1. Perspectives or Theoretical Framework:
Improving student achievement in mathematics and
science has been a concern in the United States of America since the early 80s
when international tests began showing U.S. students falling behind most
developed countries in mathematics and science skills. Educators and policymakers
have not always agreed about the reasons for such a failure. For some, many
mathematics teachers lack mathematical content knowledge themselves, and thus
are unable to teach their students to the highest level (Ahuja,
2006; Ginsburg, Cooke, Leinwand, Noell
& Pollock, 2005). Others
(Darling-Hammond, 2007; National Science Board, 2006) in part relate such an
educational failure not only to the lack of qualified teachers with solid
content knowledge in STEM, but also to a profound lack of understanding of
teaching and learning in grades K-12. For Brown and Borko
(1992), and Ball and Bass (2000), content knowledge and understanding of the
methods of inquiry in mathematics are at the core of effective teaching and
learning.
The use of inquiry-based approaches
to instruction, in which students have opportunities to construct their own
understanding of basic concepts, has been found to be most appropriate in
developing studentsÕ understanding of mathematics concepts. Such approaches
call for teachers to be able to engage students in critical, in-depth,
higher-order thinking using manipulatives, cooperative
learning and other pedagogy that enable them to construct mathematics concepts
on their own through reasoning, verifying, comparing, synthesizing,
interpreting, solving problems, making connections, communicating ideas and
constructing arguments (Grouws
& Shultz, 1996). This approach departs in
significant ways from what occurs in ÒtraditionalÓ classrooms. Helping teachers make this fundamental shift in
practice requires more powerful approaches to professional development (PD).
One such
approach is the process of inquiry through the Action Research
(AR) cycle. In this approach, teachers are engaged in a process that does not
cease, in asking questions and understanding problems, continually revisiting
critical issues relative to teaching and learning, designing plans to resolve
the issues, implementing the plans, and collecting and analyzing data to assess
the effectiveness of the designed plans. As teachers improve their pedagogical
skills, they increase their ability to explain terms and concepts to students,
interpret studentsÕ statements and solutions, engage
students in critical, in-depth, higher order thinking, and consequently leading
to increased student achievement (Grouws &
Shultz, 1996; National Council of Teachers of Mathematics [NCTM], 2000).
2. Methods,
Techniques, or Modes of Inquiry:
The process of inquiry through AR is at the
center of our three-year multi-dimensional NSF-funded PD program that had 33 certified mathematics teachers with
4-10 years of experience enrolled at the time of this study. As part of the
program, participants took a two-part course series that focused on
AR strategies. During the second part of the course series, they used mixed methods to complete and
report on at least one AR investigation.
In studying the extent to which the
practice of AR leads to teachersÕ growth and student learning, we sought answers
to the following research questions:
1) What is the impact of the practice of AR on teachersÕ
growth in pedagogical knowledge?
2) To what extent does the practice of AR leads to
studentsÕ gains in performance and change in attitudes?
Answers
to the research questions were based on teachersÕ reflections from their AR
reports, AR course blogs, open-ended and quantitative self-ratings from course
evaluations, and the 29
action research projects developed by 23 of these teachers that involved 1017
students (639 HS and 378 MS students). For student performance, teachers considered
student success in terms of attitudinal changes and motivation—as opposed
to test scores and grades—and relied heavily on qualitative methods of
data collection such as open-ended questions, review of student work samples,
and interviews with individual students.
3. Results and/or Conclusions:
Most
teachers identified growth in the related areas of becoming a more reflective
teacher, being able to conduct an AR inquiry, and learning to pay greater
attention to studentsÕ needs, prior knowledge, and understanding. Most rated
themselves highly in their ability to identify and describe errors and
misconceptions (78%), design activities to address these misconceptions (74%), collect
and analyze student data (70%), and reflect upon the results of their classroom
research (70%).
Fifty-two
percent of student demonstrated a significant change in performance; 24% a
significant change in performance in some areas of mathematics; 55% a
significant change in their attitudes toward and understanding of mathematics;
finally, 38% some evidence of change in attitudes toward and understanding of
mathematics. Students were more engaged, gained more self-confidence, expressed
themselves better mathematically, were slightly more open to word problems, and
took more responsibility for their own learning.
4. Educational/Scientific
Importance:
Teachers
identify lack of motivation as the main barrier to student learning, especially
in urban areas where a lack of engagement has been especially pronounced for
adolescent minority students. High engagement through effective participation and willingness to
collaborate are indications of intrinsic motivation. As a model of
student-centered approach, AR has therefore the potential of having the
greatest impact on higher student engagement and studentsÕ learning. Student
engagement plays an essential role in the learning process and is a strong
predictor of student learning (Seashore et al., 2010). Indeed, research shows
that engaged students experience greater satisfaction with school experiences,
which may in turn lead to greater school completion and lower incidences of
acting-out behaviors and the overarching goal of student success.
Selected References
Ahuja, O.P. (2006). World-class high quality mathematics
education for all K-12
American students. The Montana Mathematics Enthusiast, 3(2), 223-248.
Brown, C. & Borko, H. (1992): Becoming a mathematics teacher. In: D. Grouws
(Handbook
of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning (pp. 209–239). New
York: Macmillan.
Grouws, D.A. &
Schultz, K.A. (1996). In Sikula, J. (ed.), Handbook of Research on
Teacher Education, 2nd Ed. New York:
Macmillan.
Seashore, K. L. et al. (2010). Learning from
leadership: Investigating the links to
improved
student learning. Final Report of Research to the Wallace
Foundation. University of Minnesota and University of
Toronto.
Teachers identify a lack of motivation as the main barrier to students' learning, especially in urban areas where minority students show especially pronounced lack of engagement. The practice of action research through the inquiry cycle, however, engages students, who then improve in both performance and attitude.
Session Type: Poster Session