ERG SES C 10, Perspectives in Education
Most students have difficulty in learning algebra to the extent that learning experiences in algebra results in hating mathematics in general (Baker, 2013). Teachers are the ones providing effective learning environments focusing on meaningful experiences in learning algebra for students (Kieran, 2007). What characteristics of teachers affect teaching and learning algebra should be a topic for discussion (Doerr, 2002). Recent discussion in literature has been on noticing skills of teachers that improve teaching practices related to mathematics; especially in the area of algebra (Walkoe, 2014).
Based on different conceptualizations of teacher noticing, various frameworks were provided by researchers focusing different aspects of teacher noticing (Van Es & Sherin, 2008; Van Es, 2011). Certain framework focused solely on mathematical thinking (e.g. Jacobs, Lamb, & Philipp, 2010), on student thinking (e. g. Van Es, 2011). Van Es and Sherin (2002) provided a framework including three aspects of teacher noticing. Van Es and Sherin (2002) framework called Learning to Notice Framework includes:
"(a) Identifying what is important or noteworthy about a classroom situation.
(b) Making connections between the specifics of classroom interactions and the
broader principles of teaching and learning they represent.
(c) Using what one knows about the context to reason about classroom interactions" (p.573)
The framework includes five categories of teacher noticing as actor (e.g. teacher, student and other), topic (e.g. mathematical thinking, pedagogy, climate, and management), stance (describe, evaluate, and interpret), specificity (e.g. general and specific), video (video based and non-video based). There are various studies conducted on teacher noticing based on general perspective (e.g. Van Es & Sherin, 2008) or on a category of noticing as mathematical thinking (e.g. Jacobs, Lamb, & Philipp, 2010). Although most studies focused on general mathematics teaching, certain studies focused on particular area of mathematics such as algebra (e.g. Walkoe, 2014). They also differ in their use of materials to capture and develop teachers’ noticing skills such as use of video (e.g. Sherin & Han, 2011) or classroom artifacts (e.g. Goldsmith & Seago, 2011). Lastly, another characteristic of teacher noticing studies in mathematics education is whether they are comparative studies with respect to teaching experience ( e.g. Huang & Li, 2012) or focusing on a particular group of teachers ( e.g. Sherin & Han, 2011) or pre-service teachers (e.g. Işıksal, Koç, & Osmanoğlu., 2012). Similarly, in European context, there are also various studies investigating mathematics teachers’ or pre-service mathematics teachers’ noticing skills (e.g. Potari, Psycharis, Kouletsi, & Diamantis, 2011). The studies follow similar trends in literature. However, to my knowledge, there is no study comparing pre-service and in-service mathematics noticing skills in the context of algebra in European context.
The purpose of this study is to explore the differences and similarities among pre-service and in-service mathematics teachers’ noticing skills in an algebra lesson. In the context of the study, teacher noticing was conceptualized as attending and interpreting events in the complexity of classroom environment. Therefore, the focus of the study is teachers’ attending and interpreting skills in an algebra lesson based on the categories of actor, topic, stance, and specificity. The study is significant since it identifies beginning teachers and in-service teachers’ noticing skills and shows how experience in teaching contributes to teacher noticing skills in algebra lesson. Based on the purpose of the study, there are two main research questions:
1- Is there a significant difference in pre-service and in-service mathematics teachers’ noticing skills in an algebra lesson?
2- How do pre-service and in-service mathematics teachers’ noticing skills in an algebra lesson differ?
METHOD The Design of the Study The current study is a mixed-method study. The concurrent embedded strategy of mixed method is adopted. I mainly used qualitative method, but embed quantitative method into the qualitative method. The qualitative section implies multi-case studies as teachers with varying teaching experiences were selected as the cases of the study. The Participants There are four participants of the study selected through purposeful sampling. Selin and Nil are pre-service mathematics teachers completed teaching practice courses. Can and Yeliz are in-service mathematics teachers who teach 5 to 8 grades and have one-year experience in field. The teacher education background of all participants was similar since they all took same courses from similar instructors from the same university. Data Collection A classroom video from The Inside Mathematics Project was used as a teaching episode for teachers to examine noticing skills (www.insidemathematics.org). The mathematical topic was "algebraic symbol strings- making sense of the differences between equations, inequalities, and expression". To collect data, two semi-structured interviews were conducted from the introduction and closure parts of the lesson. While watching the videos, I asked participants to note exact moments that they notice and o add brief note why they notice. When they completed all phase, we went back each minute or second that they took note and I asked two main questions while they were re-watching that part: -What have you noticed? -Why do you think it is worth to notice? What is interesting on that moment? Each audio-taped interview took 17 to 33 minutes in total. Data Analyses For the data analysis, the categories from The Noticing Framework by Van Es and Sherin (2002) was used. Four main categories and subcategories were assigned to each noticed event. Video focus dimension was not used since before the interviews participants were asked to attend the video particularly. After coded each noticing event with respect to four categories, I entered the frequencies of codes for each noticed event by each participant to compare pre-service and in-service mathematics teachers noticing skills. Then I conducted chi-square analysis used for the analysis of categorical data (Field, 2013). Since this is a mixed method study with concurrent embedded strategy/approach, I did quantitative analysis to be based for my qualitative descriptions for each category.
RESULTS The chi square analysis indicated that there is a significant difference between in- service and pre-service mathematics teachers on actor level (2, 113) = 1.62, p=.003, Cramer's V= .32. In-service mathematics teachers (31 %) made significantly more statements about student in actor category than pre-service mathematics teachers (8.5 %). In addition, there is also significant difference between pre-service and in-service mathematics teachers on topic level, (3, 113) = 18.35, p=.00, Cramer's V= .40. In-service mathematics teachers (59.5 %) made significantly more statements about mathematical thinking than pre-service teachers (22.5 %). In addition, pre-service mathematics teachers (47.9 %) made more statements on pedagogy than in-service teachers (28.6 %). Similarly, pre-service mathematics teachers (19.7 %) made more statements on management than in-service mathematics teachers (2.4 %). Furthermore, the significant differences between pre-service and in-service mathematics teachers on stance category are also found (2, 113) = 6.83, p=.03, Cramer's V= .25. In-service mathematics teachers (14.3%) made more statements with a descriptive stance than pre-service mathematics teachers (2.8 %). Furthermore, in-service mathematics teachers (38%) made more statements with an evaluative stance than pre-service mathematics teachers (31 %). In addition, pre-service mathematics teachers (66.2%) made more statements with interpretive stance than in-service mathematics teachers (47.6%). When I did chi-square analyses to compare pre-service and in-service mathematics teachers' noticed events, significant differences were found in three categories; actor, topic and stance, but not in specificity. The results of quantitative analysis indicated that in-service mathematics teachers noticed student as the actor and mathematical thinking as the topic more than pre-service mathematics teachers. However, in-service mathematics teachers noticed events in less interpretive stance than pre-service mathematics teachers. The qualitative differences among pre-service and in-service mathematics teachers' noticed events were explored based on quantitative analyses. The qualitative results will be presented and discussed during the conference.
REFERENCES Baker, N. (2013). Wrong answer: The case against Algebra II. Harper's Magazine, 31-38. Doerr, H. M. (2004). Teachers' knowledge and the teaching of algebra. In K. Stacey & H. Chick (Eds.), The Future of the Teaching and Learning of Algebra: The 12th ICMI Study (pp. 267-290). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer. Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Sage Publications Goldsmith, L. T., & Seago, N. (2011). Using classroom artifacts to focus teachers' noticing: affordances and opportunities. In M. Sherin, R. Philipp, & V. Jacobs (Eds.). Mathematics teacher noticing: Seeing through teachers' eyes (pp. 169-187). New York: Routledge. Huang, R., & Li, Y. (2012). What matters most: A comparison of Chinese expert and novice teachers' noticing of classroom events? School Science and Mathematics, 112, 420-432. Işıksal M., Koç, Y. & Osmanoğlu, A. (2012). Prospective teachers' noticing with respect to the student roles underlined in the elementary mathematics program: Use of video cases. Education and Science, 37(165), 336-347. Jacobs, V.R., Lamb, L.L.C., & Philipp, R.A. (2010). Professional noticing of children's mathematical thinking. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 41(2), 169-202. Kieran, C. (2007). Learning and teaching algebra at the middle school through college levels: Building meaning for symbols and their manipulation. In F. K. Lester, Jr. (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 707-762). Greenwich: Information Age Publishing. Potari, D., Psycharis, G., Kouletsi, E. & Diamantis, M. (2011). Prospective mathematics teachers' noticing of classroom practice through critical events. In M. Pytlak, T. Rowland & E. Swoboda (Eds.), Proceedings of CERME 7 (pp. 2798-2807). Rzeszów: University of Rzeszów. Sherin, M. G., & Han, S. Y. (2004). Teacher learning in the context of a video club. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 163-183. van Es, E. A. (2011). A framework for learning to notice student thinking. In M. G. Sherin, V. R. Jacobs, & R. A. Philipp (Eds.), Mathematics teacher noticing: Seeing through teachers' eyes (pp. 134-151). New York: Routledge. van Es, E. A., & Sherin, M. G. (2002). Learning to notice: Scaffolding new teachers' interpretations of classroom interactions. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 10, 571-596. van Es, E. A., & Sherin, M. G. (2008). Mathematics teachers "learning to notice" in the context of a video club. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 244-276. Walkoe, J. (2014). Exploring teacher noticing of student algebraic thinking in a video club. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 1-28.
00. Central Events (Keynotes, EERA-Panel, EERJ Round Table, Invited Sessions)
Network 1. Continuing Professional Development: Learning for Individuals, Leaders, and Organisations
Network 2. Vocational Education and Training (VETNET)
Network 3. Curriculum Innovation
Network 4. Inclusive Education
Network 5. Children and Youth at Risk and Urban Education
Network 6. Open Learning: Media, Environments and Cultures
Network 7. Social Justice and Intercultural Education
Network 8. Research on Health Education
Network 9. Assessment, Evaluation, Testing and Measurement
Network 10. Teacher Education Research
Network 11. Educational Effectiveness and Quality Assurance
Network 12. LISnet - Library and Information Science Network
Network 13. Philosophy of Education
Network 14. Communities, Families and Schooling in Educational Research
Network 15. Research Partnerships in Education
Network 16. ICT in Education and Training
Network 17. Histories of Education
Network 18. Research in Sport Pedagogy
Network 19. Ethnography
Network 20. Research in Innovative Intercultural Learning Environments
Network 22. Research in Higher Education
Network 23. Policy Studies and Politics of Education
Network 24. Mathematics Education Research
Network 25. Research on Children's Rights in Education
Network 26. Educational Leadership
Network 27. Didactics – Learning and Teaching
The programme is updated regularly (each day in the morning)
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.