Mathematics Teachers’ Learning: Identifying Key Learning Opportunities Linked to Teachers’ Knowledge Growth

Abstract

This study examines the role of several key features of professional development (PD) in bringing about changes in teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching. Artifacts (e.g., PD tasks, materials, and agendas) of the PD activities completed by 542 teachers in 21 different Mathematics and Science Partnership programs were coded based on the core features of PD identified in earlier literature. Multilevel analyses examined whether the programs’ focus on specific components of teacher knowledge (e.g., knowledge of mathematics teaching) and specific strategies for implementing the PD content (e.g., examining students’ work and solving mathematics problems) were related to gains in teachers’ mathematical knowledge. The results showed that a focus on curricular content knowledge and examining students’ work were significantly related to teachers’ learning. Implications for research and teacher education are discussed.

Keywords

teacher knowledge professional development mathematics education teacher learning

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abt Associates. (2013, November). Mathematics and science partnerships: Summary of performance period 2011 annual reports. Retrieved from http://www.ed-msp.net/images/public_documents/document/annual/MSP%20PP11%20Annual%20Final%20Report.pdf

Ball

D. L.

Hill

H. C.

(2008). Mathematical knowledge for teaching (MKT) measures: Mathematics released items 2008. Retrieved from http://www.umich.edu/~lmtweb/files/lmt_sample_items.pdf

Ball

D. L.

Thames

M. H.

Phelps

(2008). Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special? Journal of Teacher Education, 59, 389–407. doi:10.1177/0022487108324554

Banilower

E. R.

Smith

P. S.

Weiss

I. R.

Malzahn

K. A.

Campbell

K. M.

Weis

A. M.

(2013). Report of the 2012 national survey of science and mathematics education. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research.

Baumert

Kunter

Blum

Brunner

Voss

Jordan

. . . Tsai

(2010). Teachers’ mathematical knowledge, cognitive activation in the classroom, and student progress. American Educational Research Journal, 47, 133–180.

Bell

C. A.

Wilson

S. M.

Higgins

McCoach

D. B.

(2010). Measuring the effects of professional development on teacher knowledge: The case of developing mathematical ideas. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 41, 479–512.

Blank

R. K.

de las Alas

Smith

(2008). Does teacher professional development have effects on teaching and learning? Analysis of evaluation findings from programs for mathematics and science teachers in 14 states. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.

Borko

Eisenhart

Brown

C. A.

Underhill

R. G.

Jones

Agard

P. C.

(1992). Learning to teach hard mathematics: Do novice teachers and their instructors give up too easily? Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 23, 194–222.

Borko

Stecher

B. M.

Alonzo

Moncure

McClam

(2005). Artifact packages for characterizing classroom practice: A pilot study. Educational Assessment, 10, 73–104.

10.

Boston

M. D.

Smith

M. S.

(2009). Transforming secondary mathematics teaching: Increasing the cognitive demands of instructional tasks used in teachers’ classrooms. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 40, 119–156.

11.

Carney

M. B.

Brendefur

J. L.

Thiede

Hughes

Sutton

(2016). Statewide mathematics professional development: Teacher knowledge, self-efficacy, and beliefs. Educational Policy, 30, 539–572.

12.

Carpenter

T. P.

Fennema

Peterson

P. L.

Chiang

C. P.

Loef

(1989). Using knowledge of children’s mathematics thinking in classroom teaching: An experimental study. American Educational Research Journal, 26, 499–531. doi:10.3102/00028312026004499

13.

Copur-Gencturk

(2015). The effects of changes in mathematical knowledge on teaching: A longitudinal study of teachers’ mathematical knowledge and instruction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 46, 280–330.

14.

Copur-Gencturk

Lubienski

S. T.

(2013). Measuring mathematical knowledge for teaching: A longitudinal study using two measures. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 16, 211–236.

15.

Copur-Gencturk

Thacker

Plowman

(2018, April). Do teachers accurately report their learning? A comparison of teacher reports to validated measures. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association (AERA) annual meeting, New York.

16.

Crockett

M. D.

(2002). Inquiry as professional development: Creating dilemmas through teachers’ work. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, 609–624.

17.

Darling-Hammond

Richardson

(2009). Research review/teacher learning: What matters? Educational Leadership, 66(5), 46–53.

18.

Desimone

L. M.

(2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38, 181–199. doi:10.3102/0013189X08331140

19.

Desimone

L. M.

Porter

A. C.

Garet

M. S.

Yoon

K. S.

Birman

B. F.

(2002). Effects of professional development on teachers’ instruction: Results from a three-year longitudinal study. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24, 81–112.

20.

Ferreira

M. M.

(2015). The impact of a professional development program on elementary teachers’ science knowledge and pedagogical skills. Journal of Educational Issues, 1(1), 36–47.

21.

Franke

M. L.

Carpenter

T. P.

Levi

Fennema

(2001). Capturing teachers’ generative change: A follow-up study of professional development in mathematics. American Educational Research Journal, 38, 653–689. doi:10.3102/00028312038003653

22.

Garet

M. S.

Birman

B. F.

Porter

A. C.

Desimone

Herman

(1999). Designing effective professional development: Lessons from the Eisenhower Program [and] technical appendices. Retrieved from https://www.air.org/resource/designing-effective-professional-development-lessons-eisenhower-program

23.

Garet

M. S.

Heppen

J. B.

Walters

Parkinson

Smith

T. M.

Song

. . . Borman

G. D.

(2016). Focusing on mathematical knowledge: The impact of content-intensive teacher professional development (NCEE 2016-4010). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance.

24.

Garet

M. S.

Porter

A. C.

Desimone

Birman

B. F.

Yoon

K. S.

(2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38, 915–945. doi:10.3102/00028312038004915

25.

Garet

M. S.

Wayne

Stancavage

Taylor

Eaton

Walters

. . . Doolittle

(2011). Middle school mathematics professional development impact study: Findings after the second year of implementation (NCEE 2011-4024). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance.

26.

Givvin

K. B.

Santagata

(2011). Toward a common language for discussing the features of effective professional development: The case of a US mathematics program. Professional Development in Education, 37, 439–451.

27.

Goldsmith

L. T.

Doerr

H. M.

Lewis

C. C.

(2014). Mathematics teachers’ learning: A conceptual framework and synthesis of research. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 17, 5–36.

28.

Guskey

T. R.

(2002). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and Teaching, 8, 381–391.

29.

Guskey

T. R.

(2003). Analyzing lists of the characteristics of effective professional development to promote visionary leadership. NASSP Bulletin, 87(637), 4–20. doi:10.1177/019263650308763702

30.

Heck

D. J.

Banilower

E. R.

Weiss

I. R.

Rosenberg

S. L.

(2008). Studying the effects of professional development: The case of the NSF’s local systemic change through teacher enhancement initiative. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 39, 113–152.

31.

Hill

H. C.

Ball

D. L.

(2004). Learning mathematics for teaching: Results from California’s Mathematics Professional Development Institutes. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 35, 330–351. doi:10.2307/30034819

32.

Hill

H. C.

Ball

D. L.

Schilling

S. G.

(2008). Unpacking pedagogical content knowledge: Conceptualizing and measuring teachers’ topic-specific knowledge of students. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 39, 372–400.

33.

Hill

H. C.

Blunk

M. L.

Charalambous

C. Y.

Lewis

J. M.

Phelps

G. C.

Sleep

Ball

D. L.

(2008). Mathematical knowledge for teaching and the mathematical quality of instruction: An exploratory study. Cognition and Instruction, 26, 430–511.

34.

Hill

H. C.

Rowan

Ball

D. L.

(2005). Effects of teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 42, 371–406. doi:10.3102/00028312042002371

35.

Hill

H. C.

Schilling

S. G.

Ball

D. L.

(2004). Developing measures of teachers’ mathematics knowledge for teaching. Elementary School Journal, 105, 11–30.

36.

Ingvarson

Meiers

Beavis

(2005). Factors affecting the impact of professional development programs on teachers’ knowledge, practice, student outcomes & efficacy. Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 13(10). Retrieved from https://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/115

37.

Jackson

Gibbons

Sharpe

C. J.

(2017). Teachers’ views of students’ mathematical capabilities: Challenges and possibilities for ambitious reform. Teachers College Record, 119(7). Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1144316

38.

Jacob

Hill

Corey

(2017). The impact of a professional development program on teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching, instruction, and student achievement. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 10, 379–407.

39.

Jacobs

V. R.

Franke

M. L.

Carpenter

T. P.

Levi

Battey

(2007). Professional development focused on children’s algebraic reasoning in elementary school. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38, 258–288.

40.

Jayanthi

Gersten

Taylor

M. J.

Smolkowski

Dimino

(2017). Impact of the Developing Mathematical Ideas professional development program on Grade 4 students’ and teachers’ understanding of fractions (REL 2017–256). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Southeast. Retrieved from https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/southeast/pdf/REL_2017256.pdf

41.

Joyce

Gitomer

D. H.

Iaconangelo

C. J.

(2017). Classroom assignments as measures of teaching quality. Learning and Instruction, 54, 48–61. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2017.08.001

42.

Kang

N. H.

(2007). Elementary teachers’ teaching for conceptual understanding: Learning from action research. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18, 469–495.

43.

Kaufman

J. H.

Stein

M. K.

Junker

(2016). Factors associated with alignment between teacher survey reports and classroom observation ratings of mathematics instruction. Elementary School Journal, 116, 339–364.

44.

Kennedy

(1998). Form and substance in in-service teacher education [Monograph]. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.

45.

Kennedy

M. M.

(2016). How does professional development improve teaching? Review of Educational Research, 86, 945–980.

46.

Kersting

N. B.

Givvin

K. B.

Thompson

B. J.

Santagata

Stigler

J. W.

(2012). Measuring usable knowledge: Teachers’ analyses of mathematics classroom videos predict teaching quality and student learning. American Educational Research Journal, 49, 568–589. doi:10.3102/0002831212437853

47.

Koellner

Jacobs

Borko

(2011). Mathematics professional development: Critical features for developing leadership skills and building teachers’ capacity. Mathematics Teacher Education and Development, 13, 115–136.

48.

Lewis

Maerten-Rivera

Adamson

Lee

(2011). Urban third grade teachers’ practices and perceptions in science instruction with English language learners. School Science and Mathematics, 111, 156–163.

49.

Loucks-Horsley

Stiles

K. E.

Mundry

Hewson

P. W.

Love

(Eds.). (2010). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

50.

Marrongelle

Sztajn

Smith

(2013). Scaling up professional development in an era of common state standards. Journal of Teacher Education, 64, 202–211.

51.

Minner

Martinez

Freeman

(2013, May). Compendium of research instruments for STEM education. Part 1: Teacher practices, PCK, and content knowledge (with addendum). Cambridge, MA: Abt Associates. Retrieved from http://cadrek12.org/sites/default/files/Compendium%20of%20STEM%20instruments%20Part%201.pdf

52.

Murata

Bofferding

Pothen

B. E.

Taylor

M. W.

Wischnia

(2012). Making connections among student learning, content, and teaching: Teacher talk paths in elementary mathematics lesson study. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 43, 616–650.

53.

Ottmar

E. R.

Rimm-Kaufman

S. E.

Larsen

R. A.

Berry

R. Q.

(2015). Mathematical knowledge for teaching, standards-based mathematics teaching practices, and student achievement in the context of the responsive classroom approach. American Educational Research Journal, 52, 787–821.

54.

Penuel

W. R.

Fishman

B. J.

Yamaguchi

Gallagher

L. P.

(2007). What makes professional development effective? Strategies that foster curriculum implementation. American Educational Research Journal, 44, 921–958.

55.

Piasta

S. B.

Logan

J. A.

Pelatti

C. Y.

Capps

J. L.

Petrill

S. A.

(2015). Professional development for early childhood educators: Efforts to improve math and science learning opportunities in early childhood classrooms. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107, 407–422.

56.

Rockoff

J. E.

Jacob

B. A.

Kane

T. J.

Staiger

D. O.

(2011). Can you recognize an effective teacher when you recruit one? Education, 6, 43–74.

57.

Rosebery

A. S.

Warren

Tucker-Raymond

(2016). Developing interpretive power in science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53, 1571–1600.

58.

Rudd

L. C.

Lambert

M. C.

Satterwhite

Smith

C. H.

(2009). Professional development + coaching = enhanced teaching: Increasing usage of math mediated language in preschool classrooms. Early Childhood Education Journal, 37, 63–69.

59.

Sadler

P. M.

Sonnert

Coyle

H. P.

Cook-Smith

Miller

J. L.

(2013). The influence of teachers’ knowledge on student learning in middle school physical science classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 50, 1020–1049.

60.

Santagata

(2009). Designing video-based professional development for mathematics teachers in low-performing schools. Journal of Teacher Education, 60, 38–51.

61.

Santagata

Bray

(2016). Professional development processes that promote teacher change: The case of a video-based program focused on leveraging students’ mathematical errors. Professional Development in Education, 42, 547–568.

62.

Santagata

Kersting

Givvin

K. B.

Stigler

J. W.

(2011). Problem implementation as a lever for change: An experimental study of the effects of a professional development program on students’ mathematics learning. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 4, 1–24. doi:10.1080/19345747.2010.498562

63.

Scher

O’Reilly

(2009). Professional development for K–12 math and science teachers: What do we really know? Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 2, 209–249.

64.

Schilling

S. G.

(2007). The role of psychometric modeling in test validation: An application of multidimensional item response theory. Measurement, 5, 93–106.

65.

Shulman

L. S.

(1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.

66.

Sitzmann

Ely

Brown

K. G.

Bauer

K. N.

(2010). Self-assessment of knowledge: A cognitive learning or affective measure? Academy of Management Learning & Education, 9, 169–191.

67.

Supovitz

J. A.

Turner

H. M.

(2000). The effects of professional development on science teaching practices and classroom culture. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 963–980.

68.

Tchoshanov

M. A.

(2011). Relationship between teacher knowledge of concepts and connections, teaching practice, and student achievement in middle grades mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 76, 141–164. doi:10.1007/s10649-010-9269-y

69.

Texas Education Agency. (2013). Public information management system. Austin, TX: Author. Retrieved May, 2014, from http://www.tea.state.tx.us/peims/about.html

70.

Tymms

(2004). Effect sizes in multilevel models. In Schagen

Elliot

(Eds.), But what does it mean? The use of effect sizes in educational research (pp. 55–66). National Foundation for Educational Research.

71.

Van Driel

J. H.

Berry

. (2012). Teacher professional development focusing on pedagogical content knowledge. Educational Researcher, 41, 26–28.

72.

van Es

E. A.

Sherin

M. G.

(2010). The influence of video clubs on teachers’ thinking and practice. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 13, 155–176.

73.

Van Veen

Zwart

Meirink

. (2012). What makes teacher professional development effective? A literature review. In Kooy

van Veen

(Eds.), Teacher learning that matters (pp. 3–21). New York, NY: Routledge.

74.

Wayne

A. J.

Yoon

K. S.

Zhu

Cronen

Garet

M. S.

(2008). Experimenting with teacher professional development: Motives and methods. Educational Researcher, 37, 469–479.

75.

White

Donaldson

Hodge

Ruff

(2013). Examining the effects of math teachers’ circles on aspects of teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching. International Journal for Mathematics Teaching & Learning. Retrieved from http://www.cimt.org.uk/journal/white.pdf

76.

Wilson

(Ed.). (2009). Education policy white paper on teacher quality. Washington, DC: National Academy of Education.

77.

Yoon

S. Y.

Diefes-Dux

Strobel

(2013). First-year effects of an engineering professional development program on elementary teachers. American Journal of Engineering Education, 4, 67–84.

78.

Yoon

K. S.

Duncan

Lee

S. W.-Y.

Scarloss

Shapley

(2007). Reviewing the evidence on how teacher professional development affects student achievement (Issues & Answers Report, REL 2007-No. 033). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Southwest. Retrieved from https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/southwest/pdf/rel_2007033_sum.pdf

79.

Zwart

R. C.

Wubbels

Bergen

Bolhuis

(2009). Which characteristics of a reciprocal peer coaching context affect teacher learning as perceived by teachers and their students? Journal of Teacher Education, 60, 243–257.