 |
Learning to teach preservice mathematics teachers:
The role of a doctoral course
| |
| | Unformatted Document Text:
LEARNING TO TEACH PRESERVICE MATHEMATICS TEACHERS:
THE ROLE OF A DOCTORAL COURSE
Sandra Crespo & Natasha Speer
Michigan State University
## email not listed ## & ## email not listed ##
Abstract
The teaching preparation of mathematics teacher educators has not been an area of programmatic or systematic attention in doctoral programs of education, which most prominently focus on the content, discourse, and practices of educational research. Such inattention to the teaching development of teacher educators propagates the very same myths schools of education tend to challenge, such as ‘experience is the best teacher.’ This study investigated the experiences of 8 first and second year doctoral students in a ‘teaching practicum’ doctoral course designed to support their teaching of future teachers of mathematics and their development as mathematics teacher educators. The analysis of these experiences shed light on the study’s questions: what is involved in learning to teach future teachers of mathematics and what role does (or might) a doctoral course play in such learning?
Introduction
While challenges of learning to teach mathematics have been widely documented over the
past two decades (see Ball, Mewborn, & Lubienski, 2001; Brown & Borko 1992), challenges of learning to teach future teachers have received much less attention. Challenges of teacher education have been explored broadly (e.g., Katz & Raths, 1992) and several endemic dilemmas have been identified, such as interplay between theory and practice, and programmatic coherence. Challenges of learning to teach future teachers has also been explored by individual teacher educators as they reflect on and study their own practices (e.g., Feiman-Nemser & Featherstone, 1992).
In light of such challenges, researchers (e.g., Heaton, 2000; Nicol, 1997) raise questions
about the lack of attention to learning to teach prospective teachers in graduate schools of education. As a recent study of students’ experiences reports, 83% of doctoral students surveyed stated that, “enjoyment of teaching made them interested in being a professor” (Golde & Dore, 2001, p. 21). Yet, respondents also indicated that support for such work - organized and sustained professional development - varies greatly across institutions and within and across departments. Furthermore, as Golde and Dore note, it is not preparation for teaching that comprises a significant portion of graduate student work. Rather, preparation to conduct research tends to receive the greatest attention in courses, guided practica, and faculty-student interactions. Despite this, it is a widespread practice for graduate students to teach undergraduate preservice courses as part of their assistantships.
Concern for the teaching preparation in doctoral programs is also represented in a recent
document that compiled mathematics educators’ discussions around preparation of doctoral students (Reys & Kilpatrick, 2000). In this document, Lambdin and Wilson (2000) stated that: “doctoral programs in mathematics education must ensure that students are involved in a variety of teaching experiences, both in schools and at the university level” (p. 82). The form, length, and number of such experiences, however, were not specified and were reportedly a point of disagreement among the mathematics educators at this retreat.
In response to concerns similar to those stated above, our Department of Teacher Education
launched a programmatic effort to explicitly mentor graduate students into their roles as future teacher educators. Doctoral students, who are or will be teaching preservice teachers for the first time, are required to take a “practicum in teaching” course. The purpose of this study is to investigate the role such a course plays (and might play) in helping doctoral students learn to teach and to inquire into their teaching of future teachers of mathematics.
This study contributes to the scarce literature on preparation and development of beginning
mathematics teacher educators. It also provides another perspective to the largely “self-study” approach to the process of learning to teach future teachers. It examines this process in the
|
| | Authors: Crespo, Sandra. and Speer, Natasha. |
|
| |
|
|
LEARNING TO TEACH PRESERVICE MATHEMATICS TEACHERS:
THE ROLE OF A DOCTORAL COURSE
Sandra Crespo & Natasha Speer
Michigan State University
## email not listed ## & ## email not listed ##
Abstract
The teaching preparation of mathematics teacher educators has not been an area of programmatic
or systematic attention in doctoral programs of education, which most prominently focus on the
content, discourse, and practices of educational research. Such inattention to the teaching
development of teacher educators propagates the very same myths schools of education tend to
challenge, such as ‘experience is the best teacher.’ This study investigated the experiences of 8
first and second year doctoral students in a ‘teaching practicum’ doctoral course designed to
support their teaching of future teachers of mathematics and their development as mathematics
teacher educators. The analysis of these experiences shed light on the study’s questions: what is
involved in learning to teach future teachers of mathematics and what role does (or might) a
doctoral course play in such learning?
Introduction
While challenges of learning to teach mathematics have been widely documented over the
past two decades (see Ball, Mewborn, & Lubienski, 2001; Brown & Borko 1992), challenges of
learning to teach future teachers have received much less attention. Challenges of teacher
education have been explored broadly (e.g., Katz & Raths, 1992) and several endemic dilemmas
have been identified, such as interplay between theory and practice, and programmatic
coherence. Challenges of learning to teach future teachers has also been explored by individual
teacher educators as they reflect on and study their own practices (e.g., Feiman-Nemser &
Featherstone, 1992).
In light of such challenges, researchers (e.g., Heaton, 2000; Nicol, 1997) raise questions
about the lack of attention to learning to teach prospective teachers in graduate schools of
education. As a recent study of students’ experiences reports, 83% of doctoral students surveyed
stated that, “enjoyment of teaching made them interested in being a professor” (Golde & Dore,
2001, p. 21). Yet, respondents also indicated that support for such work - organized and
sustained professional development - varies greatly across institutions and within and across
departments. Furthermore, as Golde and Dore note, it is not preparation for teaching that
comprises a significant portion of graduate student work. Rather, preparation to conduct research
tends to receive the greatest attention in courses, guided practica, and faculty-student
interactions. Despite this, it is a widespread practice for graduate students to teach undergraduate
preservice courses as part of their assistantships.
Concern for the teaching preparation in doctoral programs is also represented in a recent
document that compiled mathematics educators’ discussions around preparation of doctoral
students (Reys & Kilpatrick, 2000). In this document, Lambdin and Wilson (2000) stated that:
“doctoral programs in mathematics education must ensure that students are involved in a variety
of teaching experiences, both in schools and at the university level” (p. 82). The form, length,
and number of such experiences, however, were not specified and were reportedly a point of
disagreement among the mathematics educators at this retreat.
In response to concerns similar to those stated above, our Department of Teacher Education
launched a programmatic effort to explicitly mentor graduate students into their roles as future
teacher educators. Doctoral students, who are or will be teaching preservice teachers for the first
time, are required to take a “practicum in teaching” course. The purpose of this study is to
investigate the role such a course plays (and might play) in helping doctoral students learn to
teach and to inquire into their teaching of future teachers of mathematics.
This study contributes to the scarce literature on preparation and development of beginning
mathematics teacher educators. It also provides another perspective to the largely “self-study”
approach to the process of learning to teach future teachers. It examines this process in the
|
|
 Convention | | All Academic Convention makes running your annual conference simple and cost effective. It is your online solution for abstract management, peer review, and scheduling for your annual meeting or convention. | | Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. | | Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! | | Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! | | Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. | | Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! | | Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! | | Click here for more information. |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Page 1 of 7 
