Theoretical Perspective

For decades researchers have investigated the experiences of pre- and in-service schoolteachers (e.g., Moir, 2009). Within this body of research, there has been a dedicated effort to understand, in particular, the experiences of new mathematics schoolteachers (e.g., Chappell & Pateracki, 2004; Sowder, 2007). In contrast, little is known about the experiences of new mathematics teacher educators (Goos, 2009; Tzur, 2001). Researchers have recently considered how doctoral education could provide better preparation to this group for careers in academe (Reys, Cox, Dingman, & Newton, 2009).

New K-12 mathematics teachers' “early years of teaching are often characterized by a ‘sink-or-swim' or ‘survival' mentality because we have often failed to provide for careful support and thoughtful development of teaching expertise over time” (Bartell, 2005, p. 3). Similarly, new mathematics teacher educators must learn to navigate the often rocky terrain of their institutions, wherein they seek to find ways to strike a balance between teaching, research, and service expectations. As Reys et al. (2009) point out “important aspects to be monitored are the challenges that lie ahead for these new Ph.D.s as they begin their careers in higher education” (p. 9) While others (e.g., Shulman, 2004) have looked to these challenges to help understand how doctoral education could provide better preparation for academic careers, this research project sought to compare the challenges faced by new mathematics teacher educators and new teachers of K-12 mathematics.

Methods

This research study focused its attention on addressing the following questions:

1.      How prepared do new mathematics teacher educators feel to begin their careers in higher education?

2.      How are the experiences of new mathematics teacher educators similar to those of new K-12 mathematics teachers?

3.      In what ways could an awareness of these similarities help to inform and possibly transform new mathematics teacher educators' practices in working with pre- and in-service teachers?

Three levels of data collection and analysis occurred during this study. Phase One involved a national survey administered to a convenience sample of 40 recent graduates from mathematics education doctoral programs. Phase Two involved a meta-analysis of the literature on K-12 novice mathematics teachers' experiences. Phase Three compared the findings from the data collected in the first two phases to identify similarities between the two aforementioned groups.

Data Sources

Phase One. Forty-six recent mathematics education doctoral graduates were contacted via email and asked to complete a 27-question online survey. Forty participants completed the survey showing a return rate of 87%. The data were analyzed using a two-pronged approach. First, we started with grounded theory (Glaser & Strauss, 1967) to identify codes and common themes describing beginning experiences of mathematics education doctoral graduates. Secondly, we compared our data with what was consistent in the research literature. To improve reliability, two researchers reviewed the data independently and compared their findings. If either researcher coded a segment of data differently, both researchers discussed the difference until agreement in interpretation was reached.

Phase Two. A team of five researchers completed a meta-analysis of the existing literature concerning novice K-12 mathematics educators. Research journals such as the Journal for Research in Mathematics Education and the Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education were reviewed as well as books published on the subject of novice mathematics teachers. Common themes were identified across the literature and a matrix was developed that separated each theme across the elementary, middle, and secondary levels.

Phase Three. The themes found from phase one were compared to the themes found in phase two and conclusions were drawn on the similarities and differences existing among novice university mathematics educators (recent mathematics education doctoral graduates) and novice K-12 mathematics teachers.

Results and Conclusions

Findings revealed several similarities among the two populations. For example, both new mathematics educators and new K-12 mathematics teachers felt they did not receive enough teaching experience before graduating from their respective programs. The national online survey revealed responses such as “My program did not include any training on teaching--how to lead a discussion, construct a syllabus, or create assignments. Some faculty may have discussed this in passing. I didn't teach at all in graduate school.” Another representative response: “I did not graduate with any resources for teaching. I had taught one course during one semester (a methods course), but had nothing from which to create courses on my own.” The meta-analysis of the literature on novice K-12 mathematics teachers also showed the importance of student teaching and the need for more practicum experiences in teacher preparation programs (Darling-Hammond, 2006). A second similarity centered on mentoring. The national survey results found 37% of new university mathematics educators were assigned an official mentor at the start of their academic position with whom they have been steadily working. Twenty-three percent were assigned an official mentor but have not been working with them or found their interactions unhelpful. Forty percent were not officially assigned a mentor but have found their own informal mentor. The K-12 literature review found similar concerns of lack of mentoring or lack of effective mentoring as well (Britton et al., 2000). Our findings support the need for new mathematics teachers to be mentored by an experienced mathematics teacher and for mentors of university faculty to share the same content area as their mentees (Luft & Cox, 2001).

Educational Significance

We believe this research has the potential to inform and transform approaches to mathematics teacher education at all levels by sharing preparation successes and challenges faced by mathematics educators at both the university and K-12 levels. In addition, this study sheds light on the joint Association of Mathematics Teacher Educators (AMTE) and National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) doctoral program 2002 statement, Principles to Guide Doctoral Programs in Mathematics Education, by examining empirical data on what recent doctoral graduates say about their preparation.

References

Association of Mathematics Teacher Educators (AMTE) & National Council of Teachers of

Mathematics (NCTM). (2002). Principles to guide doctoral programs in mathematics

education. Retrieved April 27, 2011, from

http://www.amte.net/sites/all/themes/amte/resources/DocProgramsMathEducation_PosistionStatement.pdf

Bartell, C. A. (2005). Cultivating high-quality teaching through induction and mentoring.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Britton, E., Raiaen, S., Paine, L., & Huntley, M. A. (2000). More swimming, less sinking:

Perspectives on teacher induction in the US and abroad. Paper prepared for the National

Commission on Teaching Mathematics and Science in the 21st Century. Retrieved on July 31, 2011, from http://www.wested.org/online_pubs/teacherinduction/

Chappell, M. F., Pateracki, T. (2004). Empowering the beginning teacher of mathematics in

middle school. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Powerful teacher education: Lessons from exemplary programs. Hoboken, NJ: Jossey-Bass.

 Glaser, B. & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Piscataway, New Jersey: Aldine Transaction.

Luft, J. A. & Cox, W. E. (2001). Investing in our future: A survey of support offered to

beginning secondary mathematics and science teachers. Science Education, 10(1), 1-9.

Moir, E. (2009). Phases of First-Year Teaching. The Center for Teaching and Learning at the

Michael D. Eisner College of Education, 4.

Reys, R., Cox, D., Dingman, S., & Newton, J. (2009). Transitioning to careers in higher

education: Reflections from recent Ph.D.s in mathematics education. Notices of the American

Mathematical Society, 56(9), 1098-1103.

Shulman, L.S. (2004). The Wisdom of Practice: Essays on Teaching, Learning, and Learning to Teach. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Sowder, J. T. (2007). The mathematical education and development of teachers. In F. K. Lester,

Jr. (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 157-223).Charlotte, NC: Information Age.

Tzur, R. (2001). Becoming a mathematics teacher educator: Conceptualizing the terrain through

self-reflective analysis. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 4, 259 – 283.