You are here:

Helping Mathematics Teachers Develop Noticing Skills: Utilizing Smartphone Technology for One-on-One Teacher/Student Interviews
article

, The Ohio State University, United States ; , Montclair State University, United States ; , Harvard University, United States

CITE Journal Volume 16, Number 1, ISSN 1528-5804 Publisher: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education, Waynesville, NC USA

Full Text

Abstract

Teaching mathematics for understanding requires listening to each student’s mathematical thinking, best elicited in a one-on-one interview. Interviews are difficult to enact in a teacher’s busy schedule, however. In this study, the authors utilize smartphone technology to help mathematics teachers interview a student in a virtual one-on-one setting. Free from physical constraints and preconceived biases, teachers can concentrate on building questioning, listening, and responding skills when noticing student mathematical thinking. Teachers engaged in four communication types when working with students through this technology: clarification, verification, and either extension or redirection.

Citation

Chao, T., Murray, E. & Star, J. (2016). Helping Mathematics Teachers Develop Noticing Skills: Utilizing Smartphone Technology for One-on-One Teacher/Student Interviews. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 16(1), 22-37. Waynesville, NC USA: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education. Retrieved February 8, 2023 from .

© 2016 Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Aizikovitsh-Udi, E., & Star, J. (2011). The skill of asking good questions in mathematics teaching. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 1354–1358.
  2. Ben-Chaim, D., Fey, J.T., Fitzgerald, W.M., Benedetto, C., & Miller, J. (1998). Proportional reasoning among the 7th grade students with different curricular experiences. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 36, 247–273.
  3. Chapin, S.H., O’Connor, C., & Anderson, N.C. (2003). Classroom discussions: Using math talk to help students learn, Grades 1-6. Sausalito, CA: Math Solutions Publications.
  4. Corbin, J., & Strauss, A.C. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  5. Duckworth, E.R. (2001). “Tell me more”: Listening to learners explain. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
  6. Dunn, T.K. (2004). Engaging prospective teachers in critical reflection: Facilitating a disposition to teach mathematics for diversity. A.J. Rodriguez& R.S. Kitchen (Eds.),Preparing mathematics and science teachers for diverse classrooms: Promising strategies for transformative pedagogy (pp. 143-158). New York, NY: Routledge.
  7. Empson, S.B. (1999). Equal sharing and shared meaning: The development of fraction concepts in a first-grade classroom. Cognition and Instruction, 17(3), 283–342.
  8. Erlandson, D.A., Harris, E.L., Skipper, B.L., & Allen, S.D. (1993). Doing naturalistic inquiry: A guide to methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 16(1)
  9. Ginsburg, H.P. (1997). Entering the child’s mind: The clinical interview in psychological research and practice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Goodman, K.S. (1969). Analysis of oral psycholinguistics.Reading Research Quarterly, 9-30.
  10. Huff, K., & Goodman, D.P. (2007). The demand for cognitive diagnostic assessment. In J.P. Leighton & M.J. Gierl (Eds.), Cognitive diagnostic assessment for education: Theory and applications (pp. 19-60). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
  11. Hunting, R.P. (1997). Clinical interview methods in mathematics education research and practice. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 16(2), 145–165. Doi:10.1016/S07323123(97)90023-7
  12. Jacobs, V.R., & Ambrose, R.C. (2008). Making the most of story problems. Teaching Children Mathematics, 15(5), 260–266.
  13. Jacobs, V.R., Lamb, L.C., & Philipp, R.A. (2010). Professional noticing of children’s mathematical thinking. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 41(2), 169– 202.
  14. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: author. Retrieved from http://standards.nctm.org/
  15. National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common core state standards. Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org/
  16. Rittle-Johnson, B., & Star, J.R. (2007). Does comparing solution methods facilitate conceptual and procedural knowledge? An experimental study on learning to solve equations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(3), 561.
  17. Schwandt, T. (2007). The SAGE dictionary of qualitative inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
  18. Sherin, M.G., & Van Es, E.A. (2009). Effects of video club participation on teachers’ professional vision. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(1), 20–37.
  19. Smith, M., & Stein, M.K. (2011). Five practices for orchestrating productive mathematical discourse. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
  20. Tourniaire, F., & Pulos, S. (1985). Proportional reasoning: A review of the literature.Educational Studies in Mathematics, 16, 181–204.
  21. White, D.Y., Murray, E.C., & Brunaud-Vega, V. (2012). Discovering multicultural mathematics dispositions. Journal of Urban Mathematics Education, 5(1), 31-43.
  22. Zazkis, R., & Hazzan, O. (1998). Interviewing in mathematics education research: Choosing the questions. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 17(4), 429–439.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Also Read

Related Collections