Skip to main content
Log in

Quality mathematics teaching: Describing some key components

  • Article
  • Published:
Mathematics Education Research Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Survey responses of 125 teacher educators and experienced teachers to fixed-format and open-response items on aspects of mathematics teaching are presented. A qualitative analysis of responses revealed six major categories. These were Communicating, Problem Solving, Building Understanding, Engaging, Nurturing and Organising for Learning. Within each of these categories, the frequency of use of particular phrases and descriptors indicate general beliefs about the important characteristics of quality mathematics teaching. There was a great diversity in the language used to describe particular components. A model is proposed which suggests a way in which the categories are linked.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Australian Education Council (1991).A National statement on mathematics for Australian schools. Melbourne: Curriculum Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Behr, M. J., Lesh, R., Post, T., & Silver, E. A. (1983). Rational number concepts. In R. Lesh and M. Landau (Eds.),Acquisition of mathematical concepts and processes (pp. 92–126). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byers, V., & Herscovics, N. (1977) Understanding school mathematics.Mathematics Teaching, 81, 24–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, D., Stephens, W. M., & Waywood, A. (1992). Communication and the learning of mathematics. In T. A. Romberg (Ed.),Mathematics assessment and evaluation: Imperatives for mathematics educators. Albany, NY: The State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cockcroft, W. H. (Chairman) (1982).Mathematics counts. London: Her Majesty’s Stationary Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christiansen, B., & Walther, G. (1986). Task and activity. In B. Christiansen, A. G. Howsen & M. Otte (Eds.),Perspectives on mathematics education (pp. 243–307). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Reidel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham, G. S., Scott-Bower, W., & McGhee, P. (1984). Developing observational skills in early field experiences.Teacher Educator, 19(3), 2–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, E. J. (1978). A model for understanding in mathematics.Arithmetic Teacher, 26(1), 13–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellerton, N., & Clements, M. A. (1990). Language factors in mathematics learning: A review. In K. Milton & H. McCann (Eds.),Mathematical turning points: Strategies for the 1990’s (pp. 230–260). Hobart: Australian Association of Mathematics Teachers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gergen, K. J. (1985). The social constructionist movement in modern psychology.American Psychologist, 40(3), 266–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Good, T. L., Grouws, D., &Ebmeier, H. (1983).Active mathematics teaching. New York: Longmans.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lerman, S. (1989). Constructivism, mathematics, and mathematics education.Educational Studies in Mathematics, 20, 211–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McIntosh, A. (1977). When will they ever learn?Forum, 19(3), 92–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mousley, J., & Clements, M. A. (1990). The culture of mathematics classrooms. In M. A. Clements (Ed.),Whither mathematics? (pp. 397–406). Melbourne: Mathematical Association of Victoria.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mousley, J., Sullivan, P., & Clements, M. A. (1991, July).The perceptions which student teachers have of teaching practices in classrooms observed during field experience. Paper presented at the Bi-ennial Conference of the Mathematics Education Lecturers’ Association, Perth.

  • Mousley, J., & Sullivan, P. (1992).Quality mathematics teaching: Consensus and contradiction. Proceedings of the Australian Association for Research in Education Conference, Deakin University (Published on computer disk). Melbourne: ACER.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mousley, J., Sullivan, P., & Waywood, A. (1993). NUDIST: A qualitative research tool or a mirror of our own pedagogical theories. In W. Atweh, C. Kanes, M. Carss, G. Booker (Eds.),Contexts in mathematics education (pp. 415–423). Brisbane: Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polya, G. (1957).How to solve it. New York: Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richards, T., & Richards, L. (1990).Manual for mainframe NUDIST: A software system for qualitative data base analysis on time-sharing computers. Melbourne: Replee.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skemp, R. (1976). Relational understanding and instrumental understanding.Mathematics Teaching, 77, 20–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Glasersfeld, E. (1983). Learning as a constructivist activity. In J. C. Bergeron & N. Herscovics (Eds.),Proceedings of the fifth Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 41–69) Montreal: PME.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Glasersfeld, E. (1992). A constructivist approach to experiential foundations of mathematical concepts. In S. Hills (Ed.),The history and philosophy of science in science education: Proceedings of the second international conference of the History and Philosophy of Science in Science Teaching (Vol. 2, pp. 553–571). Kingston, Ontario: Queen’s University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheatley, G. H. (1991). Constructivist perspectives on science and mathematics learning.Science Education, 75(1), 9–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woolever, R. (1983). Observing student teachers for a hierarchy of generic teaching skills. ERIC document, SP 023 457.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sullivan, P., Mousley, J. Quality mathematics teaching: Describing some key components. Math Ed Res J 6, 4–22 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217259

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217259

Keywords

Navigation