Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This study explores the dimensionality of mathematical knowledge needed by elementary school teachers. Specifically, we focus on the construct of Mathematical Knowledge for Teaching to investigate whether common mathematical content knowledge (the generic mathematical knowledge that is held by an educated adult), specialized content knowledge (the content knowledge that is unique to teaching), and pedagogical content knowledge (knowledge of the content, students, and teaching) can be distinguished empirically. Findings from a secondary analysis of data collected from upper elementary teachers in the Measures of Effective Teaching project (N = 397) suggest the most parsimonious explanation of Mathematical Knowledge for Teaching construct is that it is unidimensional. We argue, based on the findings and limitations we identified, that researchers should reconsider both the structure of the components that make up the content knowledge for teaching and the effects of item design on the dimensionality of the construct.

Keywords

mathematics teacher education teacher knowledge quantitative research

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abt Associates. (2010, October). Mathematics and science partnerships: Summary of performance period: 2008 annual reports. Retrieved from http://www.ed-msp.net/public_documents/document/annual/MSP%20PP08%20Annual%20Final%20Report.doc

Abt Associates. (2013, November). Mathematics and science partnerships: Summary of performance period: 2011 annual reports. Retrieved from http://www.ed-msp.net/images/public_documents/document/annual/MSP%20PP11%20Annual%20Final%20Report.pdf

Ball

D. L.

Hill

H. C.

(2008). Mathematical Knowledge for Teaching (MKT) measures: Mathematics released items 2008. Retrieved from http://lmt.mspnet.org/media/data/MKT_Released_items_2008.pdf?media_000000005770.pdf

Ball

D. L.

Thames

M. H.

Phelps

(2008). Content knowledge for teaching what makes it special? Journal of Teacher Education, 59(5), 389-407.

Blömeke

Busse

Kaiser

König

Suhl

(2016). The relation between content-specific and general teacher knowledge and skills. Teaching and Teacher Education, 56, 35-46.

Borko

Eisenhart

Brown

C. A.

Underhill

R. G.

Jones

Agard

P. C.

(1992). Learning to teach hard mathematics: Do novice teachers and their instructors give up too easily? Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 23(3), 194-222.

Campbell

P. F.

Nishio

Smith

T. M.

Clark

L. M.

Conant

D. L.

Rust

A. H.

Choi

(2014). The relationship between teachers’ mathematical content and pedagogical knowledge, teachers’ perceptions, and student achievement. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 45(4), 419-459.

Flora

D. B.

Curran

P. J.

(2004). An empirical evaluation of alternative methods of estimation for confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data. Psychological Methods, 9, 466-491.

Gitomer

Phelps

Weren

Howell

Croft

A. J.

(2014). Evidence on the validity of content knowledge for teaching assessments. In Kane

Kerr

Pianta

(Eds.), Designing teacher evaluation systems: New guidance from the Measures of Effective Teaching project (pp. 494-528). New York, NY: John Wiley.

10.

Grossman

(2008). Responding to our critics: From crisis to opportunity in research on teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 59(1), 10-23. doi:10.1177/0022487107310748

11.

Hill

H. C.

(2010). The nature and predictors of elementary teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 41, 513-545.

12.

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.

13.

Hill

H. C.

Dean

Goffney

I. M.

(2007). Assessing elemental and structural validity: Data from teachers, non-teachers, and mathematicians. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 5(2-3), 81-92.

14.

Hill

H. C.

Rowan

Ball

D. L.

(2005). Effects of teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 42(2), 371-406.

15.

Hill

H. C.

Schilling

S. G.

Ball

D. L.

(2004). Developing measures of teachers’ mathematics knowledge for teaching. The Elementary School Journal, 105(1), 11-30.

16.

Howell

Phelps

Croft

A. J.

Kirui

Gitomer

(2013). Cognitive interviews as a tool for investigating the validity of content knowledge for teaching assessments. ETS Research Report Series, 2013(1), i-97.

17.

L. T.

Bentler

P. M.

(1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55.

18.

Imig

Wiseman

Imig

(2011). Teacher education in the United States of America, 2011. Journal of Education for Teaching, 37(4), 399-408.

19.

Kersting

N. B.

Givvin

K. B.

Sotelo

F. L.

Stigler

J. W.

(2010). Teachers’ analyses of classroom video predict student learning of mathematics: Further explorations of a novel measure of teacher knowledge. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(1-2), 172-181.

20.

Kersting

N. B.

Givvin

K. B.

Thompson

B. J.

Santagata

Stigler

J. W.

(2012). Measuring usable knowledge: Teachers’ analyses of mathematics classroom videos predict teaching quality and student learning. American Educational Research Journal, 493(3), 568-589.

21.

Kilpatrick

Swafford

Findell

(Eds.). (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

22.

König

Blömeke

Paine

Schmidt

W. H.

Hsieh

F. J.

(2011). General pedagogical knowledge of future middle school teachers: On the complex ecology of teacher education in the United States, Germany, and Taiwan. Journal of Teacher Education, 62(2), 188-201.

23.

Krauss

Brunner

Kunter

Baumert

Blum

Neubrand

Jordan

(2008). Pedagogical content knowledge and content knowledge of secondary mathematics teachers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(3), 716-725.

24.

(1999). Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics: Teachers’ understanding of fundamental mathematics in China and the United States. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

25.

McCrory

Floden

Ferrini-Mundy

Reckase

M. D.

Senk

S. L.

(2012). Knowledge of algebra for teaching: A framework of knowledge and practices. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 43(5), 584-615. doi:10.5951/jresematheduc.43.5.0584

26.

Minner

Martinez

Freeman

(2013, May). Compendium of research instruments for STEM education. Part 1: Teacher practices, PCK, and content knowledge (with addendum). Cambridge, MA: ABT Associates.

27.

Muthen

L. K.

Muthen

B. O.

(2012). Mplus user’s guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Author.

28.

Ottmar

E. R.

Rimm-Kaufman

S. E.

Larsen

R. A.

Berry

R. Q.

(2015). Mathematical knowledge for teaching, standards-based mathematics teaching practices, and student achievement in the context of the responsive classroom approach. American Educational Research Journal, 52(4), 787-821.

29.

Phelps

Weren

Croft

Gitomer

(2014). Developing content knowledge for teaching assessments for the Measures of Effective Teaching study. ETS Research Report Series, 2014(2), 1-92.

30.

Putnam

R. T.

Heaton

R. M.

Prawat

R. S.

Remillard

(1992). Teaching mathematics for understanding: Discussing case studies of four fifth-grade teachers. Elementary School Journal, 93, 213-228.

31.

Rockoff

J. E.

Jacob

B. A.

Kane

T. J.

Staiger

D. O.

(2011). Can you recognize an effective teacher when you recruit one? Education Finance and Policy, 6(1), 43-74.

32.

Rowland

Huckstep

Thwaites

(2005). Elementary teachers’ mathematics subject knowledge: The knowledge quartet and the case of Naomi. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 8(3), 255-281.

33.

Schilling

S. G.

(2007). The role of psychometric modeling in test validation: An application of multidimensional item response theory. Measurement, 5(2-3), 93-106.

34.

Shulman

L. S.

(1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.

35.

Shulman

L. S.

(1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-23.

36.

Silverman

Thompson

(2008). Toward a framework for the development of mathematical knowledge for teaching. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 11, 499-511.

37.

Tatto

M. T.

Schwille

Senk

Ingvarson

Peck

Rowley

(2008). Teacher Education and Development Study in Mathematics (TEDS-M): Policy, practice, and readiness to teach primary and secondary mathematics. Conceptual framework. East Lansing: Teacher Education and Development International Study Center, College of Education, Michigan State University. Retrieved from https://msu.edu/user/mttatto/documents/TEDS_FrameworkFinal.pdf

An Empirical Study of the Dimensionality of the Mathematical Knowledge for Teaching Construct

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References