18. Gonzalez, M., Gomez, P., & Pinzon, A. (2020). Characterising lesson planning: A case study with mathematics teachers. Teaching Education, 31(3), 260-278. https://doi.org/10.1080/10476210.2018.1539071
  19. Lampert, M. (2001). Teaching problems and the problems of teaching. London: Yale University Press. 방정 숙, 권민성 공역(2016). 가르치는 것은 왜 그렇게 어려울까?. 서울: 경문사.
  20. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). (2014). Principles to actions: Ensuring mathematical success for all. Reston, VA: Author.
  21. Remillard, J. T. (2005). 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
  22. Reys, R., Lindquist, M. M., Lambdin, D. V., & Smith, N. L. (2015). Helping children learn mathematics (11th ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons. 박성선, 김민경, 방정숙, 권점례 공역(2017). 초등교사를 위한 수학과 교수법 개정판. 서울: 경문사.
  23. Sherin, M. G., & Drake, C. (2009). Curriculum strategy framework: Investigating patterns in teachers' use of a reform based elementary mathematics curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 41(4), 467-500. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220270802696115
  24. Smith, M. S., & Stein, M. K. (2018). The five practices for orchestrating productive mathematics discussions (2nd ed). Corwin, VA: NCTM.
  25. Smith, M. S., Bill, V., & Hughes, E. K. (2008). Thinking through a lesson protocol: A key for successfully implementing high-level tasks. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 14, 132-138. https://doi.org/10.5951/MTMS.14.3.0132
  26. Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (1999). The teaching gap: Best ideas from the world's teachers for improving in the classroom. New York: The Free Press.