Supporting Preservice Secondary Mathematics Teachers’ Professional Judgment Around Digital Technology Use

View More View Less
  • 1 University of Hawai’i at Mãnoa
  • | 2 Santa Clara University

The pervasiveness of digital technology creates an imperative for mathematics teacher educators to prepare preservice teachers (PSTs) to select technology to support students’ mathematical development. We report on research conducted on an assignment created for and implemented in secondary mathematics methods courses requiring PSTs to select and evaluate digital mathematics tools. We found that PSTs primarily focused on pedagogical fidelity (ease of use), did not consider mathematical fidelity (accuracy), and at times superficially attended to cognitive fidelity (how well the tool reflects students’ mathematical thinking processes) operationalized as the CCSS for Mathematical Practice and Five Strands of Mathematical Proficiency. We discuss implications for implementing the assignment and suggestions for addressing PSTs’ challenges with identifying the mathematical practices and five strands.

Contributor Notes

Charmaine Mangram, University of Hawai’i at Mãnoa, USA, cmangram@hawaii.edu

Kathy Liu Sun, Santa Clara University, USA, ksun@scu.edu

(Corresponding author is Charmaine Mangram cmangram@hawaii.edu)
(Corresponding author is Kathy Liu Sun ksun@scu.edu)
Mathematics Teacher Educator
  • 1.

    Association of Mathematics Teacher Educators. (2017). Standards for preparing teachers of mathematics. Author.

  • 2.

    Battey, D., Kafai, Y., & Franke, M. (2005). Evaluation of mathematical inquiry in commercial rational number software. In C. Vrasidas & G. V. Glass (Eds.), Preparing Teachers to Teach with Technology (pp. 241256). Information Age Publishing.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3.

    Bokhove, C., & Drijvers, P. (2010). Digital tools for algebra education: Criteria and evaluation. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 15(1), 45.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4.

    Bos, B. (2009). Virtual math objects with pedagogical, mathematical, and cognitive fidelity. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), 521528.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5.

    Bryk, A. S. (2015). 2014 AERA distinguished lecture: Accelerating how we learn to improve. Educational Researcher, 44(9), 467477.

  • 6.

    Bryk, A. S., Gomez, L. M., Grunow, A., & LeMahieu, P. G. (2015). Learning to improve: How America’s schools can get better at getting better. Harvard Education Press.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7.

    Dick, T. (2007). Keeping the faith: Fidelity in technological tools for mathematics education. In W. G. Blume & M. K. Heid (Eds.), Research on Technology and the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics: Vol. 2. Cases and perspectives. (pp. 333339). Information Age.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8.

    Dick, T. P., & Hollebrands, K. F. (2011). Focus in high school mathematics: Technology to support reasoning and sense making (pp. xixvii). National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9.

    Gee, J. P. (2005). Learning by design: Good video games as learning machines. E-Learning and Digital Media, 2(1), 516.

  • 10.

    Hollebrands, K. (2017). A framework to guide the development of a Teaching Mathematics with Technology Massive Open Online Course. 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. Hoosier Association of Mathematics Teacher Educators.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11.

    Johnston, C., & Suh, J. (2009). Pre-service elementary teachers planning for math instruction: Use of technology tools. In I. Gibson, R. Weber, K. McFerrin, R. Carlsen, & D. Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE 2009–Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 35613566). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12.

    Larkin, K. (2015). The search for fidelity in geometry apps: An exercise in futility?. In M. Marshman, V. Geiger, & A. Bennison (Eds.), Proceedings of the 38th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 341348). MERGA.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13.

    Martin, W. G., & Gobstein, H. (2020). Overview of the mathematics teacher education partnership. In W. G. Martin, B. R. Lawler, A. E. Lischka, & W. M. Smith (Eds.), The mathematics teacher education partnership: The power of a networked improvement community to transform secondary mathematics teacher preparation (pp. 323). Information Age Publishing.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14.

    National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Author.

  • 15.

    National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2014). Principles to actions: Ensuring mathematical success for all. Author.

  • 16.

    National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common core state standards for mathematics. Author.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17.

    National Research Council. (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. The National Academies Press.

  • 18.

    Sherman, M. F., Cayton, C., & Chandler, K. (2017). Supporting PSTs in using appropriate tools strategically: A learning sequence for developing technology tasks that support students’ mathematical thinking. Mathematics Teacher Educator, 5(2), 122157.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19.

    Sinclair, M. P. (2003). Some implications of the results of a case study for the design of pre-constructed, dynamic geometry sketches and accompanying materials. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 52(3), 289317.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20.

    Smith, R. C., Shin, D., & Kim, S. (2017). Prospective and current secondary mathematics teachers' criteria for evaluating mathematical cognitive technologies. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 48(5), 659681.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21.

    Thomas, A., & Edson, A. J. (2019). A framework for teachers’ evaluation of digital instructional materials: Integrating mathematics teaching practices with technology use in K-8 classrooms. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 19(3), 351372.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 550 212 7
Full Text Views 202 87 5
PDF Downloads 236 122 8
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0