{"title":"实施数学粗草稿的显著性和可行性:教师对富有成效和强有力的变化的看法","authors":"Amanda Jansen, Elena M. Silla, Crystal L. Collier","doi":"10.1007/s10857-024-09650-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Rough draft math [RDM] (Jansen, 2020a) occurs when a teacher invites students to share their in-progress thinking and provides opportunities for students to revise their thinking. RDM could be viewed as an approach to ambitious teaching because it is a practice when teachers elicit and respond to students’ thinking to support their learning, which is productive, and their positive identity development, which is powerful. The purpose of this study was to identify salient and feasible enactments of rough draft math, as described by teachers after they have learned about RDM through a book study and/or professional development. We interviewed 32 teachers in eight states in the USA, and we identified variations among the two most feasible and salient enactments of RDM: (1) inviting students to revise and (2) purposeful task selection and implementation. Variations in revising enactments included providing students with structured or unstructured revision opportunities and different ways teachers incorporated revising into their assessment practices (either test corrections or student self-assessment). Variations in task selection included modifying curricular tasks or using instructional routines intentionally. Variations in task implementation included implementing tasks to reinforce content or develop new understandings. We developed conjectures about the ways in which these variations could provide powerful or productive opportunities for students.</p>","PeriodicalId":47442,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Salience and feasibility of enacting rough draft math: Teachers’ voices about productive and powerful variations\",\"authors\":\"Amanda Jansen, Elena M. Silla, Crystal L. Collier\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10857-024-09650-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Rough draft math [RDM] (Jansen, 2020a) occurs when a teacher invites students to share their in-progress thinking and provides opportunities for students to revise their thinking. RDM could be viewed as an approach to ambitious teaching because it is a practice when teachers elicit and respond to students’ thinking to support their learning, which is productive, and their positive identity development, which is powerful. The purpose of this study was to identify salient and feasible enactments of rough draft math, as described by teachers after they have learned about RDM through a book study and/or professional development. We interviewed 32 teachers in eight states in the USA, and we identified variations among the two most feasible and salient enactments of RDM: (1) inviting students to revise and (2) purposeful task selection and implementation. Variations in revising enactments included providing students with structured or unstructured revision opportunities and different ways teachers incorporated revising into their assessment practices (either test corrections or student self-assessment). Variations in task selection included modifying curricular tasks or using instructional routines intentionally. Variations in task implementation included implementing tasks to reinforce content or develop new understandings. We developed conjectures about the ways in which these variations could provide powerful or productive opportunities for students.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47442,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-17\",\"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/s10857-024-09650-6\",\"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/s10857-024-09650-6","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}
Salience and feasibility of enacting rough draft math: Teachers’ voices about productive and powerful variations
Rough draft math [RDM] (Jansen, 2020a) occurs when a teacher invites students to share their in-progress thinking and provides opportunities for students to revise their thinking. RDM could be viewed as an approach to ambitious teaching because it is a practice when teachers elicit and respond to students’ thinking to support their learning, which is productive, and their positive identity development, which is powerful. The purpose of this study was to identify salient and feasible enactments of rough draft math, as described by teachers after they have learned about RDM through a book study and/or professional development. We interviewed 32 teachers in eight states in the USA, and we identified variations among the two most feasible and salient enactments of RDM: (1) inviting students to revise and (2) purposeful task selection and implementation. Variations in revising enactments included providing students with structured or unstructured revision opportunities and different ways teachers incorporated revising into their assessment practices (either test corrections or student self-assessment). Variations in task selection included modifying curricular tasks or using instructional routines intentionally. Variations in task implementation included implementing tasks to reinforce content or develop new understandings. We developed conjectures about the ways in which these variations could provide powerful or productive opportunities for students.
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.