Matching Items (2)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

153836-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Teachers must recognize the knowledge they possess as appropriate to employ in the process of achieving their goals and objectives in the context of practice. Such recognition is subject to a host of cognitive and affective processes that have thus far not been a central focus of research on teacher

Teachers must recognize the knowledge they possess as appropriate to employ in the process of achieving their goals and objectives in the context of practice. Such recognition is subject to a host of cognitive and affective processes that have thus far not been a central focus of research on teacher knowledge in mathematics education. To address this need, this dissertation study examined the role of a secondary mathematics teacher’s image of instructional constraints on his enacted subject matter knowledge. I collected data in three phases. First, I conducted a series of task-based clinical interviews that allowed me to construct a model of David’s mathematical knowledge of sine and cosine functions. Second, I conducted pre-lesson interviews, collected journal entries, and examined David’s instruction to characterize the mathematical knowledge he utilized in the context of designing and implementing lessons. Third, I conducted a series of semi-structured clinical interviews to identify the circumstances David appraised as constraints on his practice and to ascertain the role of these constraints on the quality of David’s enacted subject matter knowledge. My analysis revealed that although David possessed many productive ways of understanding that allowed him to engage students in meaningful learning experiences, I observed discrepancies between and within David’s mathematical knowledge and his enacted mathematical knowledge. These discrepancies were not occasioned by David’s active compensation for the circumstances and events he appraised as instructional constraints, but instead resulted from David possessing multiple schemes for particular ideas related to trigonometric functions, as well as from his unawareness of the mental actions and operations that comprised these often powerful but uncoordinated cognitive schemes. This lack of conscious awareness made David ill-equipped to define his instructional goals in terms of the mental activity in which he intended his students to engage, which further conditioned the circumstances and events he appraised as constraints on his practice. David’s image of instructional constraints therefore did not affect his enacted subject matter knowledge. Rather, characteristics of David’s subject matter knowledge, namely his uncoordinated cognitive schemes and his unawareness of the mental actions and operations that comprise them, affected his image of instructional constraints.
ContributorsTallman, Michael Anthony (Author) / Carlson, Marilyn P (Thesis advisor) / Thompson, Patrick W (Committee member) / Saldanha, Luis (Committee member) / Middleton, James (Committee member) / Harel, Guershon (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015
157668-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
This dissertation reports three studies about what it means for teachers and students to reason with frames of reference: to conceptualize a reference frame, to coordinate multiple frames of reference, and to combine multiple frames of reference. Each paper expands on the previous one to illustrate and utilize the construct

This dissertation reports three studies about what it means for teachers and students to reason with frames of reference: to conceptualize a reference frame, to coordinate multiple frames of reference, and to combine multiple frames of reference. Each paper expands on the previous one to illustrate and utilize the construct of frame of reference. The first paper is a theory paper that introduces the mental actions involved in reasoning with frames of reference. The concept of frames of reference, though commonly used in mathematics and physics, is not described cognitively in any literature. The paper offers a theoretical model of mental actions involved in conceptualizing a frame of reference. Additionally, it posits mental actions that are necessary for a student to reason with multiple frames of reference. It also extends the theory of quantitative reasoning with the construct of a ‘framed quantity’. The second paper investigates how two introductory calculus students who participated in teaching experiments reasoned about changes (variations). The data was analyzed to see to what extent each student conceptualized the variations within a conceptualized frame of reference as described in the first paper. The study found that the extent to which each student conceptualized, coordinated, and combined reference frames significantly affected his ability to reason productively about variations and to make sense of his own answers. The paper ends by analyzing 123 calculus students’ written responses to one of the tasks to build hypotheses about how calculus students reason about variations within frames of reference. The third paper reports how U.S. and Korean secondary mathematics teachers reason with frame of reference on open-response items. An assessment with five frame of reference tasks was given to 539 teachers in the US and Korea, and the responses were coded with rubrics intended to categorize responses by the extent to which they demonstrated conceptualized and coordinated frames of reference. The results show that the theory in the first study is useful in analyzing teachers’ reasoning with frames of reference, and that the items and rubrics function as useful tools in investigating teachers’ meanings for quantities within a frame of reference.
ContributorsJoshua, Surani Ashanthi (Author) / Thompson, Patrick W (Thesis advisor) / Carlson, Marilyn (Committee member) / Roh, Kyeong Hah (Committee member) / Middleton, James (Committee member) / Culbertson, Robert (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2019