You are here:

Using Technology in Representing Practice to Support Preservice Teachers’ Quality Questioning: The Roles of Noticing in Improving Practice
article

, , University of Maryland, United States

Journal of Technology and Teacher Education Volume 26, Number 1, ISSN 1059-7069 Publisher: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education, Waynesville, NC USA

Full Text

Abstract

Calls for a “practice-based” approach to teacher education have become common in scholarship on teacher education, and preservice-teaching (PST) mathematics programs are increasingly heeding this call. Practice-based teacher education (PBTE) moves beyond standard approaches to teacher education in which PSTs learn about teaching in ways they are then expected to apply in practice and toward an approach that provides PSTs opportunities to gain experience in particular core practices in ways that approximate enactment in the classroom. A growing body of research suggests that teachers’ responses, including the questions they ask, can help students’ develop content knowledge and proficiency in mathematics and science practices in the classroom. However, despite evidence that PSTs can notice students’ thinking in various activities in their preparation programs, it is not clear that they are sufficiently well-prepared to propose quality responses before entering the classroom. In this paper, we describe two different approaches that we have taken to provide support for quality teacher questioning in the LessonSketch environment. From our results, we develop a hypothesis that a pedagogical approach that primes novices to notice model questioning can support a stance of focusing on the substance of students’ thinking and probing rather than guiding students’ thinking in their proposed questions.

Citation

Walkoe, J. & Levin, D.M. (2018). Using Technology in Representing Practice to Support Preservice Teachers’ Quality Questioning: The Roles of Noticing in Improving Practice. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 26(1), 127-147. Waynesville, NC USA: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education. Retrieved December 6, 2023 from .

© 2018 Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Ball, D.L. (1993). With an eye on the mathematical horizon: Dilemmas of teaching elementary school mathematics. Elementary School Journal, 93(4), 373-397.
  2. Ball, D.L., & Cohen, D.K. (1999). Developing practice, developing practitioners: Toward a practice-based theory of professional education. In L. Darling-Hammond and G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession (pp. 3–31). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
  3. Ball, D.L., & Forzani, F.M. (2009). The work of teaching and the challenge for teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(5), 497-511.
  4. Benedict-Chambers, A. (2016). Using tools to promote novice teacher noticing of science teaching practice in post-rehearsal discussions. Teaching and Teacher Education, 59, 28–44
  5. Berliner, D.C. (1985). Laboratory settings and the study of teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 36, 2-8
  6. Coffey, J.E., Hammer, D., Levin, D.M., & Grant, T. (2011). The missing disciplinary substance of formative assessment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(10), 1109-1136.
  7. Cunningham, C.A., & Harrison, K. (2010). The affordances of Second Life for education. In G. Vincenti& J. Braman (Eds.), Multi-user virtual environments for the classroom: Practical approaches to teaching in virtual worlds (pp. 94-119). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
  8. De Araujo, Z., Amador, J., Estapa, A., Weston, T., Aming-Attai, R., & Kosko, K.W. (2015). Animating preservice teachers’ noticing. Mathematics Teacher Education and Development, 17(2), 25-44.
  9. Dieker, L.A., Hynes, M.C., Hughes, C.E., Hardin, S., & Becht, K. (2015). TLE TeachLivE (TM): Using technology to provide quality professional development in rural schools. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 34(3), 11.
  10. Forzani, F. (2014). Understanding “core practices” and “practice-based” teacher education: Learning from the past. Journal of Teacher Education, 65(4), 357-368.
  11. Franke, M.L., Carpenter, T., Fennema, E., Ansell, E., & Behrend, J. (1998). Understanding teachers’ self-sustaining, generative change in the context of professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14(1), 67–80.
  12. Franke, M.L., Webb, N.M., Chan, A.G., Ing, M., Freund, D., & Battey, D. (2009). Teacher questioning to elicit students’ mathematical thinking in elementary school classrooms. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(4), 380-392.
  13. Hammer, D. & Van Zee, E. (2006). Seeing the science in children’s thinking: Case studies of student inquiry in physical science, a staff developer’s guide. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
  14. Hammer, D., Goldberg, F., & Fargason, S. (2012). Responsive teaching and the beginnings of energy in a third grade classroom. Review of Science, Mathematics and ICT Education, 6(1), 51-72.
  15. Herbst, P., Aaron, W., & Chieu, V.M. (2013). LessonSketch: An environment for teachers to share and examine mathematical practices. In D. Polly (Ed.), Common core mathematics standards and implementing digital technologies (pp. 281-294). Hershey, PA: IGI Global
  16. Jacobs, V.R., Lamb, L.L., & Philipp, R.A. (2010). Professional noticing of children’s mathematical thinking. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 41(2), 169-202.
  17. Kazemi, E., Lampert, M., & Franke, M.F. (2009). Developing pedagogies in teacher education to support preservice teachers’ ability to enact ambitious teaching. In R. Hunter, B. Bickness & T. Burgess (Eds.), Crossing divides: Proceedings of the 32nd annual conference of the mathematics education research group of Australasia (Vol. 1, pp. 12-30). Palmerston North, NZ:
  18. Lampert, M. (2010). Learning teaching in, from, and for practice: What do we mean? Journal of Teacher Education, 61(1-2), 21-34
  19. Lampert, M., Beasley, H., Ghousseini, H., Kazemi, E., & Franke, M. (2010). Using designed instructional activities to enable novices to manage ambitious mathematics teaching (pp. 129-141). In M.K. Stein& L. Kucan (Eds.) Instructional
  20. Levin, D.M., Hammer, D., and Coffey, J.E. (2009). Novice teachers’ attention to student thinking. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(2), 142-154.
  21. Levin, D.M and Richards, J. (2011). Learning to attend to the substance of student thinking in science. Science Educator, 20(2), 1-11.
  22. Ma, T., Brown, I.A., Kulm, G., Davis, T.J., Lewis, C.W., & Allen, G.D. (2014). Constructing and role-playing student avatars in a simulation of teaching algebra for diverse learners. Urban Education 51(5), 534-555.
  23. Matsko, K.K., & Hammerness, K. (2014). Unpacking the “urban” in urban teacher education: Making a case for context-specific preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 65(2), 128-144.
  24. McDonald, M., Kazemi, E., & Kavanagh, S.S. (2013). Core practices and pedagogies of teacher education: A call for a common language and collective activity. Journal of Teacher Education, 64(5), 378-386.
  25. Monte-Sano, C., & Cochran, M. (2009). Attention to learners, subject, or teaching: What takes precedence as preservice candidates learn to teach historical thinking and reading? Theory& Research in Social Education, 37(1), 101-135.
  26. Neel, M.A. (2015). Learning to elicit, interpret, and respond to students’ historical thinking: A case study of four teacher candidates. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Maryland, College Park.
  27. Pierson, J. (2008). The relationship between patterns of classroom discourse and mathematics learning. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Texas at Austin.
  28. Rich, P.J., & Hannafin, M. (2009). Video annotation tools: Technologies to scaffold, structure, and transform teacher reflection. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(1), 52-67.
  29. Russ, R.S., Sherin, M.G., & Sherin, B.L. (2016). What constitutes teacher learning? In D. Gitomer, & C. Bell (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching (5th ed., pp. 391-426). Washington, DC: AERA.
  30. Sahin, A., & Kulm, G. (2008). Sixth grade mathematics teachers’ intentions and use of probing, guiding, and factual questions. Journal of mathematics teacher education, 11(3), 221-241.
  31. Sherin, M.G., & Han, S.Y. (2004). Teacher learning in the context of a video club. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(2), 163-183.
  32. Singer-Gabella, M., Stengel, B., Shahan, E., & Kim, M.J. (2016). Learning to leverage student thinking: What novice approximations teach us about ambitious practice. The Elementary School Journal. 116(3), 411-436
  33. Star, J.R., & Strickland, S.K. (2008). Learning to observe: Using video to improve preservice mathematics teachers’ ability to notice. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 11(2), 107-125.
  34. TeachingWorks. (2017). High-leverage practices. Retrieved from http://www.teachingworks.org/work-of-teaching/high-leverage-practices
  35. Van Es, E.A., & Sherin, M.G. (2002). Learning to notice: Scaffolding new teachers’ interpretations of classroom interactions. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 10(4), 571-596.
  36. Walkoe, J. (2015). Exploring teacher noticing of student algebraic thinking in a video club. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 18(6), 523-550.
  37. Windschitl, M. & Calabrese Barton, A. (2016). Rigor and equity by design: Locating a set of core teaching practices for the science education community? In D. Gitomer & C. Bell (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching (5th ed., pp. 1099-1158). Washington, DC: AERA.
  38. Zeichner, K. (2012). The turn once again toward practice-based teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 63(5), 376-382.

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

Suggest Corrections to References

Cited By

View References & Citations Map

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact info@learntechlib.org.