The Mathematical Education (한국수학교육학회지시리즈A:수학교육)

Korean Society of Mathematical Education (한국수학교육학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The characteristics of lesson design prepared by pre-service teachers according to the structural changes of lesson design template

수업 설계안 구조 변화에 따른 예비교사들의 수업 설계 특징 분석

  • Received : 2021.01.11
  • Accepted : 2021.02.02
  • Published : 2021.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In this study, a student participation-centered class based on student mathematical thinking as a the meaningful subject was called a student thinking-based math class. And as a way to support these classes, I paid attention to lesson design. For student thinking-based mathematics classes, it is necessary not only to anticipate student thinking and teacher feedback, but also to plan in advance how to properly arrange and connect expected student responses. The student thinking-based lesson design template proposed in this study is a modified three-step(introduction, main topic, summary) lesson design template. The reason for revising the existing design template is that it has limitation that it cannot focus on mathematical thinking. Using the conceptual framework of student thinking-based mathematics lesson as a lens, the difference between the three-step lesson design prepared by pre-service teachers and the students' thinking-based lesson design prepared by the same pre-service teachers was analyzed. As a result of planning lessons using the student thinking-based lesson design, more attention was paid to the cognitive and social engagement of students. In addition, emphasis was placed in the role of teachers as formative facilitator. This study is of significant in that it recognizes the importance of classes focusing on students' mathematical thinking and provides tools to plan math classes based on students' thinking.

본 연구는 학생의 수학적 사고를 주제로 한 참여형 수업을 학생 사고기반 수학 수업이라 명하고, 이러한 수업을 지원하는 방법으로 수업 설계에 주목했다. 교사가 학생 사고기반 수학 수업을 실천하기 위해서는 학생들의 사고와 그에 대한 교육적 피드백을 여러 측면에서 예상할 뿐 아니라, 예상한 학생 답변을 의도적으로 배열하고 그것들을 목표와 연결하는 방법을 미리 계획할 필요가 있다. 학교에서 일반적으로 사용되는 3단계 수업 설계안은 교사가 수업의 도입, 전개, 그리고 정리에 따라 일련의 수업 계획을 기록해볼 수 있는 틀을 제공하지만, 외현적 수업 활동에만 초점을 두게 한다는 제한점이 있다. 이에 본 연구는 3단계 수업 설계안을 보완한 학생 사고기반 수업 설계안을 제시했다. 그리고 학생 사고기반 수학 수업을 위한 과제, 학생 참여, 그리고 교사 역할에 관련된 문헌 검토 결과를 종합한 개념적 틀을 렌즈로 하여 예비교사들이 작성한 3단계 수업 설계안과 학생 사고기반 수업 설계안의 차이를 분석했다.

Keywords

References

  1. Kang, J. C. (2018). A case study on instruction design and practice using creative problem solving: for pre-teacher. Journal of Educational Innovation Research, 28(2), 315-345. https://doi.org/10.21024/pnuedi.28.2.201806.315
  2. Kim, G. Y. & Jeon, M. H. (2017). Exploring teachers' pedagogical design capacity: how mathematics teachers plan and design their mathematics lesson. The Mathematical Education, 56(4), 365-385. https://doi.org/10.7468/mathedu.2017.56.4.365
  3. Kim, J. S. & Lee, S. J. (2017). Characteristics of pre-service secondary mathematics teachers' anticipating through the task dialogue activity. Journal of educational research in mathematics, 28(3), 511-536.
  4. Kim, J. W. (2014). An analysis of lesson plan and implementation based on the thinking through a lesson protocol in elementary mathematics instrucion: focused on the area of plane figure at fifth grade. Korea National University of Education, Master's thesis, Ghung-Buk, Korea.
  5. Kwon, O. N., Pang, J. S., Park, J. H., Park, J. H., Oh, H. M., & Jo, H. M. (2013). Exploring the possibility of using lesson play in pre-service teacher education. School Mathematics, 15(4), 819-832.
  6. Pang, J. S. (2006). Successes and difficulties in transforming elementary mathematics classrooms to student-centered instruction. The Mathematical Education, 45(4), 459-479.
  7. Pang, J. S., Kim, J. W. (2013). An Analysis of 5 Practices for Effective Mathematics Communication by Elementary School Teachers. Journal of Elementary Mathematics Education in Korea, 17(1), 143-164.
  8. Park, I. W. (2015). A conceptual analysis on teaching and instruction, instructional theory, and instructional design theory. Journal of Educational Technology, 31(3), 633-653. https://doi.org/10.17232/KSET.31.3.633
  9. Park, K. Y. (2007). Instructional design model and practice: a survey of design practice. Journal of Educational Technology, 23(4), 1-30. https://doi.org/10.17232/KSET.23.4.1
  10. Park, K. Y. (2008). A case study on instructional planning process of teachers. The Journal of Korean Teacher Education, 25(3), 379-405. https://doi.org/10.24211/tjkte.2008.25.3.379
  11. Park, K. Y. (2018). The effects of instructional design model based on the nature of design thinking on secondary pre-service teacher's instructional design activities. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 18(3), 191-214.
  12. Lee, M, O. (2018). A study on the formation of teaching expertise of elementary school teachers. Seoul National University of Education, Doctoral dissertation. Seoul. Korea.
  13. Lee, J. H. & Lee, G. D. (2015). Beyond the certifier of right or wrong answer: what and how could pre-service teachers learn from a lesson observation course?. Journal of educational research in mathematics, 25(4), 549-569.
  14. Lim, C. I. (1994). Formative research on an instructional theroy for conceptual understanding. Journal of Educational Technology, 10(1), 45-63. https://doi.org/10.17232/KSET.10.1.45
  15. Jeong, H. H. (2009). A study on the insturcion design experiences of elementary school teacher. Korean Society of Educational Technology, 25(3), 157-191.
  16. Choi, H. S. (2020). Exploration of instructional design changes of pre-service mathematics teachers by restructuring the lesson plan. Journal of the Korean School Mathematics Society, 23(1), 159-177.
  17. Han, C. R., Kim, H. J., Kwon, O. N. (2018). Teacher Noticing on Students' Reasoning of Statistical Variability. Journal of the Korean School Mathematics, 21(2), 183-206. https://doi.org/10.30807/KSMS.2018.21.2.005
  18. Han, C. R., Kim, H. J. & Kwon, O. N. (2018). Teacher noticing on students' reasoning of statistical variability. Journal of the Korean School Mathematics, 21(2), 183-206. https://doi.org/10.30807/KSMS.2018.21.2.005
  19. Anthony, G., Hunter, J. & Hunter, R. (2015). Prospective teachers development of adaptive expertise. Teaching and Teacher Education, 49, 108-117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2015.03.010
  20. Bahr, D. L. & Bahr, K. (2017). Engaging all students in mathematical discussions. Teaching Children Mathematics, 23(6), 350-359. https://doi.org/10.5951/teacchilmath.23.6.0350
  21. Brown, A. H. & Green, T. D. (2016). The Essentials of instructional design: connecting fundamental principles with process and practice. NY: Routledge.
  22. Carr-Chellman, A. A., & Reigeluth, R. M.(2002). Whistling in the dark? Instructional design and technology in the schools. In Reiser, R. A., & Dempsey, J. V.(Eds.). Trend and issues in instructional design and technology(pp. 239-255). NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.
  23. Chapin, S. H., O'Connor, & Anderson, N. C. (2013). Classroom discussions in math: a teacher's guide for using talk moves to support the common core and more, grades K-6. Kim. J. H. et al. Translator, Trans. (2016). 수학 교실 토론. Seoul: Kyungmoon.
  24. Choy, B. H. (2013). Productive mathematic noticing: what it is and why it matters. In V. Steinle, L. Ball & C. Bardini (Eds.), Proceedings of 36th annual conference of Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia. (pp. 186-193). Melbourne, Victoria: MERGA.
  25. Choy, B. H. (2014). Teachers' productive mathematical noticing during lesson preparation. In Nicol, C., Liljedahl, P., Oesterle, S., & Allan, D. (Eds) Proceedings of the Joint Meeting of PME 38 and PME-NA, 36(2). pp. 297-304. Vancouver, Canada: PME.
  26. Choy, B. H. & Dindyal, J. (2017). Snapshots of productive noticing: orchestrating experiences using typical problems. In A. Downton, S. Livy, & J. Hall (Eds.), 40 years on: We are still learning! Proceedings of the 40th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 157-164). Melbourne: MERGA.
  27. Cohen, D. K., Raudenbush, S. W. & Ball, D. L. (2003). Resources, instruction, and research. Educational evaluation and policy analysis, 25(2), 119-142. https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737025002119
  28. Erickson, F. (2011). On noticing teacher noticing. In M. Sherin, V. Jacobs, & R. Philipp (Eds.), Mathematics teacher noticing: seeing through teachers' eyes (pp. 17-34). New York, NY: Routledge.
  29. Forbes, C. T. & Davis, E. A. (2009). Preservice elementary teachers' curriculum design and development of pedagogical design capacity for inquiry : an activity-theoretical perspective. Paper presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching. 1-72.
  30. Franke, M. L., Webb, N. M., Chan, A. G., Ing, M., Freund, D. & Batttey, D. (2009). Teacher questioning to elicit students' mathematical thinking in elementary school classrooms. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(4), 380-392. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487109339906
  31. Fredricks, J. A., Wang, M. T., Linn, J. S., Hofkens, T. L., Sugn, H., Parr, A. & Allerton, J. (2016). Using qualitative methods to develop a survey measure of math and science engagement. Learning and Instruction, 43, 5-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.01.009
  32. Hatch, J. A. (2002). Doing qualitative research in education settings. Jin, Y. E. Translator, Trans (2008). 교육 상황에서 질적 연구 수행하기. Seoul: Hakjisa.
  33. Helme, S. & Clarke, D. (2001). Identifying cognitive engagement in the mathematics classrroom. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 13, 133-153. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217103
  34. Hiebert, J., Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., & Fuson, K. C. (1997). Making sense teaching and learning mathematics with understanding. Kim, S. H., Park, Y. H., Lee, K. H., & Han, D. H. Translator, Trans. (2004). 어떻게 이해하지?. Seoul: Kyungmoon
  35. Jacobs, V. R. & Empson, S. (2016). Responding to children's mathematical thinking in the moment: an emerging framework of teaching moves. ZDM: the international journal on mathematics education, 48(1), 185-197. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-015-0717-0
  36. Jacobs, V. R., Lamb, L. L. C., & Philipp, R. a. (2010). Professional noticing of children's mathematical thinking, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 41(2), 169-202. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.41.2.0169
  37. Jonassen, D. H. (2008). Instructional design as design problem solving: an iterative process. Educational Technology, 48(3), 21-26.
  38. Leon, J., Medina-Garrido, E. & Munez, J. L. (2017). Teaching quality in math class: the development of a scale and the analysis of its relationship with engagement and achievement. Front. Psychol. 8:895. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00895.
  39. Moallem, M.(1993). An experienced teacher's model of thinking and teaching. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL.
  40. Owens, K. (2008). Identity as a mahtematical thinker. Mathematics Teacher Educational and Development, 9, 36-50.
  41. Rymes, B. (2009). Classroom discussion analysis: a tool for critical reflection by Betsy Rymes. Kim, J. H. Translator, Trans. (2011). 말이 열리는 교실: 교실수업 개선을 위한 담화분석. Seoul: CommunicationBooks.
  42. Schoenfeld, A. H. (2010). How to think: a theory of goal-oriented decision making and its educational application. Lee, K. H. Translator, Trans (2013). 수학수업, 설명을 만나다. Seoul: Kyungmoon.
  43. Smith, M. S., Bill, V., & Hughes, E. K. (2008). Thinking through a lesson: successfully implementing high-level tasks. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 14(3), 132-138. https://doi.org/10.5951/mtms.14.3.0132
  44. Smith, M. S. & J. Cartier (2009). "The lesson template." Created under the auspices of the collaborative, technology-enhanced lesson planning as an organizational routine for continuous, School-Wide Instructional Projet, directed ty M. J. Stein and J. Russell at the University of Pittsburgh, 2009.
  45. Smith, M. S. & Sherin, M. G. (2019). The five practices in practice: successfully orchestrating mathematics discussions in your middle school classroom. NY : Corwin mathematics publishing.
  46. Smith, M. S. & Stein, M. J. (2011). 5 practices for orchestrating productive mathematics discussion. Reston, VA: NCTM. Pang, J. S. Translator, Trans. (2013). 효과적인 수학적 논의를 위해 교사가 알아야 할 5가지 관행. Seoul: Kyungmoon.
  47. Stein, M. K. & Smith, M. S. (1998). Mathematical tasks as a framework for reflection: from research to practice. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 3, 268-275. https://doi.org/10.5951/mtms.3.4.0268
  48. Stein, M. K., Smith, M. S., Henningsen, M. A., & Silver, S. A. (2009). Implementing standards-based mathematics instruction: a casebook for professional development (2nd ed.) Kim, N. G., Joe, W. Y., & Kwon, S. R. Translator, Trans.(2017). 수학과제가 수학수업을 만났을 때. Seoul: Kyungmoon.
  49. Stockero, S. L., Rupnow, R. & Pascoe, A. E. (2017). Learning to notice important student mathematical thinking in complex classroom interactions. Teaching and Teacher Education, 63, 384-395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.01.006
  50. Sullivan, P., Clarke, D. & Clarke, B. (2013). Teaching with tasks for effective mathematics learning. Lee, K. H. & Kim, D. W. Translator, Trans. (2016). 수학 수업 이야기: 수학, 과제, 학습의 삼중주. Seoul: Kyungmoon.
  51. Taylan, R. D. (2018). The relationship between pre-service mathematics teachers' focus on student thinking in lesson analysis and lesson planning tasks. Int J of Sci and Math Edue, 16, 337-356. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-016-9778-y
  52. van Es, E. A. & Sherin, M. G. (2002). Learning to notice: Scaffolding new teachers' interpretations of classroom interactions. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 10(4), 571-596.
  53. Yang, Y., & Ricks, T. E. (2013). Chinese lesson study: Developing classroom instruction through collaborations in school-based teaching research group activities. In Y. Li & R.Huang (Eds.), How Chinese teach mathematics and improve teaching (pp. 51-65). NY: Routledge.