Sustaining and Scaling Up Research-Based Professional Learning for Mathematics Teachers
Keywords:
mathematics teacher professional development, sustainability, scaling upAbstract
Education research journals regularly report on small-scale studies that have been successful in changing mathematics teachers’ classroom practices. But it is rare to find large-scale transfer of research knowledge into practice in mathematics education. This article reports on a research-informed, large-scale professional development project initiated by a state education system in Australia that now involves a large number of schools and teachers. The project developed a cluster model for bringing together primary and secondary school teachers to build their curriculum knowledge, confidence, and enthusiasm for teaching mathematics. The study aimed to identify factors that contribute to the sustainability and scaling up of this initiative. Drawing mainly on interviews with 61 participants – teachers, school curriculum leaders, principals, and regional education leaders – we identified factors related to professional development content, collective action, and leadership at the school and regional levels. The findings contribute to the literature on mathematics education reform and identify implications for supporting teachers and schools in this enterprise.
References
Adler, J., Ball, D., Krainer, K., Lin, F.-L., & Novotna, J. (2005). Reflections on an emerging field: Researching mathematics teacher education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 60, 359-381.
Anthony, G., Cooke, A., & Muir, T. (2016). Challenges, reforms, and learning in initial teacher education. In K. Makar, S. Dole, J. Visnovska, M. Goos, A. Bennison, & K. Fry (Eds.), Research in mathematics education in Australasia 2012-2015 (p. 305-327). Singapore: Springer Science+Business Media.
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (2016). National assessment program – How to interpret. Retrieved 15 September 2017 from https://www.nap.edu.au/results-and-reports/how-to-interpret
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (n.d.a). Australian curriculum. Retrieved 15 September 2017 from https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (n.d.b). Australian curriculum: Mathematics. Retrieved 15 September 2017 from https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10-curriculum/mathematics/
Barton, G., Garvis, S., & Ryan, M. (2014). Curriculum to the classroom: Investigating the spatial practices of curriculum implementation in Queensland schools and its implications for teacher education. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 39(3). http://dx.doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2014v39n3.9
Begg, A., Davis, B, & Bramald, R. (2003). Obstacles to the dissemination of mathematics education research. In A. J. Bishop, M. A. Clements, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick, & F. K. S. Leung (Eds.), Second international handbook of mathematics education (pp. 593-634). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Beswick, K., Anderson, J., & Hurst, C. (2016). The education and development of practising teachers. In K. Makar, S. Dole, J. Visnovska, M. Goos, A. Bennison, & K. Fry (Eds.), Research in mathematics education in Australasia 2012-2015 (p. 329-352). Singapore: Springer Science+Business Media.
Boaler, J. (2008). Bridging the gap between research and practice: International examples of success. In. M. Menghini, F. Furinghetti, L. Giarcardi, & F. Arzarello (Eds.), The first century of the International Commission on Mathematical Instruction (1908-2008): Reflecting and shaping the world of mathematics education (pp. 91-106). Roma: Instituto della Enciclopedia Italiana foundata da Giovanni Treccani.
Coburn, C. (2003). Rethinking scale: Moving beyond numbers to deep and lasting change. Educational Researcher, 32(6), 3-12.
Cobb, P., & Jackson, K. (2011). Towards an empirically grounded theory of action for improving the quality of mathematics teaching at scale. Mathematics Teacher Education and Development, 13(1), 6-33.
Cobb, P., McClain, K., Lamberg, T., & Dean, C. (2003). Situating teachers’ instructional practices in the institutional setting at the school and district. Educational Researcher, 32(6), 13-24.
Dweck, C. (2000). Self theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.
Garet, M., Porter, A., Desimone, L., Birman, B., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915-945.
Goos, M. (in press). The mathematics learning area: Conforming, reforming or transforming? In A. Reid & D. Price (Eds.), The Australian curriculum: Promises, problems and possibilities. Canberra: Australian Curriculum Studies Association.
Higgins, J., & Bonne, L. (2011). The challenge of sustaining and scaling up teacher professional learning and development in mathematics. Mathematics Teacher Education and Development, 13(1), 1-5.
Jackson, K., Cobb, P., Wilson, J., Webster, M., Dunlap, C., & Appelgate, M. (2015). Investigating the development of mathematics leaders’ capacity to support teachers’ learning on a large scale. ZDM Mathematics Education, 47, 93-104.
Klenowski, V., & V., & Wyatt-Smith, C. (2012). The impact of high stakes testing: The Australian story. Assessment in Education, 19(1), 65-79.
Loucks-Horsley, S., Love, N., Stiles, K., Mundry, S., & Hewson, P. (2003). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics. (2nd ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Masters, G. (2016). Reversing the PISA decline: National challenge requires national response. Retrieved 6 September 2017 from https://rd.acer.edu.au/article/reversing-the-PISA-decline
Mewborn, D. (2003). Teaching, teachers’ knowledge, and their professional development. In J. Kilpatrick, W. G. Martin, & D. Schifter (Eds.), A research companion to principles and standards for school mathematics (pp. 45-52). Reston, VA: NCTM.
Proffitt-White, R. (2017). Putting teachers first. Leading change through design – initiating and sustaining effective teaching of mathematics. Australian Mathematics Teacher, 73(1), 14-22.
Roesken-Winter, B., Hoyles, C., & Blömeke, S. (2015). Evidence-based CPD: Scaling up sustainable interventions. ZDM Mathematics Education, 47(1), 1-12.
Smith, M.S., & Stein, M.K. (2011). Five practices for orchestrating productive mathematical discussions. Reston, VA: NCTM.
Sullivan, P. (2011). Teaching mathematics: Using research informed strategies. Camberwell, VIC: ACER Press.
Sullivan, P., Clarke, D.M., & Clarke, B. (2013). Teaching with tasks for effective mathematics learning. New York: Springer
Thompson, G., & Cook, I., (2014). Manipulating the data: Teaching and NAPLAN in the control society. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 35(1), 129-142.
Tirosh, D., Tsamir, P., & Levenson, E. (2015). Fundamental issues concerning the sustainment and scaling up of professional development programs. ZDM Mathematics Education, 47, 153-159.
Wilson, S. M., & Berne, J. (1999). Teacher learning and the acquisition of professional knowledge: An examination of research on contemporary professional development. Review of Research in Education, 24(1), 173–209.
