9/2023 vol. 19
Stats
CC-BY 4.0
Get citation
RESEARCH PAPER
Pre-service teachers develop their mathematical knowledge for teaching using manipulative materials in mathematics
Alberto Arnal-Bailera 1
,
 
Mónica Arnal-Palacián 1
 
 
 
More details
Hide details
1
University of Zaragoza, Zaragoza, SPAIN
 
 
Online publication date: 2023-07-09
 
 
Publication date: 2023-09-01
 
 
EURASIA J. Math., Sci Tech. Ed 2023;19(9):em2318
DOI: https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13470
 
 
Article (PDF)
References (45)
 
KEYWORDS
pre-service teachers
manipulative materials
arithmetic properties
MKT
 
ABSTRACT
This manuscript aims to describe aspects of mathematical knowledge for teaching, MKT, identified in pre-service teachers (PSTs) when explaining an arithmetic property using manipulative materials. In particular, we are interested in the specialized mathematical knowledge, SCK, the pedagogical knowledge related to teaching, KCT, and the knowledge of content and curriculum, KCC. We proposed to record a video to a sample of 27 primary education students enrolled in their first mathematics education course. They had to explain an arithmetic property of natural numbers using manipulative materials. PSTs do not create contexts by the mere presence of manipulative material, but only rely on it for visual purposes; the meaning of these values are modified during the explanation. Evidence has been found of difficulties relating to the SCK such as the inadequate varying of the meanings given to the manipulative material, and to the KCC such as the selecting of an unsuitable material.
 
REFERENCES (45)
1.
Balacheff, N. (1988). Aspects of proof in pupils’ practice of school mathematics. In D. Pimm (Ed.), Mathematics, teachers and children (pp. 216-235). Hodder & Stoughton.
Google Scholar
 
 
2.
Ball, D. L., Thames, M. H., & Phelps, G. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special? Journal of Teacher Education, 59(5), 389-407. https://doi.org/10.1177/002248....
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
3.
Baroody, A. J. (1989). Manipulatives don’t come with guarantees. The Arithmetic Teacher, 37(2), 4-5. https://doi.org/10.5951/AT.37.....
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
4.
Bartolini, M. G., & Martignone, F. (2020). Manipulatives in mathematics education. In S. Lerman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of mathematics education. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-....
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
5.
Boggan, M., Harper, S., & Whitmire, A. (2010). Using manipulatives to teach elementary mathematics. Journal of Instructional Pedagogies, 3(1), 1-10.
Google Scholar
 
 
6.
Borasi, R. (1986). On the nature of problems. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 17(2), 125-141. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF0031....
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
7.
Butterfield, B., & Chinnappan, M. (2011). Teacher knowledge activated in the context of designing problems. Faculty of Social Sciences-Papers, 1356. https://ro.uow.edu.au/sspapers....
Google Scholar
 
 
8.
Cañadas, M. C., Molina, M., & del Río, A. (2018). Meanings given to algebraic symbolism in problem-posing. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 98, 19-37. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649....
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
9.
Carmenates, O. A., Gamboa, M. E., & Amat, M. (2005). The search for relations: A way to solve mathematical problems in primary education. In Proceedings of the 5th International Virtual Congress of Education.
Google Scholar
 
 
10.
Carpenter, T. P., Franke, M. L., & Levi, L. (2003). Thinking mathematically: Integrating arithmetic and algebra in elementary school. Heinemann.
Google Scholar
 
 
11.
Carrillo, J. (1998) Problem solving in secondary education: Exemplifying the what for. Epsilon, 40, 15-26.
Google Scholar
 
 
12.
Castro, E., & Molina, M. (2007). Development of relational thinking through work with numerical equalities in basic arithmetic. Educación Matemática [Mathematics Education], 19(2), 67-94. https://doi.org/10.24844/EM.
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
13.
Chapin, S. H., Gibbons, L. K., Feldman, Z., Callis, L. K., & Salinas, A. (2021). The elementary mathematics project: Supporting preservice teachers’ content knowledge for teaching mathematics. In Developing mathematical proficiency for elementary instruction (pp. 89-113). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-....
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
14.
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. https://doi.org/10.1080/002202....
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
15.
Ding, M., Li, X., & Capraro, M. M. (2013). Preservice elementary teachers’ knowledge for teaching the associative property of multiplication: A preliminary analysis. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 32(1), 36-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmat....
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
16.
Elliot, R. & Timulak, L. (2005). Descriptive and interpretive approaches to qualitative research. In J. Miles, & P. Gilbert (Eds.), A handbook of research methods for clinical and health psychology (pp. 147-159). Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar
 
 
17.
Fernández, C., & Ivars, P. (2016). Relational thinking in primary school: The role of the teacher. UNO, 73, 14-22.
Google Scholar
 
 
18.
Fischbein, E., Deri, M., Nello, M. S., & Marino, M. S. (1985). The role of implicit models in solving verbal problems in multiplication and division. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 16(1), 3-17. https://doi.org/10.2307/748969.
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
19.
Fuentes, M., & Olmos, P. (2019). The understanding of the inverse relationship in division at early ages. REDIMAT, 8(3), 267-292. https://doi.org/10.17583/redim....
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
20.
Godino, J. D., Batanero, C., & Font, V. (2003). Fundamentals of teaching and learning mathematics for teachers. University of Granada.
Google Scholar
 
 
21.
Graciano-Barragan, J., & Aké, L. (2021). Knowledge of prospective mathematics teachers on remarkable products. Uniciencia [Uniscience], 35(1), 90-107. https://doi.org/10.15359/ru.35....
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
22.
Green, M., Piel, J.A., & Flowers, C. (2008). Reversing education majors’ arithmetic misconceptions with short-term instruction using manipulatives, The Journal of Educational Research, 101(4), 234-242. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOER.1....
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
23.
Hiebert, J. (1997). Making sense: Teaching and learning mathematics with understanding. Heinemann.
Google Scholar
 
 
24.
Hill, H. C., Ball, D. L., & Schilling, S. G. (2008). Unpacking pedagogical content knowledge: Conceptualizing and measuring teachers’ topic-specific knowledge of students. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 39(4), 372-400. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresem....
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
25.
Hodgen, J., Foster, C., Marks, R., & Brown, M. (2018). Evidence for review of mathematics teaching: Improving mathematics in key stages two and three. Education Endowment Foundation.
Google Scholar
 
 
26.
Ibañez, M., & Ortega, T. (2001). A study of test schemas in first-year baccalaureate students. UNO, 28, 39-60.
Google Scholar
 
 
27.
Lacasa, J. M., & Rodríguez, J. C. (2013). Diversity of centers, mathematical knowledge and attitudes towards mathematics teaching of prospective teachers in Spain. IEA.
Google Scholar
 
 
28.
Lee, K. (2016). Students’ proof schemes for mathematical proving and disproving of propositions. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 41, 26-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmat....
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
29.
Llinares, S., & Sánchez, M. (1988). Fracciones [Fractions]. Síntesis.
Google Scholar
 
 
30.
Maboya, M. J. (2014). The relationship between teachers’ mathematical knowledge and their classroom practices: a case study on the role of manipulatives in South African primary schools [Doctoral dissertation, University of the Free State].
Google Scholar
 
 
31.
Molina, M., Castro, E., & Ambrose, R. (2006). Working with numerical equalities to promote relational thinking. Revista de Investigación en Didáctica de la Matemática [Journal of Research in Didactics of Mathematics], 1(1), 33-46. https://doi.org/10.30827/pna.v....
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
32.
Montes, M. Á., Contreras, L. C., Liñán, M. C., Muñoz-Catalán, M. C., Climent, N., & Carrillo, J. (2015). Arithmetic knowledge of prospective teachers. Weaknesses and strengths. Journal of Education, 367, 36-62. https://doi.org/10.4438/1988-5....
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
33.
Moyer, P. S. (2001). Are we having fun yet? How teachers use manipulatives to teach mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 47(2), 175-197. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014....
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
34.
NCTM (2003). Principles and standards for mathematics education. Sociedad Andaluza de Educación Matemática Thales [Sociedad Andaluza de Educación Matemática Thales].
Google Scholar
 
 
35.
Pham, S. (2015). Teachers’ perceptions on the use of math manipulatives in elementary classrooms. University of Toronto. http://hdl.handle.net/1807/687....
Google Scholar
 
 
36.
Planas, N. Arnal-Bailera, A., & García-Honrado, I. (2018). The teacher’s mathematical discourse: How is it produced in class and how can it be investigated? Science Education, 36(1), 45-60. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/en....
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
37.
Popper, K. R. (1997). The body and the mind. Paidos Iberica.
Google Scholar
 
 
38.
Rowland, T. (2008). The purpose, design and use of examples in the teaching of elementary mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 69(2), 149-163. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649....
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
39.
Rowland, T., Huckstep, P., & Thwaites, A. (2003). The knowledge quartet. Proceedings of the British Society for Research into Learning Mathematics, 23(3), 97-102.
Google Scholar
 
 
40.
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14. https://doi.org/10.3102/001318....
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
41.
Simon, M. A. (1993). Prospective elementary teachers’ knowledge of division. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 24(3), 233-253. https://doi.org/10.2307/749346.
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
42.
Skemp, R. R. (1987). The psychology of learning mathematics. Erlbaum.
Google Scholar
 
 
43.
Suzuka, K., Sleep, L., Ball, D.L., Bass, H., Lewis, J., & Thames, M. (2009). Designing and using tasks to teach mathematical knowledge for teaching. In D. S. Mewborn, & H. S. Lee (Eds.), Scholarly practices and inquiry in the preparation of mathematics teachers (pp. 7-24). AMTE.
Google Scholar
 
 
44.
Verschaffel, L., Schukajlow, S., Star, J., & Van Dooren, W. (2020). Word problems in mathematics education: A survey. ZDM Mathematics Education, 52, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858....
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
45.
Zodik, I., & Zaslavsky, O. (2008). Characteristics of teachers’ choice of examples in and for the mathematics classroom. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 69(2), 165-182. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649....
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
Share
Send by email
RELATED ARTICLE
Pre-service teachers’ perceptions about the contributions of field work and construction of a physical model to modelling aquifers
DECODE-based STEM workshop in improving academic resilience and teaching competency of pre-service teachers
School Scientific Argumentation Enriched by Digital Technologies: Results With Pre- and in-Service Science Teachers
Preparing Pre-Service Teachers for Mathematics Teaching at Primary Schools in Vietnam
Pre-service Science Teachers’ Pedagogical Content Knowledge Integration of Students’ Understanding in Science and Instructional Strategies
Indexes
 
Keywords index
Topics index
Authors index
eISSN:1305-8223
ISSN:1305-8215
Journals System - logo
© 2006-2024 Journal hosting platform by Bentus
Scroll to top