PROFESSIONAL TEACHER KNOWLEDGE DIAGNOSIS OF COMPETENCIES

Bettina Rsken University of Duisburg-Essen, University of Helsinki OVERVIEW In the last year I have been studying the topic of y dissertation fro different perspectives as there are the follo!ing ones involved" teacher kno!ledge and its diverse accounts, teacher beliefs about athe atics and its teaching and learning, teacher change !ith regard to their beliefs as !ell as teacher co petencies and their diagnosis# $ro the beginning of septe ber %&&' I !ill supervise a pro(ect provided by a )er an foundation called *Deutsche +eleko ,tiftung-# +his pro(ect is designed as an e.ternal intervention to i prove teachers/ professional develop ent and is ainly dealing !ith in-service teacher training# In the follo!ing I !ill give a brief overvie! of the afore entioned research areas and further a short description about y o!n research !ork in this regard follo!ed by infor ation about y research in progress# +he the e of y thesis is closely related to y previous !ork# +he ain focus is on teacher kno!ledge, teacher co petencies and the design and i ple entation of in-service teacher training courses !hich are acco panied by an evaluation concerning the develop ent of co petencies# TEACHER KNOWLEDGE 0uch of the research over the past t!o decades has e.a ined teachers/ kno!ledge and in particular its role in practice# In the literature, diverse accounts of teacher kno!ledge have been discussed 1,herin, ,herin 2 0adanes, %&&&3 ,choenfeld, in preparation3 4rainer 2 5linares, in preparation6# ,herin et al# 1%&&&6, for e.a ple, report about three specific research progra s related to the na es ,hul an, 5einhardt and ,choenfeld# $or ,hul an 1789:6, the *kno!ledge base- a teacher needs for effective teaching consists of seven separate categories# ;ell-kno!n is his distinction bet!een *sub(ect atter kno!ledge- and *pedagogical content kno!ledge-, the latter considered as sub(ect atter kno!ledge that is speciali<ed for teaching# 5einhardt and )reeno 178896 focus on kno!ledge for skilled teaching !hen distinguishing bet!een routines, agendas, and curriculu scripts# +he *+eaching-In=onte.t- fra e!ork of ,choenfeld 178896 characteri<es teachers/ spontaneous decision- aking in ter s of available kno!ledge, high priority goals and beliefs# =entral point !ithin this discussion has been the conclusion that *teachers do !hat they do because they do 1or do not6 possess certain kno!ledge- 1,herin et al#, %&&&, p#>?96 and further ore the @uestion !hat athe atical kno!ledge is needed for teaching !as posed 1Ball, %&&%3 0a, 78886# $enne a and $ranke 1788%6 refer to another type of kno!ledge na ely kno!ledge of athe atical representations, that is ho! athe atics can be represented in

instruction# +hey e.plicate that *the athe atics ust be translated for the Athe studentsB so that they can see the relationship bet!een their kno!ledge and the ne! kno!ledge that they are to learn- 1p# 7?>6# In y o!n research !ork I pri arily focussed on this last entioned aspect of teacher kno!ledge about students/ learning processes# In particular I dealt !ith the +allCDinner categori<ation of concept i ageCconcept definition 1Rsken, %&&E, %&&?b6, the role of visuali<ation in athe atics teaching and learning 1Rsken, Rolka, in print6 and the i plications of cognitive load theory 1,!eller, 788E6 for teaching athe atics 1Rsken, %&&?a6# TEACHER KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEFS In the literature beliefs have been described as a * essy construct- !ith different eanings and accentuations 1Fa(ares, 788%6 and indeed the ter belief has not yet been clearly defined 1$uringhetti 2 Fehkonen, %&&%6# Ho!ever, there is so e consensus that athe atical beliefs are considered as personal philosophies or conceptions about the nature of athe atics as !ell as about teaching and learning athe atics 1+ho pson, 788%6# $ollo!ing ,choenfeld 178896, beliefs can be interpreted as * ental constructs that represent the codification of people/s e.periences and understandings- 1p# 786# +he teacher/s beliefs about the athe atical content and the nature of athe atics as !ell as about its teaching and learning have an influence on !hat he or she does in the classroo , and !hat decisions he or she takes# ;e used the *+eaching-In-=onte.t- theory to analyse a )er an videotaped athe atics lesson !ith regard to the ter s kno!ledge and beliefs 1+rner, Rolka, Rsken 2 ,choenfeld, %&&?6# +he topic of the lesson !as introducing linear functions in grade 9# Besides the topic the teacher !as free to design the lesson !ithout any directives# Recently, the teacher attended an in-service teacher training course on open @uestions, thus she decided to use this approach# +he lesson started rather open and proble oriented# ,tudents !orked in s all groups of three or four using E.cel# Ho!ever, as the lesson developed and ti e see ed to run out, the teacher suddenly changed her teaching style in favor of a ore traditional approach# +hat is, she s!itched to a onologue on definitions in a for ali<ed structure# +hese observations have challenged the @uestion !hether this turn in the teaching tra(ectory could be understood rationally# +he analysis !as guided by ,choenfeld/s odel# +he lesson involved a typical decision- aking situation in !hich an a bitious lesson plan could not be fully reali<ed, partly for reasons of ti e constraints# ;hen it beca e apparent that the open-ended activities !ere not yielding the desired results, the teacher s!itched to a traditional teaching style trying to satisfy her belief that at least the ter slope should e entioned by the students# $inally, the lesson analysis e phasi<es once again the apparently do inant i pact of sub(ect structure in athe atics lessons as a safety net !alking a tight rope for *class situations developing as not planned- 1+rner, Rolka, Rsken 2 ;Gllner, in press6# TEACHER CHANGE +he afore entioned e.a ple of a )er an lesson sho!s that sub(ect-structured teaching scripts in ost cases are pri ary scripts teachers e.perience during their

education# Fsychology tells us that such initial e.periences re ain persistently in the e ory# +hus the teacher ay have fallen back on a !ell-practiced odel although that ay not have been the best choice# =hanging the beliefs of preservice teachers is a pro inent topic in athe atics education# ;ell-kno!n in this research is an approach by !hich preservice teachersH beliefs are challenged 1$ei an-Ie ser et al#, 789:6# Jnother pro inent ethod for evoking change in preservice teachers is by involving the as learners of athe atics 1and athe atics pedagogy6, usually sub ersed in a constructivist environ ent 1Ball, 78993 $ei an-Ie ser 2 $eatherstone, 788%6# J third ethod for producing changes in belief structures by providing preservice teachers e.periences !ith athe atical discovery because this has a profound, and i ediate, transfor ative effect on the beliefs regarding the nature of athe atics, as !ell as their beliefs regarding the teaching and learning of athe atics 15il(edahl, %&&?3 , ith, ;illia s, 2 , ith, %&&?6# Jll three of these approaches !ere co bined in the design and teaching of a athe atics ethods course designed !ith the i plicit goal to change the beliefs of a group of preservice ele entary teachers 15il(edahl, Rolka 2 Rsken, in print6# +he preservice teachers docu ented their evolving beliefs in reflective (ournals# +hese (ournal entries !ere analy<ed according to established categories describing athe atical beliefs# Results indicate that through their o!n e.periences !ith athe atics in a non-traditional setting a funda ental change in the participantsH beliefs about athe atics and the teaching and learning of athe atics evolved 1Rsken 2 Rolka, in print3 5il(edahl, Rolka 2 Rsken, in print3 5il(edahl, Rsken 2 Rolka, forthco ing6 RESEARCH IDEAS AND WORK IN PROGRESS +he topic of y thesis is closely related to y !ork !ithin the pro(ect called the *$eli.-4lein-5ehrerfortbildungsinitiative 0athe atik- granted by *Deutsche +eleko - $oundation in cooperation !ith the organisation *Deutsche 0athe atikerDereinigung 1D0D6-# +his pro(ect deals !ith the develop ent and i ple entation of in-service teacher training courses in )er any# $or the ne.t three years I !ill supervise this pro(ect and !ork on the design of the teacher in-service training courses as !ell as on the evaluation# +he basic concern is in offering kno!ledge about athe atics, kno!ledge about pedagogical issues and further in challenging teachers/ beliefs about athe atics and its teaching and learning# Besides, !e consider the participating teacher in an active role and !e therefore refer to the !ork of 4rainer 17888, %&&>, %&&?6 and his re arks to the i portance of reflection, net!orking and collaborations a ong teachers# In the run-up to the starting point of the pro(ect 1&7#&7#%&&:6 !e developed a @uestionnaire to get infor ation about the needs of teachers concerning in-service teacher training# In the @uestionnaire !e asked teachers about the for and the content of training courses and their sub(ective needs !ith regard to specific athe atical topics and related pedagogical issues# $urther, !e !ere interested in

their needs concerning collaborations and co unity building !ith other teachers# +he @uestionnaire !as co posed of ite s to the follo!ing topics" 7# )eneral re arks to in-service teacher training %# Krgani<ational issues ># ,ub(ect atter kno!ledge 1specific topics and related topics6 E# Fedagogical content kno!ledge and general pedagogical kno!ledge ?# 4no!ledge about action scripts +he evaluation of the pro(ect !ill concentrate on e.a ining teachers/ co petencies, !hereby these co petencies are vie!ed in close relation to their kno!ledge in the sense that the kno!ledge structure ay li it a teacher/s options# $or easuring this construct I refer to the !ork of $rey and Bal<er 1%&&?6 !ho developed an instru ent to e.a ine co petencies and professional standards in general# +he ain idea is to investigate co petencies by self esti ation, hence by asking the persons the selves# 0y ai is to adopt the @uestionnaire and to !ork out a odified version for aking it ore do ain specific# References
Ball, D# 178996# Unlearning to teach E&-E9# athe atics# For the Learning of Mathematics, 8176,

Ball, D# 5# 1%&&%6# 4no!ing athe atics for teaching" Relations bet!een research and practice# Mathematics and Education Reform Newsletter, 14, 1>6, 7-?# $enne a, Eli<abeth, 2 $ranke, 0egan 5# 1788%6# +eachersH kno!ledge and its i pact# In Douglas J# )rou!s 1Ed#6, Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning 1pp#7E:-7'E6# Ie! Lork" 0ac illan# $ei an-Ie ser, ,#, 2 $eatherston, H# 1788%6# +he student, the teacher, and the oon# In ,# $ei an-Ie ser 2 H# $eatherston 1Eds#6, E !loring teaching" Rein#enting an introductor$ course% Ie! Lork, IL" +eacher =ollege Fress# $ei an-Ie ser, ,#, 0cDiar id, )#, 0elnick, ,#, 2 Farker, 0# 1789:6# &hanging beginning teachers' conce!tions" ( descri!tion of an introductor$ teacher education course% Faper presented at J erican Educational Research Jssociation, ;ashington, D=# $rey, J# 2 Bal<er, 5# 1%&&?6# Der Beurteilungsbogen s k" Ein 0essverfahren fGr die Diagnose von so<ialen und ethodischen $Mhigkeitskon<epten# In J# $rey, R#,# NMger 2 U# Renold 1Ed#6 )om!eten*diagnostik + ,heorien und Methoden *ur Erfassung und -ewertung #on beruflichen )om!eten*en .-erufs!/dagogik, -and 01 5andau" Derlag E pirische FMdagogik# $uringhetti, $# 2 Fehkonen, E#" %&&%, /Rethinking =haracteri<ations of Belief,/ in# )# 5eder, E# Fehkonen 2 )# +rner 1eds#6, -eliefs" ( hidden #ariable in mathematics education2, pp# >8O?:# 4lu!er, Dordrecht, +he Ietherlands#

4rainer, 4# 178886# Fro oting reflection and net!orking as an intervention strategy in professional develop ent progra s for athe atics teachers and athe atics teacher educators# In" Paslavsky, K# 1Ed#6, Froceedings of the %>rd =onference of the International )roup for the Fsychology of 0athe atics Education# Haifa, Israel# 4rainer, 4# 1%&&>6# +ea s, co unities 2 net!orks# Editorial# 3ournal of Mathematics ,eacher Education, 4, 8>-7&?# 4rainer, 4# 1%&&?6# ;as guter 0athe atikunterricht ist, Gssen 5ehrende stMndig selber erarbeitenQ ,pannungsfelder als Krientierung <ur )estaltung von Unterricht# In I# ,ch!ank 2 N# ,(uts 1Hrsg#6, 0athe atikdidaktik i ;issenschaftsgefGge" 5um 6erstehen und 7nterrichten mathematischen 8enkens% $estschrift fGr El ar =ohors$resenborg# KsnabrGck" $orschungsinstitut fGr 0athe atikdidaktik# 5einhardt, )aea, 2 )reeno, Na es )# 1789'6# +he cognitive skill of teaching# 3ournal of Educational 9s$cholog$, :9, :?-8?# 5il(edahl, F#, Rolka, 4##, 2 Rsken, B# 1in press6# Jnaly<ing the changing beliefs of preservice ele entary school teachers# athe atical

5il(edahl, F#, Rolka, 4# 2 Rsken, B# 1in press6# Jffecting affect" the re-education of preservice teachersH beliefs about athe atics and athe atics teaching and learning 5il(edahl, F#, Rsken, B# 2 Rolka, 4# 1forthco ing6# =hallenging the of preservice ele entary school teachers athe atical beliefs

5il(edahl, F# 1%&&?6# JHJQ" +he effect and affect of athe atical discovery on undergraduate athe atics students# :nternational 3ournal of Mathematical Education in ;cience and ,echnolog$, >'1%->6, %78-%>'# 0a, 5iping# 178886# )nowing and teaching elementar$ mathematics # 0ah!ah, IN" 5a!rence Erlbau Jssociates# Fa(ares, 0#$# 1788%6# +eachers/ beliefs and educational research" =leaning up a construct# Re#iew of Educational Research, '% 1>6, >&: O >>%# Rsken, B#, 2 Rolka, 4# 1in press6# DerMnderung in 5erntagebGchern# essy

athe atischer Beliefs - Doku entation

Rsken, B# 2 Rolka, 4# 1in press6# J picture is !orth a 7&&& !ords - the role of visuali<ation in athe atics learning# Rsken, B# 1%&&?a6# Ele entare 4o binatorik unter kognitionspsychologische Hildeshei , Berlin" $ran<becker# $okus#

Rsken, B# 2 +rner, )# 1%&&?b6# ,o e =haracteristics of 0ental Representations of the Integral =oncept - Jn E pirical ,tudy to Reveal I ages and Definitions# Froceedings of the %8th =onference of the International )roup for the Fsychology of 0athe atics Education# 0elbourne, Justralia, Nuly 7& - 7?# Rsken, B# 1%&&E6# E pirische Erhebung <ur Jnalyse der entalen ReprMsentation von =oncept I gage und =oncept Definition# 1,taatsarbeit, not published6# Rolka, 4#, Rsken, B#, 2 5il(edahl, F# 1in press6# Docu enting changes in preservice ele entary school teachers beliefs" Jttending to different aspects#

+rner, )#, Rolka, 4#, Rsken, B#, 2 ;Gllner, ,# 1in press6# Kn the internal structure of goals and beliefs# +rner, )#, Rolka, 4#, Rsken, B#, 2 ,choenfeld, J# 1%&&'6# +eacher onologue as a safety net" E.a ining a )er an athe atics classroo situation through the lens of ,choenfeldHs theory of teaching in conte.t# Faper presented at J erican Educational Research Jssociation, ,an $rancisco# ,choenfeld, J# 1in press6# 0athe atics +eaching and 5earning# 1Handbook of Educational Fsychology6 ,choenfeld, J# H# 178896# +o!ard a theory of teaching-in-conte.t# :ssues in Education, 4176, 7-8E# ,herin, 0#)#, ,herin, B#5# 2 0adanes, R# 1%&&&6# E.ploring Diverse Jccounts of +eacher 4no!ledge# 3ournal of Mathematical -eha#ior, 79 1>6, >?:->:?# , ith, ,#, ;illia s, ,#, 2 , ith, 0# 1%&&?6# J process odel for change in ele entary athe atics teachers/ beliefs and practices# In )# 5loyd, 0# ;ilson, N# ;ilkins 2 ,# Beh 1Eds#6, Froceedings of the %:th annual eeting of the Iorth J erican =hapter of the International )roup for the Fsychology of 0athe atics Education# ,!eller, N 1788E6# =ognitive load theory, learning difficulty and instructional design# Learning and instruction, E, 1E6, %8?->7%# +ho pson, J#)# 1788%6# +eachers/ beliefs and conceptions" J synthesis of the research# In D#J# )rou!s 1Ed#6, Handbook of research on athe atics learning and teaching 1pp#7%: - 7E'6# Ie! Lork" 0ac illan#

4rainer, 4# 2 5linares, ,# 1in press6# 0athe atics 1student6 teachers and teachers educators as learners#