The Math Teachers Circle Program

Literature Review and Rationale for Math Teachers’ Circle

Problem solving and critical thinking are widely cited as among the most important skills for college readiness, education at the college level, and participation in the 21st century workforce (Association of American Colleges & Universities, 2007; The Conference Board et al., 2006; Conley, 2007; National Governors Association, Council of Chief State School Officers, & Achieve, Inc., 2009; Partnership for 21st Century Skills, 2008; Robinson, Garton, & Vaughn, 2007). Mathematical problem solving in particular is recognized as a priority in national education standards (NCTM, 1989, 2000), curricular guides (NCTM, 2006, 2009), and policy recommendations (Ball et al., 2005; NCTM, 2008; National Mathematics Advisory Panel, 2008). However, mounting evidence from national and international assessments indicates that few U.S. students are proficient with mathematical problem solving, particularly in the context of unfamiliar problems (Gonzales et al., 2009; National Center for Education Statistics, 2009; Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, 2007). Deficiencies in U.S. students’ mathematics performance start to become evident at the middle school level, which has emerged as a critical period for determining future success in high school, college, and the workforce (ACT, 2008; Fuller, 2009; Kay, 2009; National Mathematics Advisory Panel, 2008).

Students’ deficiencies in problem solving are hardly surprising given that the U.S. curriculum has consistently been found to lack opportunities for participation in creative problem solving and mathematical reasoning activities (Hiebert, 2003; Klein et al., 2005; Schmidt, McKnight, & Raizen, 1996; Wenglinsky, 2000, 2002). However, taking the time to develop students’ higher-order thinking skills is associated with improved student achievement in mathematics (Wenglinsky, 2000, 2002), and in turn, teachers’ content knowledge of mathematics plays a critical role in the extent to which they engage students in rich mathematics (Hill et al., 2007). At least two major factors related to teachers’ content knowledge are linked with improved student achievement in mathematics: formal degrees, certifications, or coursework in mathematics (Goe, 2007; Harris & Sass, 2007), and professional development that is focused on content and/or higher-order thinking skills (Harris & Sass, 2007; Wenglinsky, 2000, 2002).

Only approximately 54% of middle school mathematics teachers had completed a mathematics major or were fully certified to teach mathematics as of the most recent School and Staffing Survey (National Science Board, 2008). Thus, providing effective professional development to in-service teachers emerges as a critical priority for improving how mathematics is taught at the middle school level. Effective professional development is generally agreed to include the following features: 1) content focus, 2) active learning, 3) coherence with other expectations and goals, 4) sustained duration, and 5) collective participation of teachers from a school, district, and/or grade level (Desimone, 2009). However, relatively few teachers appear to be offered professional development opportunities that can be characterized as meeting these criteria in a meaningful way (Desimone et al., 2002; Garet et al., 2001; Hill, 2004; Scotchmer et al., 2005).

The Math Teachers’ Circle (MTC) model is a novel method of professional development that centrally involves mathematicians in long-term collaborations with middle school mathematics teachers in order to increase the teachers’ content knowledge, mathematical problem-solving skills, and ability to bring rich mathematics into their classrooms. By tapping into mathematicians’ expertise in the process of doing mathematics, the MTC model provides a natural mechanism for them to serve as resources for the teachers. We believe that the MTC model both meets the criteria for effective professional development and also has potential as a cost-effective, scalable, and sustainable model for enriching teachers’ knowledge of mathematics and mathematical problem solving.

References

ACT. (2008). The forgotten middle: Ensuring that all students are on target for college and career readiness before high school. Iowa City, IA: Author.

Association of American Colleges and Universities (2007). College learning for the new global century. Washington, D.C.: Author.

Ball, D. L., Ferrini-Mundy, J., Kilpatrick, J., Milgram, R. J., Schmid, W., Schaar, R. (2005). Reaching for common ground in K-12 mathematics education. Notices of the AMS, 52(9), 1055-1058.

Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2009). College and Career Readiness Standards for Mathematics. Retrieved November 11, 2009, from

The Conference Board, Partnership for 21st Century Skills, Corporate Voices for Working Families, & Society for Human Resource Management. (2006). Are they really ready to work? Employers’ perspectives on the basic knowledge and applied skills of new entrants to the 21st century U.S. workforce. New York: The Conference Board.

Conley, D. T. (2007). Toward a more comprehensive conception of college readiness. Eugene, OR: Educational Policy Improvement Center.

Desimone, L. M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38(3), 181-199.

Desimone, L. M., Porter, A. C., Garet, M. S., Yoon, K. S., & Birman, B. F. (2002). Effects of professional development on teachers’ instruction: Results from a three-year longitudinal study. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(2), 81-112.

Fuller, E. (2009). Are Texas middle school students prepared for high school? Examining the effect of middle school on high school outcomes [Preliminary report]. Austin, TX: Texas Business & Education Coalition.

Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915-945.

Goe, L. (2007). The link between teacher quality and student outcomes: A research synthesis. Washington, D.C.: National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality.

Gonzales, P., Williams, T., Jocelyn, L., Roey, S., Kastberg, D., & Brenwald, S. (2008). Highlights From TIMSS 2007: Mathematics and Science Achievement of U.S. Fourth- and Eighth-Grade Students in an International Context (NCES Publication No. 2009–001 Revised). Washington, D.C.: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

Harris, D. N., & Sass, T. R. (2007). Teacher training, teacher quality, and student achievement (CALDER Working Paper No. 3). Washington, D.C.: National Center for the Analysis of the Longitudinal Data in Education Research.

Hiebert, J. (2003). What research says about the NCTM standards. In J. Kilpatrick, W. G. Martin, & D. Schifter (Eds.), A research companion to Principles and Standards for School Mathematics (pp. 5-23). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

Hill, H. C. (2004). Professional development standards and practices in elementary school mathematics. Elementary School Journal 104, 215-31.

Hill, H.C., Ball, D.L., Blunk, M. Goffney, I.M. & Rowan, B. (2007). Validating the ecological assumption: The relationship of measure scores to classroom teaching and student learning. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives (5), 2-3, 107-117.

Kay, K. (2009). Middle schools preparing young people for 21st century life and work. National Middle School Association, 40(5), 41-45.

Klein, D., Braams, B. J., Parker, T., Quirk, W., Schmid, W., & Wilson, W. S. (2005). The state of state MATH standards. Washington, D.C.: The Thomas B. Fordham Foundation.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2009). The nation’s report card: Mathematics 2009 (NCES 2010-451). Washington, D.C.: Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.

NCTM. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.

NCTM. (2006). Curriculum focal points for prekindergarten through Grade 8 mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.

NCTM. (2009). Focus in high school mathematics: Reasoning and sense making. Reston, VA: Author.

National Governors Association, Council of Chief State School Officers, & Achieve, Inc. (2009). Benchmarking for success: Ensuring U.S. students receive a world-class education. Washington, D.C.: National Governors Association.

National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). Foundations for Success: The Final Report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.

National Science Board. (2008). Science and engineering indicators 2008 (NSB Publication No. 08-01; NSB 08-01A). Arlington, VA: Author.

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. (2004). Problem solving for tomorrow’s world: First measures of cross-curricular competencies from PISA 2003. Paris: Author.

Partnership for 21st Century Skills (2008). 21st century skills, education & competitiveness: A resource and policy guide. Tucson, AZ: Author.

Robinson, J. S., Garton, B. L., Vaughn, P. R. (2007). Becoming employable: A look at graduates' and supervisors' perceptions of the skills needed for employment. NACTA Journal, June 2007 (

Schmidt, W., McKnight, C, & Raizen, S. (1996). A splintered vision: An investigation of U. S. science and mathematics education. Boston, MA: The NETWORK, Inc.

Scotchmer, M., McGrath, D. J., & Coder, E. (2005). Issue brief: Characteristics of public school teachers’ professional development activities: 1999-2000 (NCES Publication No. 2005-030). Washington, D.C.: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

Wenglinsky, H. (2000). How teaching matters: Bringing the classroom back into discussions of teacher quality (Policy Information Center Report). Princeton, NF: ETS.

Wenglinsky, H. (2002). How schools matter: The link between teacher classroom practices and student academic performance. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 10(12). Retrieved 9/4/09 from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v10n12/.

1