Noticing of argumentation: A comparison between pre-service and in-service secondary-school mathematics teachers

IF 1 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Samaher Nama , Maysa Hayeen-Halloun , Michal Ayalon
{"title":"Noticing of argumentation: A comparison between pre-service and in-service secondary-school mathematics teachers","authors":"Samaher Nama ,&nbsp;Maysa Hayeen-Halloun ,&nbsp;Michal Ayalon","doi":"10.1016/j.jmathb.2023.101098","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This study compares pre-service mathematics teachers’ (PSMTs) and in-service mathematics teachers’ (ISMTs) noticing of argumentation at the secondary-school level. Thirty-five PSMTs and 32 ISMTs engaged in analyzing argumentation classroom situations (ACSs) using an ACS-report format emphasizing two sub-skills of noticing: attending and interpretation. Analysis of the participants’ ACS reports revealed differences between the two research groups. The ISMTs paid a high level of attention to all four aspects: ‘co-constructing of arguments’, ‘critiquing arguments’, ‘mutual respect’, and ‘working toward consensus-building’, whereas the PSMTs paid a high level of attention to ‘mutual respect’ and ‘co-constructing of arguments’ aspects only. In terms of interpretation, the ISMTs outperformed the PSMTs in interpreting the argumentation through the lenses of ‘task characteristics’, ‘teaching strategies’, and ‘student cognitive characteristics’. The findings are interpreted in light of both theory and practice.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47481,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Mathematical Behavior","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Mathematical Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0732312323000688","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study compares pre-service mathematics teachers’ (PSMTs) and in-service mathematics teachers’ (ISMTs) noticing of argumentation at the secondary-school level. Thirty-five PSMTs and 32 ISMTs engaged in analyzing argumentation classroom situations (ACSs) using an ACS-report format emphasizing two sub-skills of noticing: attending and interpretation. Analysis of the participants’ ACS reports revealed differences between the two research groups. The ISMTs paid a high level of attention to all four aspects: ‘co-constructing of arguments’, ‘critiquing arguments’, ‘mutual respect’, and ‘working toward consensus-building’, whereas the PSMTs paid a high level of attention to ‘mutual respect’ and ‘co-constructing of arguments’ aspects only. In terms of interpretation, the ISMTs outperformed the PSMTs in interpreting the argumentation through the lenses of ‘task characteristics’, ‘teaching strategies’, and ‘student cognitive characteristics’. The findings are interpreted in light of both theory and practice.

论述注意:职前与在职中学数学教师之比较
本研究比较了初任数学教师(PSMTs)和在职数学教师(ISMTs)在中学水平的论辩注意。35名psmt和32名ismt使用acs报告格式分析辩论课堂情境(acs),强调注意的两个子技能:参与和解释。对参与者的ACS报告的分析揭示了两个研究小组之间的差异。ISMTs对“共同构建论点”、“批判论点”、“相互尊重”和“努力建立共识”这四个方面都给予了高度关注,而psmt只对“相互尊重”和“共同构建论点”方面给予了高度关注。在解释方面,ISMTs在通过“任务特征”、“教学策略”和“学生认知特征”来解释论证方面优于psmt。研究结果从理论和实践两个方面加以解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Mathematical Behavior
Journal of Mathematical Behavior EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
17.60%
发文量
69
期刊介绍: The Journal of Mathematical Behavior solicits original research on the learning and teaching of mathematics. We are interested especially in basic research, research that aims to clarify, in detail and depth, how mathematical ideas develop in learners. Over three decades, our experience confirms a founding premise of this journal: that mathematical thinking, hence mathematics learning as a social enterprise, is special. It is special because mathematics is special, both logically and psychologically. Logically, through the way that mathematical ideas and methods have been built, refined and organized for centuries across a range of cultures; and psychologically, through the variety of ways people today, in many walks of life, make sense of mathematics, develop it, make it their own.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信