Teacher Practice

Teachers' Orientations Toward Using Student Mathematical Thinking as a Resource During Whole-Class Discussion

Using student mathematical thinking during instruction is valued by the mathematics education community, yet practices surrounding such use remain difficult for teachers to enact well, particularly in the moment during whole-class instruction. Teachers’ orientations—their beliefs, values, and preferences—influence their actions, so one important aspect of understanding teachers’ use of student thinking as a resource is understanding their related orientations.

Author/Presenter

Shari L. Stockero, Keith R. Leatham, Mary A. Ochieng, Laura R. Van Zoest & Blake E. Peterson

Year
2020
Short Description

The purpose of this study is to characterize teachers’ orientations toward using student mathematical thinking as a resource during whole-class instruction.

Teachers' Orientations Toward Using Student Mathematical Thinking as a Resource During Whole-Class Discussion

Using student mathematical thinking during instruction is valued by the mathematics education community, yet practices surrounding such use remain difficult for teachers to enact well, particularly in the moment during whole-class instruction. Teachers’ orientations—their beliefs, values, and preferences—influence their actions, so one important aspect of understanding teachers’ use of student thinking as a resource is understanding their related orientations.

Author/Presenter

Shari L. Stockero, Keith R. Leatham, Mary A. Ochieng, Laura R. Van Zoest & Blake E. Peterson

Year
2020
Short Description

The purpose of this study is to characterize teachers’ orientations toward using student mathematical thinking as a resource during whole-class instruction.

Conceptualizing Important Facets of Teacher Responses to Student Mathematical Thinking

We argue that progress in the area of research on mathematics teacher responses to student thinking could be enhanced were the field to attend more explicitly to important facets of those responses, as well as to related units of analysis. We describe the Teacher Response Coding scheme (TRC) to illustrate how such attention might play out, and then apply the TRC to an excerpt of classroom mathematics discourse to demonstrate the affordances of this approach.
Author/Presenter

Laura R. Van Zoest

Blake E. Peterson

Annick O. T. Rougée

Shari L. Stockero

Keith R. Leatham

Ben Freeburn

Year
2021
Short Description

We argue that progress in the area of research on mathematics teacher responses to student thinking could be enhanced were the field to attend more explicitly to important facets of those responses, as well as to related units of analysis. We describe the Teacher Response Coding scheme (TRC) to illustrate how such attention might play out, and then apply the TRC to an excerpt of classroom mathematics discourse to demonstrate the affordances of this approach. We conclude by making several further observations about the potential versatility and power in articulating units of analysis and developing and applying tools that attend to these facets when conducting research on teacher responses.

Conceptualizing Important Facets of Teacher Responses to Student Mathematical Thinking

We argue that progress in the area of research on mathematics teacher responses to student thinking could be enhanced were the field to attend more explicitly to important facets of those responses, as well as to related units of analysis. We describe the Teacher Response Coding scheme (TRC) to illustrate how such attention might play out, and then apply the TRC to an excerpt of classroom mathematics discourse to demonstrate the affordances of this approach.
Author/Presenter

Laura R. Van Zoest

Blake E. Peterson

Annick O. T. Rougée

Shari L. Stockero

Keith R. Leatham

Ben Freeburn

Year
2021
Short Description

We argue that progress in the area of research on mathematics teacher responses to student thinking could be enhanced were the field to attend more explicitly to important facets of those responses, as well as to related units of analysis. We describe the Teacher Response Coding scheme (TRC) to illustrate how such attention might play out, and then apply the TRC to an excerpt of classroom mathematics discourse to demonstrate the affordances of this approach. We conclude by making several further observations about the potential versatility and power in articulating units of analysis and developing and applying tools that attend to these facets when conducting research on teacher responses.

Conceptualizing Important Facets of Teacher Responses to Student Mathematical Thinking

We argue that progress in the area of research on mathematics teacher responses to student thinking could be enhanced were the field to attend more explicitly to important facets of those responses, as well as to related units of analysis. We describe the Teacher Response Coding scheme (TRC) to illustrate how such attention might play out, and then apply the TRC to an excerpt of classroom mathematics discourse to demonstrate the affordances of this approach.
Author/Presenter

Laura R. Van Zoest

Blake E. Peterson

Annick O. T. Rougée

Shari L. Stockero

Keith R. Leatham

Ben Freeburn

Year
2021
Short Description

We argue that progress in the area of research on mathematics teacher responses to student thinking could be enhanced were the field to attend more explicitly to important facets of those responses, as well as to related units of analysis. We describe the Teacher Response Coding scheme (TRC) to illustrate how such attention might play out, and then apply the TRC to an excerpt of classroom mathematics discourse to demonstrate the affordances of this approach. We conclude by making several further observations about the potential versatility and power in articulating units of analysis and developing and applying tools that attend to these facets when conducting research on teacher responses.

Clarifiable Ambiguity in Classroom Mathematics Discourse

Ambiguity is a natural part of communication in a mathematics classroom. In this paper, a particular subset of ambiguity is characterized as clarifiable. Clarifiable ambiguity in classroom mathematics discourse is common, frequently goes unaddressed, and unnecessarily hinders in-the-moment communication because it likely could be made more clear in a relatively straightforward way if it were attended to. We argue for deliberate attention to clarifiable ambiguity as a critical aspect of attending to meaning and as a necessary precursor to productive use of student mathematical thinking.

Author/Presenter

Blake E. Peterson

Keith R. Leatham

Lindsay M. Merrill

Laura R. Van Zoest

Shari L. Stockero

Year
2020
Short Description

Ambiguity is a natural part of communication in a mathematics classroom. In this paper, a particular subset of ambiguity is characterized as clarifiable. Clarifiable ambiguity in classroom mathematics discourse is common, frequently goes unaddressed, and unnecessarily hinders in-the-moment communication because it likely could be made more clear in a relatively straightforward way if it were attended to. We argue for deliberate attention to clarifiable ambiguity as a critical aspect of attending to meaning and as a necessary precursor to productive use of student mathematical thinking.

Clarifiable Ambiguity in Classroom Mathematics Discourse

Ambiguity is a natural part of communication in a mathematics classroom. In this paper, a particular subset of ambiguity is characterized as clarifiable. Clarifiable ambiguity in classroom mathematics discourse is common, frequently goes unaddressed, and unnecessarily hinders in-the-moment communication because it likely could be made more clear in a relatively straightforward way if it were attended to. We argue for deliberate attention to clarifiable ambiguity as a critical aspect of attending to meaning and as a necessary precursor to productive use of student mathematical thinking.

Author/Presenter

Blake E. Peterson

Keith R. Leatham

Lindsay M. Merrill

Laura R. Van Zoest

Shari L. Stockero

Year
2020
Short Description

Ambiguity is a natural part of communication in a mathematics classroom. In this paper, a particular subset of ambiguity is characterized as clarifiable. Clarifiable ambiguity in classroom mathematics discourse is common, frequently goes unaddressed, and unnecessarily hinders in-the-moment communication because it likely could be made more clear in a relatively straightforward way if it were attended to. We argue for deliberate attention to clarifiable ambiguity as a critical aspect of attending to meaning and as a necessary precursor to productive use of student mathematical thinking.

Clarifiable Ambiguity in Classroom Mathematics Discourse

Ambiguity is a natural part of communication in a mathematics classroom. In this paper, a particular subset of ambiguity is characterized as clarifiable. Clarifiable ambiguity in classroom mathematics discourse is common, frequently goes unaddressed, and unnecessarily hinders in-the-moment communication because it likely could be made more clear in a relatively straightforward way if it were attended to. We argue for deliberate attention to clarifiable ambiguity as a critical aspect of attending to meaning and as a necessary precursor to productive use of student mathematical thinking.

Author/Presenter

Blake E. Peterson

Keith R. Leatham

Lindsay M. Merrill

Laura R. Van Zoest

Shari L. Stockero

Year
2020
Short Description

Ambiguity is a natural part of communication in a mathematics classroom. In this paper, a particular subset of ambiguity is characterized as clarifiable. Clarifiable ambiguity in classroom mathematics discourse is common, frequently goes unaddressed, and unnecessarily hinders in-the-moment communication because it likely could be made more clear in a relatively straightforward way if it were attended to. We argue for deliberate attention to clarifiable ambiguity as a critical aspect of attending to meaning and as a necessary precursor to productive use of student mathematical thinking.

Visualizing Chemistry Teachers’ Enacted Assessment Design Practices to Better Understand Barriers to “Best Practices”

Even when chemistry teachers’ beliefs about assessment design align with literature-cited best practices, barriers can prevent teachers from enacting those beliefs when developing day-to-day assessments. In this paper, the relationship between high school chemistry teachers’ self-generated “best practices” for developing formative assessments and the assessments they implement in their courses are examined.

Author/Presenter

Adam G. L. Schafer

Victoria M. Borlanda

Ellen J. Yezierski

Lead Organization(s)
Year
2021
Short Description

In this paper, the relationship between high school chemistry teachers’ self-generated “best practices” for developing formative assessments and the assessments they implement in their courses are examined.

Investigating How Assessment Design Guides High School Chemistry Teachers’ Interpretation of Student Responses to a Planned, Formative Assessment

High school chemistry teachers will often establish goals that guide assessment design and interpretation of assessment results. However, little is known about how these goals and the assessment design collectively guide the interpretation of results. This study seeks to better understand what teachers notice when interpreting assessment results and how the design of the assessment may influence teachers’ patterns of noticing.

Author/Presenter

Adam G. L. Schafer

Ellen J. Yezierski

Lead Organization(s)
Year
2021
Short Description

This study seeks to better understand what teachers notice when interpreting assessment results and how the design of the assessment may influence teachers’ patterns of noticing. The study described herein investigates high school chemistry teachers’ interpretations of student responses to formative assessment items by identifying patterns in what teachers notice.