Researching Pedagogy and Practice with Canadian Mathematics Teachers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The past two decades have seen an increased interest in education, especially in core areas such as mathematics, language and science. This is in part a consequence of the increase in the number of international comparisons of educational outcomes, such as PISA and TIMSS. Much research has focused on the contributions that curricula, financial resources, parental support, and so on, might have on educational outcomes. A factor that seems likely to have a very significant effect on student achievement, teachers’ practices and beliefs, has received little attention.This book reports results from a research program that sought to develop and employ research methods to compare teachers’ practices and beliefs across Canada. It provides insight into the challenge of such research, and describes teachers’ contexts, beliefs and practices, and how they differ, in four regions and across two languages.Using a multivocal ethnography approach (Tobin, 1999) teachers were involved in the preparation and discussion of videos of their own teaching and that of others. This approach resulted in not only insights into the teachers’ pedagogies and practices, but also opportunities for the teachers to reflect on their own teaching in new ways, and for researchers to reflect on research practices and orientations.The work is innovative in several ways. In a field crowded with research on teachers’ practices, beliefs and knowledge this research helps to unearth the implicit values that underlie the way teachers see teaching itself. Through the process of observation of each other’s practice, the teachers became aware of their own pedagogies, giving them new insights into their values and practices. Researchers also engaged in a parallel process of reflection on their own practices as observers of teachers, with similar insights into the values guiding their work.This book will be of interest to government policy makers, teachers and teacher educators, as well as researchers in Mathematics Education. Members of the AERA SIG in Research in Mathematics Education, the Canadian Mathematics Education Study Group, the NCTM, and provincial Mathematics teacher associations are potential readers.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.043 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".