{"title":"基于研究的雄心勃勃的数学教学辅导设计","authors":"Bilge Yurekli, Mary Kay Stein","doi":"10.1007/s10857-024-09637-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Despite the evidence of its effectiveness on student learning, ambitious mathematics instruction has proven to be challenging for teachers to enact. Increasingly, instructional coaching programs have become a way of providing intensive one-on-one support to teachers to improve the quality of mathematics instruction. Researchers have identified various design features of effective mathematics coaching programs (e.g., lesson planning, co-teaching, deep and specific discussions of instruction). However, there is a lack of theoretical explanation for how and why these design features support teacher learning, which is critical for successfully implementing and adapting what <i>works</i>. Motivated by the need to illuminate what current research has left in the shadows, we first identify the processes of teacher learning based on past research and then illustrate how specific design features of a new coaching model can work together to activate these processes and consequently produce teacher learning. We use the conjecture mapping approach to achieve our goal, informed by a research-based high-level conjecture: Effective coaching programs engage teachers in learning processes similar to the learning processes that students experience in ambitious classrooms. This work will guide the development of an empirically grounded theory for teacher learning through coaching. The reification of teacher learning processes is particularly important for the adaptation of coaching practices in different contexts and content areas. We also argue that focusing on these processes will bring a new perspective to coach navigation of tensions, for example, between responsiveness and directiveness.</p>","PeriodicalId":47442,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Research-based design of coaching for ambitious mathematics instruction\",\"authors\":\"Bilge Yurekli, Mary Kay Stein\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10857-024-09637-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Despite the evidence of its effectiveness on student learning, ambitious mathematics instruction has proven to be challenging for teachers to enact. Increasingly, instructional coaching programs have become a way of providing intensive one-on-one support to teachers to improve the quality of mathematics instruction. Researchers have identified various design features of effective mathematics coaching programs (e.g., lesson planning, co-teaching, deep and specific discussions of instruction). However, there is a lack of theoretical explanation for how and why these design features support teacher learning, which is critical for successfully implementing and adapting what <i>works</i>. Motivated by the need to illuminate what current research has left in the shadows, we first identify the processes of teacher learning based on past research and then illustrate how specific design features of a new coaching model can work together to activate these processes and consequently produce teacher learning. We use the conjecture mapping approach to achieve our goal, informed by a research-based high-level conjecture: Effective coaching programs engage teachers in learning processes similar to the learning processes that students experience in ambitious classrooms. This work will guide the development of an empirically grounded theory for teacher learning through coaching. The reification of teacher learning processes is particularly important for the adaptation of coaching practices in different contexts and content areas. We also argue that focusing on these processes will bring a new perspective to coach navigation of tensions, for example, between responsiveness and directiveness.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47442,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-024-09637-3\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-024-09637-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Research-based design of coaching for ambitious mathematics instruction
Despite the evidence of its effectiveness on student learning, ambitious mathematics instruction has proven to be challenging for teachers to enact. Increasingly, instructional coaching programs have become a way of providing intensive one-on-one support to teachers to improve the quality of mathematics instruction. Researchers have identified various design features of effective mathematics coaching programs (e.g., lesson planning, co-teaching, deep and specific discussions of instruction). However, there is a lack of theoretical explanation for how and why these design features support teacher learning, which is critical for successfully implementing and adapting what works. Motivated by the need to illuminate what current research has left in the shadows, we first identify the processes of teacher learning based on past research and then illustrate how specific design features of a new coaching model can work together to activate these processes and consequently produce teacher learning. We use the conjecture mapping approach to achieve our goal, informed by a research-based high-level conjecture: Effective coaching programs engage teachers in learning processes similar to the learning processes that students experience in ambitious classrooms. This work will guide the development of an empirically grounded theory for teacher learning through coaching. The reification of teacher learning processes is particularly important for the adaptation of coaching practices in different contexts and content areas. We also argue that focusing on these processes will bring a new perspective to coach navigation of tensions, for example, between responsiveness and directiveness.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education (JMTE) is devoted to research into the education of mathematics teachers and development of teaching that promotes students'' successful learning of mathematics. JMTE focuses on all stages of professional development of mathematics teachers and teacher-educators and serves as a forum for considering institutional, societal and cultural influences that impact on teachers'' learning, and ultimately that of their students. Critical analyses of particular programmes, development initiatives, technology, assessment, teaching diverse populations and policy matters, as these topics relate to the main focuses of the journal, are welcome. All papers are rigorously refereed.
Papers may be submitted to one of three sections of JMTE as follows: Research papers: these papers should reflect the main focuses of the journal identified above and should be of more than local or national interest.
Mathematics Teacher Education Around the World: these papers focus on programmes and issues of national significance that could be of wider interest or influence.
Reader Commentary: these are short contributions; for example, offering a response to a paper published in JMTE or developing a theoretical idea. Authors should state clearly the section to which they are submitting a paper. As general guidance, papers should not normally exceed the following word lengths: (1) 10,000 words; (2) 5,000 words; (3) 3,000 words. Maximum word lengths exclude references, figures, appendices, etc.
Critiques of reports or books that relate to the main focuses of JMTE appear as appropriate.