McDuffie, A. R., & Slavit, D. (2003). Utilizing online discussion to support reflection
and challenge beliefs in elementary mathematics
methods classrooms. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education [Online serial], 2(4). Available: http://www.citejournal.org/vol2/iss4/mathematics/article1.cfm
Utilizing Online Discussion to Support Reflection
and Challenge Beliefs in Elementary Mathematics
Methods Classrooms
Beliefs, Mathematics, and Instruction
A fundamentally important experience for preservice teachers (PSTs) in
a mathematics methods course is the self-examination of beliefs
about mathematics and the teaching and learning of mathematics.
Research suggests that beliefs about mathematics have an impact on
teaching practices (Ernest, 1989; Franke, Carpenter, Levi, & Fennema, 2001;
Philippou & Christou, 1998, Thompson, 1984), but can be quite difficult to
change (Cooney, Shealy, & Arvold, 1998; McGinnis, Kramer, Roth McDuffie,
& Watanabe, 1998; Richardson, 1996). There is also evidence that
beliefs about mathematics are more closely related to classroom practice
than beliefs about mathematics pedagogy (Raymond, 1997). Because
many preservice teachers enter methods courses with naïve views of
both mathematics and constructivist pedagogy (Ball, 1996; Ma, 1999), it is
vital that challenges to assumptions about the nature of mathematics be made
to support a reanalysis of PSTs' views of mathematical content and pedagogy.
If it is true that beliefs of preservice mathematics teachers can be
changed through specific experiences provided in their teacher preparation (Bright
& Vacc, 1994), then methods instructors must identify, provide, and
facilitate
such experiences. As reflection is a key to conceptual change
(Hiebert, 1992; Kilpatrick, 1985), these experiences need to provide the opportunity
for reflection over the long term, about meaningful issues and ideas
(for preservice teachers), and with communal support. We chose to
incorporate the use of an online discussion format into our methods courses
for precisely these reasons.
Online Discussion Format
Online discussion can be a viable and worthwhile option as a means
of promoting thinking and discussion outside of regular class time.
Blackboard (http://www.blackboard.com), a web-based classroom environment,
is becoming a widely used tool to create a virtual community in
teacher education courses. This environment allows the use of real-time
chat formats, document posting, and various other features. The feature that
is the focus of this article involves the creation of threaded discussion
around themes of the participants' choice. Password protection allows for
private discussion among the participating group.
Once in the online classroom, users select "Communications," and
from there choose "Discussion board." On the discussion board, the instructor
or a student initiates a thread, and subsequent participants either respond
to an existing thread or initiate their own. For example, during the 13th week
of the semester, the second author sent a prompt titled "Teaching
WITHOUT Understanding":
The division of fractions algorithm is pretty simple. In fact,
the essence of the algorithm has been condensed down to
three words: "flip and multiply."
We have discussed ways of teaching this algorithm for
understanding. I have stated that, while algorithms such as
addition, subtraction, and multiplication of fractions are likely to be
invented by students if given time and appropriate experiences, the
division of fractions algorithm is one that students are less likely
to develop on their own. Further, the algorithm is somewhat
difficult for students to understand. On the other hand, even attempting
to understand the algorithm may support student development,
and some students will come away with an understanding.
What do you think? Will you teach the division of
fractions algorithm with understanding?
After posting this prompt, students responded to the prompt, responded
to each other's postings, and/or initiated new discussion threads (e.g.,
see "Flip those fractions" in Figure 1). Figure 1 shows the beginning of
this threaded discussion as it appeared on the discussion board.
Figure 1. List of discussion threads
Other student comments continue in a similar manner.
Clicking on the title allows the participant to read each post, and a
"REPLY" prompt allows for responses to be posted. Blackboard automatically
threads the discussion in the format illustrated in Figure 1. Instructors can
explore this environment by creating their own course site. Simply go
to blackboard.com and click on "Course Service" to set up a trial site
free of charge.
Using Online Discussion to Support Instruction
Both authors used the Discussion Board as a means of extending
student-generated ideas from the weekly class
discussions in a Methods of Teaching Elementary Mathematics course at two different campuses of
Washington
State University. The methods courses were each part of a
preservice Master in Teaching elementary certification program (a 22-month
program for the first author and a 15-month program for the second author).
Both courses met once per week for three hours. Beyond these similarities,
the authors had slightly different purposes and approaches in
incorporating online discussions. Thus, this article includes separate discussions on
the use of online discussion first, followed by the common themes of
the benefits and challenges of using online discussion.
Roth McDuffie's Implementation of Online Discussion
In addition to extending in-class discussions, Roth McDuffie's goal in
using online discussion was for the PSTs to reflect on their own experiences
and beliefs regarding mathematics and learning mathematics and to generate
a conceptual framework for their future teaching of mathematics.
Considering the research on the difficulties in changing beliefs about teaching
toward more reform-based practices (e.g., Richardson, 1996), and her own
experiences with PSTs struggling to make sense of standards-based approaches
to teaching and learning mathematics (e.g., National Council of Teachers
of Mathematics [NCTM], 2000), Roth McDuffie sought to find
opportunities for the PSTs to wrestle with and support each other in the process
of changing beliefs.
As such, Roth McDuffie posted discussion prompts one to two times
each month (see Appendix for examples), and the PSTs responded to the
prompts and to each other's comments, creating an interactive electronic
conversation between class meetings. The prompts were prepared based on
the readings, activities, discussions, and puzzling issues the PSTs were
talking about both in and outside of class, and most often the PSTs had a choice
of items in which to react within a given prompt. Additionally, Roth
McDuffie often used online discussions to encourage the PSTs to synthesize
ideas over a few weeks of the course, exploring the underlying principles
and approaches across topics. The prompts were also used for
ongoing assessment of the PSTs' learning and the instructor's assessment of
her teaching approach.
A response was usually required within a week of the initial posting,
and some of the ideas shared online were discussed at the next class meeting.
The PSTs were encouraged to think further about the issues and post
again, either at the main thread level or in response to classmates' comments.
In creating these discussions that oscillated between face-to-face
discussions and online discussions, Roth McDuffie intended to foster a sense
of community, while using the thinking time that online discussions afford.
To ensure that the PSTs posted to the discussion board, their participation
in the online discussion was included in their participation grade and
represented 5% of their overall grade; however, it was made clear that this
grade was based on regular contributions with thoughtful responses, rather
than on specific aspects of the response.
Slavit's Implementation of Online Discussions
Slavit's methods course met once per week for three hours and was
concurrent with a two-day per week field placement experience. This
setting allowed for strong field-theory connections and the use of the
classroom experiences of the PSTs' students in course discussions.
Each week Slavit prepared a discussion prompt (see Appendix for
further examples), based on the focus of the week's readings, activities,
and discussion, that was designed to extend the flow of the classroom
activity and force deeper reflection on the part of the PSTs. Generally, the PSTs
were given more than one discussion prompt each week, but each dealt
with related ideas. The subsequent discussion around the prompt was referred
to as a "table." The PSTs were required to make at least one weekly
posting and were asked to provide a balance of initiations and responses over
the course of the semester. Slavit's primary goal with online discussions
was for PSTs to explore beliefs about mathematics and mathematics
teaching, and the prompts were written to specifically support this goal. The
PSTs were also encouraged to stay on the discussion topic but to extend
this focus. As stated in the syllabus, "Please try to keep your comments to
the focus topic, but also feel free to add any relevant insights that may
extend the direction of the discussion."
Participation in the online discussion was quantitatively graded by
checking if the PSTs made weekly posts, and the overall level of commentary by
each PST was "loosely" graded in a more qualitative manner. Online
participation accounted for half of the PSTs' classroom participation grade, or 7.5% of
the total course grade.
Online Discussions Support Individual Reflection
Many teacher educators have reported success in using journals to
promote reflection and learning in preservice teachers (e.g., Brownlee, Purdie,
& Boulton-Lewis 2001; Carter, 1998). We found that participating in an
online discussion facilitated reflection similar to the reflective thinking
brought about in journal writing for PSTs, while providing the additional benefit
of sharing their reflections with others. Specifically, the online venue
helped facilitate the PSTs' constructions of their teaching and learning
philosophy in that it required the PSTs to think about and clearly state their
viewpoints, and then to continue to clarify these views as other PSTs shared
their experiences and supported or challenged their perspectives. The
following prompt and response from Week 6 of Roth McDuffie's class provides
an example of this reflection. The first part of this prompt was used to
extend the class discussion by asking the PSTs how they intended to
apply content-specific ideas from the course in planning their
instructional approach. In the second part of the prompt, feedback was sought on
the value of a course assignment being used for the first time, and the
PSTs were given a chance to share their out-of-class reading without having
to use class time for this sharing.
WEEK 6. The past few weeks we have been discussing
number sense, developing meaning for operations, learning basic
facts, and algorithms (invented and traditional). Assuming that you
are teaching in the primary grades, what will be your general
approach and relative emphasis for instruction on the concepts
and processes listed above? In responding to this question, reflect
on the ideas from the text (Van de Walle, 2001) and other
readings, the ideas you have concerns about or disagree with, and
the ideas that you do not fully understand.
In the response, Andrea demonstrated how she was beginning to form
her own philosophy about teaching and learning mathematics as she
wrestled with specific pedagogical issues (in this case, teaching with story
problems and use of basic facts). Additionally, she used the course readings as
a referent in shaping her philosophy, with the online discussion
providing another opportunity to explore the ideas in the readings. Andrea wrote,
There seems to be an aversion in many kids to story
problems
It would make sense to start having kids make up their own
story problems very early on as they develop number sense
Then
I
would introduce more "tools" for solutions: knowing basic facts
is a "mind tool" that facilitates problem solving
. If the kids
don't have their facts nailed, it really slows them down when the
more complex operations come along
.This opinion is supported
by Isaacs and Carroll (1999) in the reading handouts.
Thus, we perceived that the online discussions provided the
opportunities for reflection that other approaches (such as journal writing) offer;
however, we found that the public nature of these reflections enabled other PSTs
to examine their classmates' reflections, and correspondingly go
beyond independent reflective thinking.
Online Discussions Enhance Classroom Discussions to Provide
More Teaching and Learning Opportunities
Online discussions provided opportunities to support, continue,
and/or extend class discussions. We describe specific ways in which the
online discussions enhanced teaching and learning.
Online discussions build a community for reflection and
learning. A primary outcome starting early in the semester was that the online
discussions helped to build a sense of community among the PSTs and
enhanced opportunities for reflection by providing a forum for dialog that might
not have occurred in a face-to-face discussion. For instance, while many of
the PSTs privately expressed their anxieties regarding mathematics to
Roth McDuffie at the beginning of the semester, they had not been as willing
to share these ideas with their classmates. However, in response to
Roth McDuffie's Week 3 prompt, they began to share these feelings and
attitudes with the class from behind their computers. This prompt was intended
to foster reflection and synthesis of foundational ideas for
reform-based mathematics instruction as discussed over the first few weeks of the course.
WEEK 3. Thus far in the course, we have spent our time
discussing some of the foundations for and guiding principles of
teaching and learning reform-based mathematics. These
discussions have included the NCTM Standards, the Washington
EALRs (State Standards), what it means to know and
understand mathematics, problem solving, and creating
problem-based
lessons, assessment (with a focus on assessment as part
of instruction, and more specifically, performance assessment),
and teaching mathematics to ALL children. As I have mentioned
in class, we spend the first few weeks building these
foundations and examining underlying principles before moving on to
exploring more concrete, grade-related, topics and activities.
Before moving on to more specific topics, I would like you to take
some time to reflect on these overarching themes that we have
discussed. What are your reactions, feelings, attitudes, and/or
beliefs about the teaching and learning of mathematics? Do you find
that your viewpoints are changing or being called into question in
light of our class discussions and readings? (Explain how and why
or why not.) In your response, you may choose to focus on any of
the areas listed above or provide a more holistic view,
incorporating several areas.
Once the PSTs started responding, it became clear that the interactive
nature of the online discussion was supporting the PSTs in their efforts to
make sense of their past experiences in mathematics and in the ways they
were coming to understand mathematics teaching and learning now.
Moreover, the nature of the medium of communication, in that PSTs were able to
read about their peers' experiences, reflect on their own experiences, and
then craft their responses on their own time, fostered the PSTs' willingness
to share their views. Several PSTs conversed about these issues with just
a sample of the following conversation. Sienna asked her classmates,
Am I the only person in this class who didn't feel successful
in math?
We must teach so that students have to have an
opportunity to learn, not just those who seem to "just get it."
I
worked hard and tried to understand, but it didn't make sense for a
long time. The key appears to me to be that students have to have
an understanding of the big picture, concepts, to know how
to approach a problem.
Lucia responded to Sienna and wrote,
No! You are not the only person who does not feel successful
in MATH! I don't know if I'll ever overcome the fear of failure
through math. I would like nothing better in life than to help young
children have a positive, successful experience with math. So back to
work I go.
The conversation went on in this fashion with most of the class
sharing negative experiences in math. Many PSTs seemed relieved to hear that
their feelings were not unique. The tone became that of colleagues
supporting each other in a goal to learn to provide teaching and learning that would
be more beneficial to children than the ones they experienced. This goal
carried into our class discussions. Contrary to previous courses when
online discussions were not used by Roth McDuffie, these conversations
seemed to help the PSTs be much more open about areas in math in which they
felt unsure. For the most part, they were comfortable admitting that they
had never thoroughly understood certain concepts and/or processes
(e.g., operations with fractions) and were ready to learn more, no longer trying
to hide their lack of understandings. A similar discussion in Slavit's
classroom also extended into the online forum.
Online discussions support interactive, shared reflection time
frame. Not only did the online discussions provide the foundation for future
in-class interactions, they also enabled in-class discussions to
continue beyond class time. The interactive nature of the online discussion
combined with the lack of restrictions on time provided the PSTs with the
opportunity to extend course discussion and activity, to build on others' ideas
and perspectives, and to more deeply challenge their own notions about
the nature of mathematics and their beliefs about mathematics teaching.
We illustrate this effect with Slavit's Week 6 prompt and a sample of responses.
WEEK 6 Prompt: Most people believe that number sense,
which has also been called numeracy, should be a high priority
in elementary mathematics classrooms. Number sense,
by definition, means different things to different people, as it is
the totality of your awareness, experiences, uses, and
understandings of numbers. We gave several different attributes of
number sense in class, most of which were centered on
understandings of number, relationships between numbers, estimation,
mental computation, and uses of numbers.
Discuss your current view of the role of number sense in
your future mathematics classroom. You may want to comment
on how you plan to incorporate number sense into your
instruction, why you do not plan to incorporate number sense, any
relationship or incompatibility between number sense instruction and
the learning of algorithms, and/or the relationship or
incompatibility between number sense and the WASLs (NOTE: The WASLs
are assessments in the state of Washington).
The following PSTs' comments represent the first three posts for the
prompt. Although they are not included in this example, the PSTs made
multiple posts to a given thread on several occasions.
Roberta: MY CURRENT VIEW OF THE ROLE OF NUMBER SENSE IN A MATH CLASSROOM
Traditionally, drills use conditioning to develop skills.
Problem solving develops cognitive skills, rather than just concentrating
on memorizing facts. It's important for children to
understand number meanings and numerical relationships. Flexible
thinking about math concepts should be encouraged. For instance,
when working with money, children should be encouraged to come
up with as many ways of showing a certain amount, such as $1.36.
Children need to know items like the inverse relationship
between addition and subtraction. Knowing the relative size of
numbers help [sic] children to connect math to the real world.
Number sense is as important to math as phonemic awareness is
to reading.
In my classroom, I hope to use problem solving in groups to
allow children to come up with many ways to an answer. When
people verbalize their math processes (as we do in our math class)
we can understand our thinking better. Number sense will also
be taught using hands on materials. I guess that those are the
four main ways that I will attempt to teach number sense: group
work, verbalizing math processes, problem solving and using
manipulatives.Sorry this is so babbly...
Roberta made a clear distinction in her belief about mathematics as
being composed of a set of skills, concepts, and problem solving processes
and articulated teaching strategies to facilitate each. She also discussed ways
in which these constructs intersect and the need to utilize students'
sense-making activities in the development of certain aspects of
mathematical development. These issues were focused on extensively in the
previous classroom discussion.
Lisa extended these thoughts by introducing the notion of
"authentic" problem solving into the discussion, probably in response to
Roberta's insertion of abstract mathematical ideas (e.g., "number meanings"
and "inverse relationship"). Lisa also further expanded on the previous
classroom discussion.
Hi Roberta,
I enjoyed reading your examples of how to incorporate
number sense in the classroom. I agree with your four key ways to
teach number sense: group work, verbalizing math processes,
problem solving and using manupulatives [sic]. But I also think it is
equally important to make sure that the problems students are
working with are authentic. Like the money example you gave.
Sometimes math concepts are so abstract and it is diffuclt [sic] to
understand the real meanings. If our students have a clear understanding
for number sense, than [sic] perhaps the core concepts will be
more comprehendable [sic] for them. I especially agree with you
about having students verbally explain their processes. I feel that this
is not only valuable for the rest of the class to hear, but it is
also beneficial for the student who is explaining. I have learned
this through personal experiences in our math class. The way
some people figure out problems blows me away sometimes! It
is interesting to listen to how others process information. Lisa
Connie then responded to both of these posts.
Lisa and Roberta,
I agree with both of you and think that both of your ideas of how
to "teach" number sense are very good. I think that it seems
strange to teach something like number sense. It is difficult to
understand what children are thinking and how they are processing
the information that we give them. It seems that if we provide
authentic situations as Laura stated that the children themselves
will pick up on the relationships between numbers. This type
of learning by doing seems, to me, to have a greater impact
on learning and understanding mathematics. If children "see"
things happening with numbers for themselves they will be
more interested in figuring out why the relationship is so. My job as
a facilitator is to provide the learning situation (although not
always, sometimes learning situations come up naturally) and to
provide further information to allow the children to construct their
own ideas about the situation. As you both said, the children will
learn so much from each other as they explain their
understandings and try to help other children understand the problem. The
tough part as a teacher is figuring out how to provide just the
right amount of guidance so not to do all the learning for them. I
guess this is my idea of how to teach a lot of math concepts, not
just number sense. Oh well! J Connie
Connie's remarks provide another example of a PST extending her
thoughts, based on others and her own reflections, on some core mathematical
beliefs in the context of instruction.
Online discussions enable more voices to be
heard. Not only was Connie's comment important in adding to the ideas of the discussion,
the fact that Connie contributed to the discussion was notable. Connie was
a rather quiet student who probably would have not contributed to
the discussion in this manner during class time. In fact, data
previously collected by the authors (Slavit, in press) found that student
"talkativeness" does transfer to a virtual setting, but that the virtual arena does help to
even out the "level of vocality" of the students. In a prior semester, Slavit
ranked his PSTs as "highly vocal," "providing adequate input," and "little or
no input," based on their levels of classroom participation. PSTs who
participated more than the minimum requirement of one post per week were
equally balanced across the three groups. Further, although the average number
of postings by the highly vocal, adequate, and little or no input groups
were 14.2, 11.6, and 9.3, respectively, the participation level among the little or
no input group in the online setting was significantly greater than during
class time. These findings were consistent with Sliva's (2002) research, in
which students who were not participating in class were comfortable
participating in an online forum.
In addition to more PSTs participating in discussions, the PSTs
referenced each other's postings frequently over the course of the semester
during classroom discussions. By having their postings referenced, less
vocal PSTs were given prestige and a platform that provided an entryway into
the classroom discourse, something that would not have happened otherwise.
Additional time for each PST to share experiences and
perspectives. Limited class time did not always allow for each of the PSTs to share
their individual experiences and emerging perspectives in whole class
discussions. The online forum provided an opportunity for this kind of
contribution to discussions and reflection. In responding to Roth McDuffie's
Week 6 prompt (shown earlier) regarding ways to teach and learn
mathematical operations, a PST's comment showed how the PSTs used the forum to
relate the ideas that we had been discussing in class to their personal
experiences. Brad explained his views and experiences as follows:
It is important for our students to be encouraged to use their
own invented strategies to solve problems....It should make sense
to the students. They will take ownership in their
techniques and
will have a good understanding of how math works. I
just wish that math had been taught in this way when I was in
school. It was all rules that had to be followed. I had my own way of
doing division problems. I actually multiplied the divisor until I got
the number that fit best. I didn't follow the rules and was told that
was the wrong way to do the problem. I got the right answers but
was not encouraged to use my own problem solving methods.
The new ways of teaching math encourage students to be creative
and try something that makes sense to them. I hope that I will be
able to teach math in this way.
Additional assessment opportunities to inform
instruction. As part of the previous discussion with Brad, one PST reflected on how she
was making sense of the ideas we were discussing in class. In her response,
she provided important assessment information for the professor in
considering how she was understanding some of the issues and which
instructional approaches were most helpful in her learning. Tanesha stated,
All students need to develop the meaning of operations and
know their basic facts in order to explore creative ways in solving
word problems. Van de Walle [2001] gives a lot of great examples
on problems to pose to your class. These examples give me
ideas [for] how to expand his examples and create my own. The
most powerful tool for me was watching videos [of students
sharing problem solving strategies]. The videos helped me to clarify
my questions and [provided ideas for] how to set this up in
my classroom. The videos showed me this method of teaching
does work and how to go about doing it.
After reading Tanesha's first sentence, Roth McDuffie was concerned
that perhaps Tanesha was forming the view that basic fact knowledge
and knowledge of the basic operations had to be gained before solving
word problems. Given that a primary goal was for PSTs to understand
current research and approaches indicating that children gain these
understandings through early experiences with problem solving and while problem
solving, her posting prompted the instructor to revisit these topics in a
subsequent class discussion. Tanesha's comments about the text and videos
provided needed information in the instructor's reflections on instructional
decisions
and approaches. In general, Roth McDuffie found that, just as
classroom discussions provide assessment opportunities, online discussions
provided an opportunity for ongoing assessment of how the PSTs were making
sense of the ideas discussed and the efficacy of her own instructional
approaches. Moreover, by having online discussions, more PSTs voiced their ideas
and understandings, and therefore, McDuffie experienced more opportunities
for assessing her teaching and the PSTs' learning. This information was
then used in planning the next class, rather than having a delay in response
that results when using written assignments to inform instruction. Indeed,
for every prompt that was posted, information was received as to how the
PSTs were forming understandings and which readings, activities,
discussions, and video case studies were most beneficial to the PSTs' understanding
and learning.
Conclusions About Benefits and Challenges of an
Online Discussion Format in Elementary Mathematics Methods
Besides acting as an "equalizer" in regard to PST vocality, we found
several benefits for the incorporation of an online discussion forum in an
elementary mathematics methods course. Similar to a journal, online
discussion provided a forum for personal reflections about thoughts and
beliefs relevant to the teaching and learning of mathematics. However, the
public nature of this forum changed the dynamics of the PST writing, and
the dialogical aspect of online discussion allowed PSTs to share their
reflections with everyone. This public dimension to the writing had two
important consequences. It initiated an increase in self-regulation and
subsequent reflection on the issues being shared, and it also allowed for a public
debate about the issues that raised challenges and forced responses to the
ideas and issues initially put forth.
The asynchronous nature of the discussion allowed PSTs to craft and
edit their remarks prior to submission in a thoughtful manner. As in the
earlier examples, PSTs' comments were often more focused and reflective than
if spoken extemporaneously, or if even written privately in a journal.
Further, the variety of feedback from peers led to directions for further thought
that were quite impossible to receive from a single instructor or in a
classroom discussion. This combination of factors both initiated and extended
the reflective process in the PSTs.
The online forum also provided another venue for the PSTs to pose
their own questions and dilemmas. If appropriately created and monitored by
the instructor, this forum can be a safe yet challenging place with which to
put forth ideas and issues, as well as address questions and concerns specific
to the participants of the online community. Constantly referring to
PSTs' comments during classroom discussion, making "model" posts as needed
to provide examples of positive feedback or criticism, and providing
relevant and thought-provoking prompts were important ways that the
instructors supported the establishment of a positive and supportive, yet critical,
online community.
We also found that creating an online community presented various
social and technical challenges. Many PSTs had older equipment that led to
long download time and subsequent frustration. Although Blackboard was
a fairly easy site to navigate, PSTs with less favorable attitudes toward or
less experience with technology also experienced frustration. In addition,
both PSTs and professors needed to devote substantial time to contribute to
the discussion. And if time was not devoted to checking the discussion
even after a posting has been made, the discussion degenerated into a string
of ideas rather than a coherent dialogue. This time aspect was the
primary complaint about the use of an online discussion format by the PSTs, as
there were many aspects of the short and intensive Master in Teaching
programs with extensive time demands. Because of this, we surmise that, if
the discussion is not used and supported in the fabric of the course, it
can quickly be thought of as peripheral and subsequently not valued by
the participants. From past experiences, we found that aspects of the
program that take on this status are quickly dismissed as "busywork," and
the reflective value of the online discussion quickly dissolves.
We also faced a challenge in regard to our role as participants. We
found that too much involvement can take ownership away from the PSTs, and
too little involvement can send the message that the online discussion is
not important or it can allow for discussion that is offtrack or superficial.
There is clearly no correct way of handling this dilemma other than
constant monitoring and appropriate instructor commentary when needed.
However, we have also found that utilizing online comments during
classroom discussion can clarify and monitor the online discussion without
participating actively in it.
References
Ball, D.L. (1996). Teacher learning and the mathematics reforms: What we
think we know and what we need to learn. Phi Delta Kappan,
77(7), 500 - 508.
Bright, G.W., & Vacc, N.N. (1994, April 4-10).
Changes in undergraduate preservice teachers' beliefs during an elementary teacher-certification
program. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American
Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
Brownlee, J., Purdie, N., & Boulton-Lewis, G. (2001). Changing
epistemological beliefs in preservice teacher education students.
Teaching in Higher Education, 6(2), 247-268.
Carter, C. (1998). The use of journals to promote reflection.
Action in Teacher Education, 19(4), 39-42.
Cooney, J., Shealy, E., & Arvold, B. (1998). Conceptualizing belief
structures of preservice secondary mathematics teachers.
Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,
29(3), 306-33.
Ernest, P. (1989). The impact of beliefs on the teaching of mathematics. In
P. Ernest (Ed.), Mathematics teaching: The state of the
art (pp. 249-254). London: The Falmer Press.
Franke, M., Carpenter, T., Levi, L., & Fennema, E. (2001). Capturing
teachers' generative change: A follow up study of professional development.
American Educational Research Journal, 38(3), 653-689.
Hiebert, J. (1992). Reflection and communication: Cognitive considerations
in school mathematics reform. International Journal of Educational
Research, 17(5), 439-456.
Issacs, A.l, & Carroll, W. (1999). Strategies for basic-facts instruction. TCM,
5 (9), 508-515.
Kilpatrick, J. (1985). Reflection and recursion.
Educational Studies in Mathematics, 16, 1-26.
Ma, L. (1999). Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics: Teachers'
understanding of fundamental mathematics in China and the
U.S. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
McGinnis, J.R., Kramer, S., Roth McDuffie, A., & Watanabe, T. (April
1998). Charting the attitude and belief journeys of teacher candidates in a
reform-based mathematics and science teacher preparation
program. Paper presented at Annual Meeting of American Educational Research
Association, San Diego, CA.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) (2000).
Principles and standards for school mathematics.
Reston, VA: The Council.
Philippou, G.N., & Christou, C. (1998). The effects of a preparatory
mathematics program in changing prospective teachers' attitudes towards
mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics,
35(2), 189-206.
Raymond, A.M. (1997). Inconsistency between a beginning elementary
school teacher's mathematics beliefs and teaching practice.
Journal for Research
in Mathematics Education, 28(5), 550-576.
Richardson, V. (1996). The role of attitudes and beliefs in learning to teach.
In J. Sikula (Ed.) Handbook of research on teacher
education (pp. 102-119). New York: Simon and Schuster.
Slavit, D. (in press). Expanding classroom discussion with an online
medium. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education.
Sliva, J. (2002). Developing a mathematical community using an electronic
discussion forum in an elementary mathematics methods course.
Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher
Education [Online serial], 2(1). Available:http://www.citejournal.org/vol2/iss1/currentpractice
/article1.cfm.
Thompson, A.G. (1984). The relationship of teachers' conceptions of
mathematics and mathematics teaching to instructional practice.
Educational Studies in Mathematics, 15(2), 105-127.
Van de Walle, J. (2001). Elementary and middle school mathematics:
Teaching developmentally. New York: Addison Wesley Longman.
Appendix
Additional Prompts Used in Online Discussions
The following examples illustrate the nature of the prompts and the intent
to encourage the PSTs' reflection on their experiences and beliefs
about mathematics teaching and learning.
-
Both the Standards and the EALRs generate, among other things,
a description of what mathematics is, how it could be taught
developmentally over a students' lifetime, how it could be assessed, and what
the curriculum could look like. Choose a specific grade level (be sure
to identify this in the title of your message) and describe what you feel is
a "reasonable mathematics curriculum" for that level. Is there
important mathematics that is missing in either the EALRs or the Standards?
Is there anything in these documents that shouldn't be there? (NOTE:
The EALRs are the learning standards in the state of Washington).
- Do you agree with the statement: The two main components of
Problem Solving are language and thought.
If so, then elaborate on the role that each of these play. Try to
be specific and contextualized - in other words, talk about these things
in the context of (or provide examples involving) specific
mathematical content. You are free to choose the math topic, but clearly discuss
how the problem utilizes (depends on?) thought and language.
If not, what other things are involved in problem solving. Again, try
to talk about these things in the context of specific mathematical ideas.
-
There are various tensions that arise when thinking about
early arithmetic. Mental computation vs. written algorithms vs.
calculators. Students' invented algorithms vs. learned, standard algorithms.
Patterns vs. heuristics vs. facts. All of these tensions have serious
consequences on instruction. Assume that you will be teaching in the
primary grades next year - How will you deal with some or all of these
tensions in your classroom?
-
We have spent the past few classes discussing fractions,
decimals, ratios, and proportions. Specifically, we have focused on
developing meaning for fractions and operating on fractions. This prompt is
aimed at reflecting on these classes. I am listing two questions. You
may respond to either or both.
A. I have been asked, "What if I want to teach fractions by
developing the concepts, but the school's (or district's) textbook is oriented
to focus on drill and memorizing procedures without developing
understandings?" We have discussed ways of developing concepts
and understandings for processes, and we realize that this takes time
to develop in students. But the textbook you may be handed (and
the district) might be pushing an agenda to spend most of
your time on drilling computation and algorithms. On the other hand, we
have discussed how teachers are often in the best position to bring
about change, and the [State Standards] and the [State testing
program] support teaching for understanding. How would you handle the
above situation (i.e., how do you overcome the forces of textbooks and
district curricula that are not in line with current research about
effective teaching and learning of fractions)? Please keep your comments
specific to the teaching and learning of fractions, decimals, ratios, and
proportions.
B. Many of you seemed to experience an "aha!" sensation as
we explored the teaching and learning of fractions in the past few
weeks. For those that did, describe your insights and experiences and
relate this to how this shapes your thinking for your role as a teacher
and students' learning of fractions.
- In your learning experiences with Geometer's
Sketchpad exploring triangles or quadrilaterals, you developed and/or reflected on
how students might develop various geometric understandings. As
a learner, consider where you feel situated among the levels of
geometric understanding as described by Van Hiele, and how you might
have progressed. Be sure to pay attention to your growth in
specific understandings as well as the role that language ("everyday talk"
and "math talk") played in this development.