Discourse

This review synthesizes insights from 23 NSF-funded projects, totaling $40 million, that studied mathematical and scientific argumentation in STEM education from prekindergarten (PreK) to Grade 12. The projects reported on both studies of argumentation interventions and naturalistic observations in “business-as-usual” settings. The projects advanced substantive knowledge about how to support student argumentation.

This article describes one mathematics professional development program designed to support all K-5 students' engagement in productive mathematical discussions, in particular emergent multilingual learners.

Malzahn, K., Sztajn, P., & Heck, D. (October, 2019). Talk is the ticket to teaching math to English learners. The Learning Professional, 40(5).

In this paper, we analyze a PD design, examining its activities and the sequencing of professional learning tasks. We use a theoretical framework typically used in pre-service teacher education to understand the design of one PD program. Our overarching goal is to theorize about how to design PD and sequence professional learning tasks for practicing teachers.

In this chapter, we use the Framework for Teaching Practice (Grossman, et al., 2009) as a conceptual tool for analzying the design of professional development. Although initially developed to examine the education of prospective teachers, we contend that this framework is appropriate for analyzing and supporting the design of professional development. The framework consists of three elements: decompositions, representations, and approximations of practice.

Many mathematics teachers agree that engaging students in high quality discourse is important for their conceptual learning, but successfully promoting such discourse in elementary classrooms—with attention to the needs of every learner—can be a challenge. Activating Math Talk tackles this challenge by bringing practical, math-specific, productive discourse techniques that are applicable to any lesson or curriculum.

Teacher responses to student mathematical thinking (SMT) matter because the way in which teachers respond affects student learning. Although studies have provided important insights into the nature of teacher responses, little is known about the extent to which these responses take into account the potential of the instance of SMT to support learning. This study investigated teachers’ responses to a common set of instances of SMT with varied potential to support students’ mathematical learning, as well as the productivity of such responses.

Teacher responses to student mathematical thinking (SMT) matter because the way in which teachers respond affects student learning. Although studies have provided important insights into the nature of teacher responses, little is known about the extent to which these responses take into account the potential of the instance of SMT to support learning. This study investigated teachers’ responses to a common set of instances of SMT with varied potential to support students’ mathematical learning, as well as the productivity of such responses.

Teacher responses to student mathematical thinking (SMT) matter because the way in which teachers respond affects student learning. Although studies have provided important insights into the nature of teacher responses, little is known about the extent to which these responses take into account the potential of the instance of SMT to support learning. This study investigated teachers’ responses to a common set of instances of SMT with varied potential to support students’ mathematical learning, as well as the productivity of such responses.

Using student mathematical thinking during instruction is valued by the mathematics education community, yet practices surrounding such use remain difficult for teachers to enact well, particularly in the moment during whole-class instruction. Teachers’ orientations—their beliefs, values, and preferences—influence their actions, so one important aspect of understanding teachers’ use of student thinking as a resource is understanding their related orientations.

Using student mathematical thinking during instruction is valued by the mathematics education community, yet practices surrounding such use remain difficult for teachers to enact well, particularly in the moment during whole-class instruction. Teachers’ orientations—their beliefs, values, and preferences—influence their actions, so one important aspect of understanding teachers’ use of student thinking as a resource is understanding their related orientations.