Reconceptualizing the Mathematical Preparation of Secondary School Mathematics Teachers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this research note, we offer theoretical reflections underlying a current ongoing research program on the mathematical education of secondary school mathematics teachers, illustrating thereby its directions and innovative character. The Context and its IssuesCurrently in Canada, as well as in other countries, secondary teachers are commonly required to take a significant number of academic courses at the university level in their subject specialization, for example, mathematics, in order to teach at the secondary school level.One issue that has received recent attention in the mathematics education literature concerns the divide between the mathematical experiences teachers encounter in these courses and the practice of teaching mathematics in schools.In effect, mathematical content knowledge, as a fundamental component in most mathematics teacher education programs, is usually identified with formal academic mathematics (which often are courses offered for future mathematicians).Although these courses may be important for future mathematicians, research studies are currently questioning whether these courses are of value to mathematics teachers.By identifying teachers' mathematical content knowledge with academic mathematics, the subject matter preparation for mathematics schoolteachers is often conceived as a self-contained process, implicitly promoting values, approaches, concepts, and ways of thinking appropriate to academic mathematics, but not necessarily appropriate to the practice of teaching mathematics in schools.This orientation has significant implications for the constitution of schoolteachers' professional ways of knowing and practicing mathematics.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".