You are here:

Preservice Mathematics Teachers’ Professional Noticing of Students’ Mathematical Thinking with Technology
PROCEEDING

, Middle Tennessee State University, United States ; , Bucknell University, United States ; , University of North Carolina at Charlotte, United States ; , Drake University, United States ; , NC State University, United States

Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, in Washington, D.C., United States ISBN 978-1-939797-32-2 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC USA

Full Text

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to examine the ways in which PSMTs professionally notice middle school students’ mathematical thinking on a technology enhanced mathematical task. Findings show that every preservice mathematics teacher included a discussion of the middle school students’ interaction with the technology in their noticing prompts, demonstrating that PSMTs recognized that the middle school students’ mathematical understanding was tied to their interactions with the technology. Additionally, results from PSMTs’ justifications for their predictions of middle school students’ responses to the task, incorporated the middle school students language and described how the middle school students would interact with the technology.

Citation

Lovett, J.N., Dick, L.K., McCulloch, A.W., Sherman, M.F. & Martin, K. (2018). Preservice Mathematics Teachers’ Professional Noticing of Students’ Mathematical Thinking with Technology. In E. Langran & J. Borup (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 1802-1811). Washington, D.C., United States: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 7, 2024 from .

© 2018 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Association of Mathematics Teacher Educators. (2017). Standards for preparing teachers of mathematics. Available online at amte.net/standards.
  2. Breidenbach, D., Dubinsky, E., Hawks, J., & Nichols, D. (1992). Development of the process conception of function. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 23, 247–285.
  3. Carlson, M.P. (1998). Across-sectional investigation of the development of the function concept. Research in collegiate mathematics education, III, Issues in mathematics education, 7(1), 115-162.
  4. Chandler, K.C. (2017). Examining how prospective secondary mathematics teachers notice students’ thinking on a paper and pencil task and a technological task. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. North Carolina State University. Raleigh, NC.
  5. Cheung, A.C.K., & Slavin, R.E. (2013). The effectiveness of educational technology applications for enhancing mathematics achievement in K-12 classrooms: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 9, 88-113.
  6. Cooney, T.J., Beckman, S., & Lloyd, G.M. (2010). Developing essential understanding of functions for teaching mathematics in grades 9-12. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
  7. Creswell, J.W. (2007). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
  8. Dick, L.K. (2017). Investigating the relationship between professional noticing and specialized content knowledge. In E.O. Schack, M.H. Fisher& J.A. Wilhelm (Eds), Teacher Noticing: Bridging and Broadening Perspectives, Contexts, and Frameworks (pp. 339-358). Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
  9. Dick, T.P., & Hollebrands, K.F. (2011). Focus in high school mathematics: Technology to support reasoning and sensemaking. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
  10. Ellington, A.J. (2003). A meta-analysis of the effects of calculators on students' achievement and attitude levels in precollege mathematics classes. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 34(5), 433-463.
  11. Even, R. (1990). Subject matter knowledge for teaching and the case of functions. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 21, 521-544.
  12. Fernandez, E. (2005). Understanding functions without using the vertical line test. Mathematics Teacher, 99(2), 96Garofalo, J., Drier, H.S., Harper, S., & Timmerman, M.A. (2000). Promoting appropriate uses of technology in mathematics teacher preparation. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 1(1). Retrieved from http://www.citejournal.org/volume-1/issue-1-00/mathematics/promoting-appropriate-uses-of-technologyinmathematics-teacher-preparation
  13. Goldsmith, L.T., & Seago, N. (2011). Using classroom artifacts to focus teachers’ noticing. In M.G. Sherin, V. Jacobs, & R.A. Philipp (Eds.), Mathematics Teacher Noticing: Seeing through teachers’ eyes (pp. 169–187). New
  14. 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.
  15. Koehler, M.J., & Mishra, P. (2005). What happens when teachers design educational technology? The development of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 32(2), 131-152.
  16. Krupa, E.E., Huey, M., Lesseig, K., Casey, S. & Monson, D. (2017). Investigating secondary preservice teacher noticing of students’ mathematical thinking. In Schack, E.O., Fisher, M.H. & Wilhelm, J.A. (Eds.). Teacher noticing: Bridging and broadening perspectives, contexts, and frameworks (pp. 49-72). Cham, Switzerland,
  17. McCulloch, A.W., Lovett, J.N., & Edgington, C. (2017). Developing preservice teachers' understanding of function using a vending machine metaphor applet. In E. Galindo & J. Newton (Eds.), Proceedings of the 39th annual meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 1281-1288). Indianapolis, IN: Hoosier Association of Mathematics Teacher Educators.
  18. Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
  19. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M.J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
  20. Niess, M.L. (2005). Preparing teachers to teach science and mathematics with technology: Developing a pedagogical content knowledge. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 509-523.
  21. Smith, M.S., & Stein, M.K. (2011). Five practices for orchestrating productive mathematics discussions. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.-1810-SITE 2018-Washington, D.C., United States, March 26-30, 2018
  22. Wilson, P.H., Lee, H.S., & Hollebrands, K.F. (2011). Understanding prospective mathematics teachers' processes for making sense of students' work with technology. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 42(1), 39-64.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Also Read

Related Collections