Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.7468/mathedu.2021.60.1.111

Investigating mathematics teachers' understanding of and intention to use textbooks  

Cho, Soohyun (Sogang University Graduate School of Education)
Kim, Gooyeon (Sogang University)
Publication Information
The Mathematical Education / v.60, no.1, 2021 , pp. 111-131 More about this Journal
Abstract
This study aims to investigate how secondary mathematics teachers understand and intend to use textbooks for their mathematics instruction. For this purpose, we developed a set of survey items in order to unpack what the teachers understand the mathematical tasks suggested in the textbooks in terms of the levels of cognitive demand and how they intended to use the tasks in the textbooks for their teaching. Twenty-five teachers participated in the survey. The data from the survey were analyzed. The findings from the data analysis suggested as follows: a) the teachers seemed to closely follow textbooks without attempting to modify the tasks, even when the teachers consider it is necessary to modify textbook tasks to high-level tasks, b) the teachers seemed to be unstable in regards that they admitted themselves very competent for modifying tasks for developing students' mathematical thinking but, at the same time, they were uncomfortable with transforming tasks into cognitively demanding tasks that promote students' mathematical understanding, and c) the teachers appeared to consider textbooks as significant criteria in conducting tests including midterm and final exam. In conclusion, the teachers seemed to intend to follow closely the contents and sequence of mathematics textbooks in their mathematics classrooms.
Keywords
mathematics teacher; use of textbooks; understanding of contents; teachers' intention of using textbooks;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 1  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Brown, M. W. (2009). The teacher-tool relationship: Theorizing the design and use of curriculum materials. In J. T. Remillard, B. A. Herbel-Eisenmann & G. M. Lloyd (Eds.), Mathematics teachers at work: Connecting curriculum materials and classroom instruction (pp. 17-36). New York, NY: Routledge.
2 Charalambous, C. Y. & Hill, H. C. (2012). Teacher knowledge, curriculum materials, and quality of instruction: Unpacking a complex relationship. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 44(4), 443-466.   DOI
3 Collopy, R. (2003). Curriculum materials as a professional development tool: How a mathematics textbook affected two teachers' learning. Elementary School Journal 103, 287-311.   DOI
4 Cooney, T. J., Beckmann, S., & Lloyd, G. M. (2010). Developing essential understanding of functions for teaching mathematics in grades 9-12. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mahtematics.
5 Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology (2010). Major business plan of MEST for 2011. Retrieved from http://if-blog.tistory.com/939.
6 Dietiler, L., Males, L. M., Amador, J. M., & Earnest, D. (2018). Curricular Noticing: A Framework to Describe Teachers' Interactions With Curriculum Materials. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education. 49(5), 521-532.   DOI
7 Hill, H. C., & Charalambous, C. Y. (2012) Teacher knowledge, curriculum materials, and quality of instruction: Lessons learned and open issues. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 44(4), 559-576.   DOI
8 Doyle, W. (1983). Academic Work. Review of Educational Research, 53(2), 159-199.   DOI
9 Grouws, D. A., Tarr, J. E., Chavez, O., Sears, R., Soria, V. M., & Taylan, R. D. (2013). Curriculum and implementation effects on high school students' mathematics learning from curricula representing subject-specific and integrated content organizations. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 44, 416-463.   DOI
10 Henningsen, M., & Stein, M. K. (1997). Mathematical tasks and student cognition: Classroom-based factors that support and inhibit high-level mathematical thinking and reasoning. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28, 524-549.   DOI
11 Hong, C. J, & Kim, G. (2012). Functions in the middle school mathematics: The cognitive demand of the mathematical tasks. School Mathematics, 14(2), 213-232.
12 Kilpatrick, J. (2003). What works? In S. L. Senk & D. R. Thompson (Eds.), Standards-based school mathematics curricula: What are they? What do students learn? (pp. 471-493). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
13 Kwon, H., & Kim, G. (2021). A comparative analysis of mathematical tasks in middle-school geometry of Korea and the US. Journal of Leaner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 21(3), 1531-1557.
14 Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J., & Findell, B. (Eds.). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. Washington, DC.: National Research Council.
15 Kim, G. (2011). How teachers use mathematics curriculum materials in planning and implementing mathematics lessons. School Mathematics, 13(4), 485-500.
16 Kim, G. & Jeon, M. (2017a). Exploring mathematics teachers' pedagogical design capacity: How mathematics teachers plan and design their mathematics lessons.. The Mathematical Education, 56(4), 365-385.   DOI
17 Kim, G. & Jeon, M. (2017b). Exploring how middle-school mathematics textbooks on functions provide students an opportunity-to-learn. School Mathematics 19(2), 289-317.
18 Kim, M. (2013). Secondary mathematics teachers' use of mathematics textbooks and teacher's guide. School Mathematics 16(3), 503-531.
19 Kwon, J. & Kim, G. (2013). An analysis of mathematical tasks in the middle school geometry. The Mathematical Education, 52(1), 111-128.   DOI
20 Lee, H. L. & Kim, G. (2013). Pre-service secondary mathematics teachers' understanding and modifications of tasks in mathematics textbooks. Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics, 23(3), 353-371.
21 Lee, S., & Kim, G. (2019). How middle-school mathematics textbooks of Korea and the US support to develop students' statistical reasoning. The Mathematical Education, 58(1), 139-160.   DOI
22 Lloyd, G. M. (2008). Teaching mathematics with a new curriculum: Changes to classroom organization and interactions. Mathematical Thinking and Learning 10, 163-195.   DOI
23 National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
24 Lloyd, G. M., Remillard, J. T., Herbel-Eisenmann, B. A. (2009). Teachers' use of curriculum materials: An emerging field. In J. T. Remillard, B. A. Herbel-Eisenmann, G. M. Lloyd (Eds.), Mathematical teachers at work: Connecting curriculum materials and classroom instruction(pp. 3-14). New York: Routledge.
25 Marsh, C. (1992). Key concepts for understanding curriculum. London: Falmer Press. 박현주 역(1996). 교육과정 이해를 위한 주요 개념. 서울: 교육과학사.
26 Mun, J. & Kim, G. (2015). Measuring and analyzing teachers' mathematical knowledge for teaching[MKT] of functions. School Mathematics, 17(3), 469-492.
27 National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2014). Principles to actions: Ensuring mathematical success for all. Reston, VA: Author.
28 Reisman, A., & Fogo, B. (2016). Contributions of educative document-based curricular materials to quality of historical instruction. Teaching and Teacher Education, 59, 191-202.   DOI
29 Remillard, J. T. (2005). Examining key concepts in Research on Teachers' Use of Mathematics Curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75(2), 211-246.   DOI
30 Remillard, J. T., & Bryans, M. B. (2004). Teachers' orientations toward mathematics curriculum materials: implications for teacher learning. Journal for research in Mathematics Education, 35(5), 352-388.   DOI
31 Reys, B. J., Reys, R. E., & Chavez, O. (2004). Why mathematics textbooks matter. Educational Leadership, 61(5), 61-66.
32 Stein, M. K., & Kim, G. (2009). The role of mathematics curriculum materials in large-scale urban reform: An analysis of demands and opportunities for teacher learning. In J. T. Remillard, B. A. Herbel-Esienmann, & G. M. Lloyd (Eds.), Mathematics teachers at work: Connecting curriculum materials and classroom instruction (pp. 37-55). New York, NY: Routledge.
33 Senk, S. L., & Thompson, D. R. (2003). Middle school mathematics curriculum reform. In S. L. Senk & D. R. Thompson (Eds.), Standards-based school mathematics curricula: What are they? What do students learn? (pp. 181-191). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
34 Silver, E. A., & Smith, M. S. (2015). Integrating powerful practices: Formative assessment and cognitively demanding mathematics tasks. In C. Suurtamm, & A. R. McDuffie (Eds.), Assessment to enhance teaching and learning (pp. 5-14). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
35 Sleep, L. & Eskelson, S. L. (2012). MKT and curriculum materials are only part of the story: Insights from a lesson on fractions. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 44(4), 537-558.   DOI
36 Smith, M. S., & Stein. M. K. (1998). Selecting and creating mathematical: from research to practice, Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 3, 344-350.   DOI
37 Stein, M. K., Grover, B. W., & Henningsen, M. (1996). Building student capacity for mathematical thinking and reasoning. An analysis of mathematical used in reform classrooms, American Educational Research Journal, 33, 455-488.   DOI
38 Stein, M. K., Kim, G., & Seely, M. (2006). The enactment of reform mathematics curricula in urban settings: A comparative analysis. Paper Presented At The Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
39 Stein, M. K., Smith, M. S., Henningsen, M., & Silver, E. (2000). Implementing Standards-based mathematics instruction: A casebook for professional development. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
40 Stein, M. K., Remillard, J. T., & Smith, M. S. (2007). How curriculum influences student learning. In F. K. Lester (Ed), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 319-370). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.