Students’ mathematics-related experiences can develop positively if they are given as little as one lesson a month that specifically promotes positive emotions, agency, and collaboration (Tuohilampi, 2016). The effect can be achieved through lessons that are largely student centred and always prompted by an open problem to solve. In such lessons, teachers’ role is to scaffold students in their own initiatives, not to give direct teaching or provide answers (Anghileri, 2006). This aligns with the ideas of pedagogical listening, as well as the rights of the learners (RotL) (Hintz, Tyson, & English, 2018).

Such pedagogies draw from what was presented by Lerman (1990). He introduced fallibilist epistemology in the sociology of knowledge. Lerman suggested that mathematics education could turn towards quasi-empirical, describing a situation where the teacher guides students to examine their misconception as a hypothesis. This way, misconceptions can be seen as a positive start towards mathematical reasoning, helping students build up self-confidence and trust on their own thinking.

Such teacher-student interaction requires some degree of confidence from the teacher. Refraining oneself from being helpful longer than usual might feel uncomfortable. It turns out teachers’ might lack competence in implementing such student-initiated classroom orchestration (Tuohilampi & Nieminen, manuscript).

In an intervention implemented in Finland, a group of teachers were instructed to activate, inspire and engage their students to problem solving activities. The teachers took part in a workshop on pedagogical listening, and they were given carefully constructed material based on the interest development model by Hidi and Renninger (2006). The data of the study consists of the teachers’ written reflections of the learning experience and of video recordings on the participant teachers’ mathematics lessons. While observing the video data of the intervention lessons, it soon became evident that the teachers struggled to catch students’ interest in mathematics, and then to maintain it. Furthermore, the teachers were remarkably keen to help students out, by sort of buying them out of their obligations, at the expense of active agency or productive struggle (cf. Warshauer, 2015). The teachers in the intervention called for material that would meet the requirements of an activating pedagogy. However, it may instead be the lack of knowledge of how to apply the teaching materials to engage their students that hinders their professional development.

In this study, the teachers’ written reflections about their implementation of student activating pedagogy during the intervention are elaborated and complemented with video recordings on teachers' classroom practices. As a tentative result, teachers name peer support, collecting ideas and tips, and taking care of their own interest, plus utilizing students’ initiatives as important factors to build up interest-catching pedagogy. They also seem to separate the idea of supporting student activation from the actual practices to achieve these ideals. This indicates the teachers need more tools to implement their belief in practice (e.g. Liljedahl, 2009).

Anghileri, J. (2006). Scaffolding practices that enhance mathematics learning. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 9(1), 33–52. Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational psychologist, 41(2), 111-127. Hintz, A., Tyson, K., & English, A. R. (2018). Actualizing the rights of the learner: The role of pedagogical listening. Democracy and education, 26(2), 8. Lerman, S. (1990). Alternative perspectives of the nature of mathematics and their influence on the teaching of mathematics. British Educational Research Journal, 16(1), 53-61. Liljedahl, P. (2009). Teachers’ insights into the relationship between beliefs and practice. In J. Maasz, & W. Schloeglmann (Eds.), Beliefs and attitudes in mathematics education (pp. 33-43). Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill Sense. Tuohilampi, L. (2016). Deepening mathematics related affect research into social and cultural. Helsingin yliopisto. Research Report 384. Tuohilampi, L. & Nieminen, J. H. (2021). Student commitment in models of teacher knowledge in mathematics education: In teachers', students', or no-one's control? Manuscript in preparation. Warshauer, H. K. (2015). Productive struggle in middle school mathematics classrooms. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 18(4), 375-400.