Browse > Article

Standards for Promoting Mathematical Communication in Elementary Classrooms  

Kim, Sang-Hwa (Yongin Sanyang Elementary School)
Bang, Jeong-Suk (Korea National University of Education)
Publication Information
Communications of Mathematical Education / v.24, no.2, 2010 , pp. 385-413 More about this Journal
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to set appropriate targets for school-year levels and types of mathematical communication. First, I classify mathematical communication into four types as Discourse, Representation, Operation and Complex and refer to them collectively as the 'D.R.O.C pattern'. I have listed achievement factors based on the D.R.O.C pattern hearing opinions from specialists to set a target, then set a final target after a 2nd survey with specialists and teachers. I have set targets for mathematical communication in elementary schools suitable to its status and students' levels in our country. In NCTM(2000), standards of communication were presented only from kindergarten to 12th grade students, and, for four separate grade bands(prekindergarten through grade 2, grades 3-5, grades 6-8, grades 9-12), they presented characteristics of the same age group through analysis of classes where communication was active and the stated roles of teachers were suitable to the characteristics of each school year. In this study, in order to make the findings accessible to teachers in the field, I have classified types into Discourse, Representation, Operation and Complex (D.R.O.C Pattern) according to method of delivery, and presented achievement factors in detail for low, middle and high grades within each type. Though it may be premature to set firm targets and achievement factors for each school year group, we hope to raise the possibility of applying them in the field by presenting targets and achievement factors in detail for mathematical communication.
Keywords
mathematical communication; status; recognition; standard; discourse; representation; operation; complex; role of teachers;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 3  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2000). Principle and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author. 류희찬 외5인 공역 (2007). 학교수학을 위한 원리와 규준. 서울: 경문사.
2 McGuire, M., & Harshman, K. (2002). The role of discourse in mathematical inquiry. Boise State University. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 470 662).
3 National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
4 Cobb, P., Boufi, A., McClain, K., & Whitenack, J. (1997). Reflective discourse and collective reflection. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28(3), pp.258-277.   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Jacobs, J. K., & Morita, E. (2002). Japanese and American teachers' evaluation of videotaped mathematics lessons. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 33(3), pp.154-175.   DOI   ScienceOn
6 D'Ambrosio, U. (2004). Ethnomathematics and its place in the history and pedagogy of mathematics. In T. P. Carpenter, J. A. Dossey, & J. L. Koehler (Eds.), Classics in mathematics education research (pp.194-199). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
7 Griffiths, R., & Clyne, M. (1994). Language in the mathematics classroom: Talking, representing, recording. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
8 Hardy, I. (2001). The relationship between the use of representations and instructional discourse in mathematics tasks. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (AERA). Seattle, Washington.
9 Bishop, A. J. (2004). Mathematics education in its cultural context. In T. P. Carpenter, J. A. Dossey, & J. L. Koehler (Eds.), Classics in mathematics education research (pp.200-207). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
10 Battista, M. T. (1994). Teacher beliefs and the reform movement in mathematics. Phi Delta Kappan, 75(6), pp.462-470.
11 Brendefur, J. L., & Frykholm, J. A. (2000). Promoting mathematical communication in the classroom: Two pre-service teachers' conceptions and practices. Journal of Mathematics in Teacher Education, 3(2), pp.125-153.   DOI   ScienceOn
12 Chapin, S. H., O'Connor, C., & Anderson, N. C. (2003). Classroom discussions: using mathematics talk to help students learn. Sausalito, CA: Math Solutions.
13 송경화․임재훈 (2007). 초등학교 4학년 교실에서 정확한 수학적 언어 사용 문화의 형성. 학교수학, 9(2), pp.181-196.
14 Baroody, A. J., & Coslick, R. T. (1998). Fostering children's mathematical power: An investigative approach to K-8 mathematics instruction. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 권성룡 외 11인 공역 (2005). 수학의 힘을 길러주자: 왜? 어떻게?. 서울: 경문사.
15 신준식 (2007). 수학 수업에서 의사소통 분석: 언어상호작용을 중심으로. 한국수학교육학회지 시리즈C <초등수학교육>, 10(1), pp.15-28.   과학기술학회마을
16 이종희․김선희 (2002). 수학적 의사소통. 서울: 교우사.
17 홍우주․방정숙 (2008). 초등학교 6학년 수업에서의 수학적 의사소통과 학생의 수학적 사고 분석. 한국학교수학학회논문집, 11(2), pp.201-219.   과학기술학회마을
18 방정숙․정희진 (2006). 학습자 중심 교수법에 대한 초등 교사의 이해와 실행형태: 수학적 의사소통을 중심으로. 학습자중심교과교육연구, 6(1), pp.297-321.
19 민용성 (2006). 학습자 중심의 교육목표 설정 및 진술에 관한 연구: 제7차 교육과정의 학교급별 교육 목표 개선을 중심으로. 학습자중심교과교육연구, 6(1), pp.323-341.
20 박미혜․방정숙 (2009). 개정 교육과정의 실험 적용에서 나타나는 수학적 의사소통 분석: 초등 1․2학년 탐구 활동과 이야기 마당을 중심으로. 수학교육학연구, 19(1), pp.163-183.
21 Ongstad, S. (2007). Language in mathematics? A comparative study of four national curricula. In S. Ongstad (ed.), Language in mathematics? A report to the council of Europe from the LAC group in mathematics education (pp.1-12). Oslo: June.
22 교육인적자원부 (2007). 수학과 교육과정(고시 제2007-79호[별책 8]), 서울: 대한교과서.
23 류희찬 (2006). 교과교육 전문화를 위한 과제. 우수연구결과발표대회(기조 강연). pp.3-13.
24 Wood, T. (1998). Alternative patterns of communication in mathematics classes: Funneling or focusing? In H. Steinbring, M. G. Bartolini-Bussi, A. Sierpinska (Eds.), Language and communication in the mathematics classroom (pp.167-178). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
25 Wood, T., & McNeal, B. (2003). Complexity in teaching and children's mathematical thinking. In N. Pateman, B. Dougherty, & J. Zilliox (Eds.), Proceedings of the 27th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education(Vol. 4, pp.435-442). CRDG, College of Education, University of Hawai'i: Psychology of Mathematics Education.
26 Thompson, D. R,. & Chappell, M. F. (2007). Communication and representation as elements in mathematical literacy. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 23(2). pp.179-196.   DOI   ScienceOn
27 Wood, T. (1994). Patterns of interaction and the culture of mathematics classrooms. In S. Lerman (Ed.), The culture of the mathematics classroom (pp.149-168). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
28 Pirie, S. E. B. (1998). Crossing the gulf between thought and symbol: language as (slippery) stepping stones. In H. Steinbring, M. G. B. Buss, & A. Sierpinska (Eds.), Language and communication in the mathematics classroom (pp.7-29). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.