Posted in Mathematics education

Forms of mathematical knowledge

Anyone interested to understand how mathematics is learned should at first understand what mathematical knowledge consist of. The book Forms of Mathematical Knowledge: Learning and Teaching with Understanding describes various types of knowledge that are significant for learning and teaching mathematics. It defines, discusses and contrasts various types of knowledge involved inthe learning of mathematics. It also describes ideas about forms of mathematical knowledge that are important for teachers to know and ways of implementing such ideas. The book is a collection of articles/papers from well known mathematics educators and researchers.


Top in the list of forms of knowledge presented in the book is a discussion about intuition and schemata.
While there is no commonly accepted definition, the implicitly accepted property of intuition is that of self-evidence as opposed to logical-analytical endeavor. Now, what is the role of intuition in the learning of mathematics?

While in the early grades teachers are awed by intuitive solutions by our students, those handling higher-level mathematics would find intuitive knowledge to constrain understanding of mathematics. In the book, the author of offered examples of these. He also defined the concept of intuitions and described the contribution, sometimes positive and sometimes negative, of intuitions in the history of science and mathematics and in the teaching process. The author argues that knowledge about intuitive interpretations is crucial to teachers, authors of textbooks and mathematics education researchers alike. The author further argued that intuitions are generally based on structural schemas.

My favorite article in the book is about the description of mathematical knowledge as knowing that, knowing how, knowing why and knowing-to

Knowing why, meant having “various stories in one’s head” about why a mathematical result is so. For example, when partitioning an interval into n subintervals, one might recall that n+1 fenceposts are required to hold up a straight fence of n sections. Knowing why and proof are different — in many cases, the proof doesn’t reveal why. As an example, the author suggested that when primary teachers ask why (-1)(-1)=1, they want images of temperature or depth, not a proof, or even a consistency argument that negative numbers work like positive numbers.

Knowing to means having access to one’s knowledge in the moment — knowing to do something when it’s needed. For example, in evaluating a limit, a student might just know to multiply by a certain quantity divided by itself. This kind of enacted behavior is not the same as writing an essay explaining what one is doing — it often occurs spontaneously in the form of schemas unsupported by reasons, whereas explanations require supported knowledge.

Forms of Mathematical Knowledge: Learning and Teaching with Understanding is a must-read for teachers, educators, and those doing research in mathematics teaching and learning.

 

Posted in Mathematics education

How confident are you to teach mathematics?

As mathematics teachers we simply cannot just stop learning and improving in our field. Reflecting on our practice is a powerful and productive way of supporting our own professional development. I found a goldmine of tools for this in the National Center for Excellence in the Teaching Mathematics (NCETM). I think this site is great for mathematics teachers who wants to keep on improving their craft. Below are some of the self-evaluation questions they have for mathematics- specific teaching strategies.

1. How confident are you that you know how and when it is appropriate to:

  • demonstrate, model and explain mathematical ideas?
  • use whole class discussion?
  • use open questions with more than one possible answer to challenge pupils and encourage them to think?
  • use higher order or more demanding questions to encourage pupils to explain, analyse and synthesise?
  • intervene in the independent work of an individual or group?
  • summarise and review the learning points in a lesson or sequence of lessons?

2. How confident are you that you can select activities for pupils that will promote your learning aims and, over time, give them opportunities to:

  • work independently as individuals or collaboratively with others?
  • engage in interesting and worthwhile mathematical activities?
  • investigate and ‘discover’ mathematics for themselves?
  • make decisions for themselves?
  • reason and develop convincing arguments?
  • visualise?
  • practise techniques and skills and remember facts in varied ways and contexts?
  • engage in peer group discussion?
  • communicate their results, methods and conclusions to different audiences?
  • appreciate the rich historical and cultural roots of mathematics?
  • understand that mathematics is used as a tool in many different contexts?

3. How confident are you that you know how and when you might provide:

  • alternative or supplementary activities for pupils who experience minor difficulties with learning?
  • mathematical activities designed to respond to pupils’ diverse learning needs, including special educational needs?
  • suitable activities for mathematically gifted pupils?
  • suitable homework?

4. How confident are you that you are familiar with a range of equipment and practical resources to support mathematics teaching and learning, such as:

  • structural apparatus and other models for teaching number?
  • measuring equipment?
  • resources to support the teaching of geometrical ideas?
  • board games and puzzles?
  • resources to support and stimulate data handling activities?
  • calculators?
  • ICT and relevant software?

Here are sample questions for self evaluation about mathematics content knowledge. Go to the NCETM.org site for other topics.

1. How confident are you that you know and can explain the properties of:

  • the sine function?
  • the cosine function?
  • the tangent function?

2. How confident are you that you can explain:

  • why sin ? / cos ? = tan ? and use this to solve simple trigonometric equations?
  • why sin² ? + cos² ? = 1 and use this to solve simple trigonometric equations?

Please share this with your co-teachers.

 

Posted in Mathematics education

Why it is bad habit to introduce math concepts through their definitions

In my earlier post on the meaning of understanding, I describe understanding of mathematics as making connections: To understand is to make connections. These connections are not done in random.  Concepts are linked with other concepts in order to create a richer image for the new concept that is being learned. To understand therefore is to form concept image. And a concept image is not formed by defining the concept. The definition of a concept is different from the concept image. Let me share with you a an excerpt from my paper which discusses this idea. You can view the references here.

Understanding the definition does not imply understanding the concept. In order to understand a concept one must have a concept image for it. One’s concept image includes all the non-verbal entities, visual representations, impressions and experiences that are created in our mind by a mention of a concept name (Vinner, 1992). Vinner stressed that the concept definition is not the first thing that is learned in understanding a concept but the experiences associated with it, which becomes part of one’s concept image. Vinner believes that in carrying out cognitive tasks, the mind consults the concept image rather than the concept definition. Continue reading “Why it is bad habit to introduce math concepts through their definitions”

Posted in Curriculum Reform, Mathematics education

Knowledge of Teaching with ICT

In the 80’s, Lee Shulman introduced the concept of pedagogical content knowledge to differentiate it from content knowledge (CK) and knowledge of general pedagogy (PK). Pedagogical content knowledge or popularly known as PCK  is teachers’ knowledge of how a particular subject-matter is best taught and learned. Since Shulman introduced this concept, many others have contributed towards defining and describing it, the most important elements of its description include (1) knowledge of interpreting the content, (2) knowledge of the different ways of representing the content to the learner,  and (3) knowledge of learners’ potential difficulties, misconceptions, and prior conceptions about the content and related concepts. Click here for an example of a pedagogical concept map for teaching integers.

With the increasing dependence of almost everything to ICT, it is no longer a question of whether schools should integrate these technology in its curriculum. In fact it’s been decades since courses on ICT have been offered as a subject in many schools. But how about the use of technology in teaching traditional subjects like mathematics? Does knowledge of technology equip teachers to use it to teach effectively?

Some mathematics teachers jumped to it right away, used technology in teaching. Some teachers are still in testing-the-water mode. Some, until now, are still totally in the dark, sticking to their old method despite the availability of technology, oblivious to the reality that in today’s ICT-driven world, it’s the students who are the natives and the teachers are the migrants (heard this at an APEC Conference in Tokyo). The way students learn are influenced by their experiences with many forms of technology and the way these tools think and do things.

When the pen and the printing press were invented, everybody thought that they will give an end  to illiteracy (I heard this from the same conference). It didn’t take long for us to realize that it didn’t and can’t. The same can be said with computers, internet, softwares for teaching. Experience with these tools tell us that it is not enough to know how to use ICT  just us it was not enough to know mathematics content to teach mathematics so that students learn it with meaning and understanding .   Teachers must now be equipped not only with PCK but with TPCK – Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge.

Punya Mishra and Matthew Koehler introduced this theoretical framework known as Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) in 2005. The basic premise of TPACK is that a teacher’s knowledge regarding technology is multifaceted and that the optimal mix for the classroom is a balanced combination of technology, pedagogy, and content.

technological pedagogical content knowledgeThe figure at the right is popularly known as TPACK Framework (click image for source). It shows the kinds of knowledge teachers should posses. It can be used as framework for designing learning experiences for teachers and for planning, analyzing and describing the integration of technology in teaching.