1 / 15

Teachers’ Developing Talk About the Mathematical Practice of Attending to Precision

Teachers’ Developing Talk About the Mathematical Practice of Attending to Precision. Samuel Otten , Christopher Engledowl, & Vickie Spain University of Missouri, USA. Rationale.

thane-snow
Télécharger la présentation

Teachers’ Developing Talk About the Mathematical Practice of Attending to Precision

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Teachers’ Developing Talk Aboutthe Mathematical Practice ofAttending to Precision Samuel Otten, Christopher Engledowl, & Vickie Spain University of Missouri, USA

  2. Rationale • Mathematical practices, such as reasoning, problem solving, and attending to precision, are important for students to experience but difficult for teachers to enact successfully. • The Common Core (2010) Standards for Mathematical Practice explicitly include attending to precision (SMP6). • Precision of computations and measurement • Precision of communication and language (Koestler et al., 2013) • In order to support teachers in enacting SMP6, we need to understand how they interpret this mathematical practice.

  3. Research Question • How do middle and high school mathematics teachers talk about the mathematical practice of attending to precision? • Initially – based on the Common Core paragraph description • Over time – based on extended experiences with the SMPs

  4. Project Overview • Participants: Eight mathematics teachers (grades 5-12) • Five Summer Study Sessions centered around the Standards for Mathematical Practice from Common Core (15 hours) • Data Sources • Audio/Video recordings • Teacher written work • Focus on Attending to Precision (SMP6) • Session 1 – brainstorm, discussion based on Common Core paragraph • Session 3 – reading, task, transcript, and related discussions

  5. Analysis • Sociocultural/Sociolinguistic perspective (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Halliday & Matthiessen, 2003) • Lexical chains and thematic mappings (Herbel-Eisenmann & Otten, 2011; Lemke, 1990)

  6. Analysis relation TERM TERM relation relation TERM TERM

  7. Preliminary Results

  8. Initial Discourse about SMP6 • Precision as appropriate rounding within a problem context • Emilee: Knowing when to round versus when to truncate. Like, if you need 8.24 gallons of paint, what’s an acceptable answer for that? Nine’s a great answer but what about 8 gallons and one quart? And that could get into the discussion. • Teachers provided other examples • $13.647 • 3 and a half people • Negative kittens

  9. Initial Discourse about SMP6 • Precision as correct use of vocabulary / mathematical language Unofficial Vocabulary Official Vocabulary Examples Examples factoring by grouping MARF coordinate plane xy-plane SYNONYMS x-intercepts zeros roots

  10. Initial Discourse about SMP6 • Precision as correct use of the equal sign (=) 2x – 5 = 13 2x = 18 = x = 9 2x + 5 7 2(8) = 16 + 5 = 21 ÷ 7 = 3

  11. Later Discourse about SMP6 • Vocabulary comes up again with regard to precise communication, but it is connected to precision in reasoning. • E.g., carefully formulated argument • Precision with symbols are discussed with regard to possible misinterpretations. • E.g., 2a in the denominator of the quadratic formula • Using parentheses to clarify expressions

  12. Later Discourse about SMP6 • With regard to number/estimation, precision as an awareness of exactness vs. inexactness • E.g., 1/3 vs. 0.33 • “If you round in step one, and then you round in step two, and round in step three, each time you’ve gotten further and further and further…” • Dilemma about how to push students toward precision without turning them off. Which students should be pushed and when?

  13. Discussion • Initial talk focused on student errors and a desire for more correctness (as opposed to precision, per se). • The distinction between precision and correctness may be important to make explicit as we support teachers in enacting SMP6. • Initial talk did involve both rounding/measurement and language, but these became more nuanced and comprehensive in later discussions. • Discussions of classroom examples where SMP6 occurred seemed helpful in promoting new ideas in the teacher’s discourse.

  14. Acknowledgments • Thank you for coming • Funding provided by the University of Missouri System Research Board and the MU Research Council • We appreciate the participation of the teachers and students who made this study possible www.MathEdPodcast.com

  15. References Halliday, M., & Matthiessen, C. M. (2003). An introduction to functional grammar. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Herbel-Eisenmann, B. A., & Otten, S. (2011). Mapping mathematics in classroom discourse. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 42, 451-485. Koestler, C., Felton, M. D., Bieda, K. N., & Otten, S. (2013). Connecting the NCTM Process Standards and the CCSSM Practices. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood, NJ: Greenwood Publishing. National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common Core State Standards for Mathematics. Washington, DC: Author.

More Related