Abstract
Partnership with teachers for professional development has been considered beneficial because of the potential of collaborative work in the teacher’s own classroom to be relevant to practice. From this perspective, both teachers and researchers can draw on their own expertise and work as authentic partners. In this study, we address the need for such collaboration and focus on how a teacher and a researcher performed their roles when collaboratively implementing mathematical modeling tasks within a context of in situ professional development. Using multi-tier design-based research, as a framework, a researcher worked in a teacher’s classroom to implement a series of research-based mathematical modeling activities. A broad corpus of data from this interaction was analyzed, including audio recordings of interviews with the teacher, video recordings of three mathematical modeling lessons, researcher field notes and journal reflections, instructional materials, and students’ written work using the principles for designing activities for teachers. The emerging roles and relationships between the teacher and the researcher were documented, as (1) the researcher implemented the professional development, (2) the teacher shared her concerns, (3) the researcher responded to the teacher’s challenges, and (3) the teacher reflected on student development. As a case study of collaboration, the participants’ roles and strategies to overcome challenges and achieve shared objectives can benefit teachers and researchers who plan to collaboratively implement modeling in the classroom. The study supports the value and viability of this form of in situ professional development, indicating that significant changes in teachers’ thinking about their students’ mathematical model development can occur in relatively short periods of time.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ball, D. L., & Bass, H. (2003). Toward a practice-based theory of mathematics knowledge for teaching. In B. Davis & E. Simmt (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2002 annual meeting of the Canadian Mathematics Education Study Group (CMESG). Edmonton, AB: CMESG.
Ball, D. L., & Cohen, D. K. (1999). Developing practice, developing practitioners: Toward a practice-based theory of professional education. In L. Darling-Hammond & G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice (pp. 3–32). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141–178.
Cazden, C. B. (1983). Can ethnographic research go beyond the status quo? Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 14(1), 33–41.
Chamberlin, M. T. (2005). Teachers’ discussions of students’ thinking: Meeting the challenge of attending to students’ thinking. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 8(2), 141–170.
Cobb, P., Confrey, J., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 9–13.
Darling-Hammond, L. & Ball, D. L. (1998). Teaching for high standards: What policymakers need to know and be able to do. Center for Policy Research in Education Joint Report Series (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED426491).
Darling-Hammond, L., & McLaughlin, M. W. (1995). Policies that support professional development in an era of reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 76, 597–604.
Darling-Hammond, L., Wei, R. C., Andree, A., Richardson, N., & Orphanos, S. (2009). Professional learning in the learning profession. Washington, DC: National Staff Development Council.
Doerr, H. M., & English, L. D. (2006). Middle grade teachers’ learning through students’ engagement with modeling tasks. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 9(1), 5–32.
Doerr, H. M., & Lesh, R. (2003). A modeling perspective on teacher development. In R. Lesh & H. Doerr (Eds.), Beyond constructivism: A models and modeling perspectives on mathematics problem solving, learning, and teaching (pp. 125–140). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Edwards, J. A., & Jones, K. (2003). Co-learning in the collaborative mathematics classroom. In A. Peter-Koop, et al. (Eds.), Collaboration in teacher education (pp. 135–151). Dordrecht, NL: Kluwer.
Goos, M. (2008). Researcher–teacher relationships in mathematics education. In Proceedings of the 31st annual conference of the mathematics education research group of Australasia (pp. 227–234).
Guskey, T. R. (1995). Professional development in education: In search of the optimal mix. In T. R. Guskey & M. Huberman (Eds.), Professional development in education: New paradigms and practices (pp. 114–131). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Herrenkohl, L. R., Kawasaki, K., & Dewater, L. S. (2010). Inside and outside: Teacher–researcher collaboration. The New Educator, 6(1), 74–92.
Hiebert, J., Gallimore, R., & Stigler, J. W. (2002). A knowledge base for the teaching profession: What would it look like and how can we get one? Educational Researcher, 31(5), 3–15.
Jorgensen, D. L. (Ed.). (1989). Participant observation: A methodology for human studies (Vol. 15). London: Sage.
Jung, H. (2014). Building 21st century skills through modeling. Mathematics in Michigan, 47(2), 10–14.
Jung, H. (2015). Strategies to support students’ model development. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 21(1), 42–48.
Lau, S. M. C., & Stille, S. (2014). Participatory research with teachers: toward a pragmatic and dynamic view of equity and parity in research relationships. European Journal of Teacher Education, 37(2), 156–170.
Lesh, R., & Doerr, H. M. (2003). In what ways does a models and modeling perspective move beyond constructivism? In R. Lesh & H. Doerr (Eds.), Beyond constructivism: A models and modeling perspectives on mathematics problem solving, learning, and teaching (pp. 519–556). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Lesh, R., English, L., Sevis, S., & Riggs, C. (2013). Modeling as a means for making powerful ideas accessible to children at an early age. In S. Hegedus & J. Roschelle (Eds.), The SimCalc vision and contributions: Democratizing access to important mathematics. Berlin: Springer.
Lesh, R., & Harel, G. (2003). Problem solving, modeling, and local conceptual development. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 5(2–3), 157–189.
Lesh, R., Hoover, M., Hole, B., Kelly, A., & Post, T. (2000). Principles for developing thought-revealing activities for students and teachers. In A. Kelly & R. Lesh (Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 591–646). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Lesh, R., Hoover, M., & Kelly, A. (1992). Equity, technology, and teacher development. In I. Wirszup & R. Streit (Eds.), Developments in school mathematics education around the world (Vol. 3, pp. 104–129). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Lesh, R., & Kelly, A. E. (2000). Multi-tiered teaching experiments. In A. Kelly & R. Lesh (Eds.), Handbook of research in mathematics and science education (pp. 197–230). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Lesh, R., & Lehrer, R. (2003). Models and modeling perspectives on the development of students and teachers. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 5(2–3), 109–129.
Lesh, R., Yoon, C., & Zawojewski, J. (2007). John Dewey revisited—Making mathematics practical versus making practice mathematical. In R. Lesh, E. Hamilton, & J. Kaput (Eds.), Models and modeling as foundations for the future in mathematics education (pp. 315–348). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Lewis, C. (2002). Does lesson study have a future in the United States? Nagoya Journal of Education and Human Development, 1, 1–23.
Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Little, J. W. (1993). Teachers’ professional development in a climate of educational reform. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15, 129–151.
Loucks-Horsley, S., Harding, C. K., Arbuckle, M. A., Murray, L. B., Dubea, C., & Williams, M. K. (1987). Continuing to learn: A guidebook for teacher development. Andover, MA: Regional Laboratory for Educational Improvement of the Northeast and Islands.
Mundry, S., Britton, E., Raizen, S., & Loucks-Horsley, S. (2000). Designing successful professional meetings and conferences in education: Planning, implementation, and evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
National Governor’s Association Center for Best Practices, & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common core state standards for mathematics. Washington, DC: Authors.
Peng, A. (2007). Knowledge growth of mathematics teachers during professional activity based on the task of lesson explaining. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 10(4–6), 289–299.
Putnam, R. T., & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning? Educational Researcher, 29(1), 4–15.
Reys, B., Tran, D., Thomas, A. L., Dingman, S., Kasmer, L., Newton, J., et al. (2012). Common core state standards: What follows state adoption? Journal of Mathematics Education Leadership, 14(2), 5–13.
Schorr, R., & Lesh, R. (2003). A modeling approach for providing on the-job teacher development. In R. Lesh & H. Doerr (Eds.), Beyond constructivism: A models and modeling perspective on mathematics problem solving, learning, and teaching (pp. 141–157). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Silver, E. A., Clark, L. M., Ghousseini, H. N., Charalambous, C. Y., & Sealy, J. T. (2007). Where is the mathematics? Examining teachers’ mathematical learning opportunities in practice-based professional learning tasks. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 10(4–6), 261–277.
Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (1999). The teaching gap: Best ideas from the world’s teachers for improving education in the classroom. New York, NY: Summit.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
The Design-Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5–8.
Wagner, J. (1997). The unavoidable intervention of educational research: A framework for reconsidering researcher–practitioner cooperation. Educational Researcher, 26(7), 13–22.
Yang, Y., & Ricks, T. E. (2013). Chinese lesson study: Developing classroom instruction through collaborations in school-based teaching research group activities. In L. Yeping & R. Huang (Eds.), How Chinese teach mathematics and improve teaching (pp. 51–65). Florence, KY: Routledge.
Yoshida, M. (1999). Lesson study: A case study of a Japanese approach to improving instruction through school-based teacher development. Dissertation Abstracts International, 60(11), 3895 (UMI No. 9951885).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Jung, H., Brady, C. Roles of a teacher and researcher during in situ professional development around the implementation of mathematical modeling tasks. J Math Teacher Educ 19, 277–295 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-015-9335-6
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-015-9335-6