{"title":"政策变动时期初任数学教师对教学法的价值观和信念","authors":"Rosalyn Hyde, Rosa Archer, Sally Bamber","doi":"10.1007/s10857-024-09647-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This study interrogates how beginning secondary mathematics teachers align their beliefs with their practice when they justify their pedagogical choices in the context of recent English mathematics education policy which is strongly influenced by approaches to mathematics teaching in Shanghai and Singapore currently referred to as ‘mastery’ approaches. It seeks to understand beginning teachers’ perceptions and understandings of these approaches and the extent to which they recognise aspects of ‘mastery’ in practice. In setting the context, pre-service teachers’ beliefs were surveyed and found to be congruent with constructivist approaches to learning. We then draw on qualitative data from semi-structured interviews secondary mathematics teachers in their first year post-qualification. The interviews were designed to interrogate and capture understanding of the features of mastery within their own classrooms. By using vignettes to capture participants’ beliefs, our aim was to present a ‘more nuanced understanding of the phenomena’ (Skilling and Stylianides in Int J Res Method Educ 43(5):541–556, 2019, 10.1080/1743727x.2019.1704243). The analytical framework developed draws on Guskey’s (In: Wright J (ed) International encyclopedia of the social & behavioural sciences, 2015, vol 14, 2nd edn, Elsevier, pp 752–759) interpretation of Bloom’s theory of mastery learning together with features of mastery learning in mathematics articulated by Drury (How to teach mathematics for mastery, 2018, Oxford University Press) and Boylan et al. (Edu Sci 8(4):202, 2018, 10.3390/educsci8040202). This posed a research design challenge given the variation in interpretation of mastery learning as it is understood in practice. The data exposes differences in the interpretation of mastery approaches in the settings where they learn to teach, as well as the tensions that arise between beginning teachers’ beliefs, practice, professional knowledge and agency in their developing classroom roles.</p>","PeriodicalId":47442,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education","volume":"56 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Beginning mathematics teachers’ values and beliefs about pedagogy during a time of policy flux\",\"authors\":\"Rosalyn Hyde, Rosa Archer, Sally Bamber\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10857-024-09647-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>This study interrogates how beginning secondary mathematics teachers align their beliefs with their practice when they justify their pedagogical choices in the context of recent English mathematics education policy which is strongly influenced by approaches to mathematics teaching in Shanghai and Singapore currently referred to as ‘mastery’ approaches. It seeks to understand beginning teachers’ perceptions and understandings of these approaches and the extent to which they recognise aspects of ‘mastery’ in practice. In setting the context, pre-service teachers’ beliefs were surveyed and found to be congruent with constructivist approaches to learning. We then draw on qualitative data from semi-structured interviews secondary mathematics teachers in their first year post-qualification. The interviews were designed to interrogate and capture understanding of the features of mastery within their own classrooms. By using vignettes to capture participants’ beliefs, our aim was to present a ‘more nuanced understanding of the phenomena’ (Skilling and Stylianides in Int J Res Method Educ 43(5):541–556, 2019, 10.1080/1743727x.2019.1704243). The analytical framework developed draws on Guskey’s (In: Wright J (ed) International encyclopedia of the social & behavioural sciences, 2015, vol 14, 2nd edn, Elsevier, pp 752–759) interpretation of Bloom’s theory of mastery learning together with features of mastery learning in mathematics articulated by Drury (How to teach mathematics for mastery, 2018, Oxford University Press) and Boylan et al. (Edu Sci 8(4):202, 2018, 10.3390/educsci8040202). This posed a research design challenge given the variation in interpretation of mastery learning as it is understood in practice. The data exposes differences in the interpretation of mastery approaches in the settings where they learn to teach, as well as the tensions that arise between beginning teachers’ beliefs, practice, professional knowledge and agency in their developing classroom roles.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47442,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education\",\"volume\":\"56 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-024-09647-1\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-024-09647-1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
英国最近的数学教育政策深受上海和新加坡数学教学方法的影响,这些方法目前被称为 "掌握 "教学法。本研究探讨了初任中学数学教师在证明自己的教学选择合理时,如何将自己的信念与实践相结合。本研究旨在了解职前教师对这些方法的看法和理解,以及他们在实践中对 "掌握 "的认识程度。在确定研究背景时,我们对职前教师的信念进行了调查,发现他们的信念与建构主义学习方法是一致的。然后,我们利用半结构式访谈中学数学教师在获得资格后第一年的定性数据。访谈的目的是在他们自己的课堂上探究和捕捉对 "掌握 "特征的理解。通过使用小故事来捕捉参与者的信念,我们的目的是呈现 "对现象更细致入微的理解"(Skilling 和 Stylianides in Int J Res Method Educ 43(5):541-556, 2019, 10.1080/1743727x.2019.1704243)。所制定的分析框架借鉴了古斯基(In:Wright J (ed) International encyclopedia of the social & behavioural sciences, 2015, vol 14, 2nd edn, Elsevier, pp 752-759)对布鲁姆掌握学习理论的诠释,以及德鲁里(How to teach mathematics for mastery, 2018, Oxford University Press)和博伊兰等人(Edu Sci 8(4):202, 2018, 10.3390/educsci8040202)阐述的数学掌握学习的特点。鉴于在实践中对掌握学习的理解存在差异,这给研究设计带来了挑战。数据揭示了教师在学习教学环境中对掌握学习方法的不同理解,以及初任教师在发展课堂角色过程中的信念、实践、专业知识和能动性之间产生的紧张关系。
Beginning mathematics teachers’ values and beliefs about pedagogy during a time of policy flux
This study interrogates how beginning secondary mathematics teachers align their beliefs with their practice when they justify their pedagogical choices in the context of recent English mathematics education policy which is strongly influenced by approaches to mathematics teaching in Shanghai and Singapore currently referred to as ‘mastery’ approaches. It seeks to understand beginning teachers’ perceptions and understandings of these approaches and the extent to which they recognise aspects of ‘mastery’ in practice. In setting the context, pre-service teachers’ beliefs were surveyed and found to be congruent with constructivist approaches to learning. We then draw on qualitative data from semi-structured interviews secondary mathematics teachers in their first year post-qualification. The interviews were designed to interrogate and capture understanding of the features of mastery within their own classrooms. By using vignettes to capture participants’ beliefs, our aim was to present a ‘more nuanced understanding of the phenomena’ (Skilling and Stylianides in Int J Res Method Educ 43(5):541–556, 2019, 10.1080/1743727x.2019.1704243). The analytical framework developed draws on Guskey’s (In: Wright J (ed) International encyclopedia of the social & behavioural sciences, 2015, vol 14, 2nd edn, Elsevier, pp 752–759) interpretation of Bloom’s theory of mastery learning together with features of mastery learning in mathematics articulated by Drury (How to teach mathematics for mastery, 2018, Oxford University Press) and Boylan et al. (Edu Sci 8(4):202, 2018, 10.3390/educsci8040202). This posed a research design challenge given the variation in interpretation of mastery learning as it is understood in practice. The data exposes differences in the interpretation of mastery approaches in the settings where they learn to teach, as well as the tensions that arise between beginning teachers’ beliefs, practice, professional knowledge and agency in their developing classroom roles.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education (JMTE) is devoted to research into the education of mathematics teachers and development of teaching that promotes students'' successful learning of mathematics. JMTE focuses on all stages of professional development of mathematics teachers and teacher-educators and serves as a forum for considering institutional, societal and cultural influences that impact on teachers'' learning, and ultimately that of their students. Critical analyses of particular programmes, development initiatives, technology, assessment, teaching diverse populations and policy matters, as these topics relate to the main focuses of the journal, are welcome. All papers are rigorously refereed.
Papers may be submitted to one of three sections of JMTE as follows: Research papers: these papers should reflect the main focuses of the journal identified above and should be of more than local or national interest.
Mathematics Teacher Education Around the World: these papers focus on programmes and issues of national significance that could be of wider interest or influence.
Reader Commentary: these are short contributions; for example, offering a response to a paper published in JMTE or developing a theoretical idea. Authors should state clearly the section to which they are submitting a paper. As general guidance, papers should not normally exceed the following word lengths: (1) 10,000 words; (2) 5,000 words; (3) 3,000 words. Maximum word lengths exclude references, figures, appendices, etc.
Critiques of reports or books that relate to the main focuses of JMTE appear as appropriate.