ISSUE
The Charles A. Dana Center
at The University of Texas at Austin
BR
IEF
Supporting Mathematics Teacher Education:
Policy Recommendations
Spring 2005
C
olleges and universities that are involved in the
training and certification of mathematics teachers
have a responsibility to make teacher preparation and
professional development a primary part of their mission.
Further, significant involvement by mathematicians in
all phases of teacher preparation is critical to improving
the preparation of mathematics teachers, and, in turn,
the mathematical education of students in kindergarten
through grade 12. With their depth of content knowledge,
mathematicians are uniquely qualified to help all their
students—especially prospective teachers—make
important connections within mathematics, between
mathematics and other fields of study, and between the
content of their college courses and the content they will
be expected to teach.
Mathematicians involved in mathematics teacher
preparation must also form and maintain significant
connections to practicing schoolteachers, mathematics
supervisors, and schools. This outreach is critical to the
work of mathematicians with primary responsibilities
in the mathematical preparation of teachers.
Issue
Mathematics departments should provide a departmental
reward structure that promotes the involvement of
mathematicians in mathematics teacher preparation
and outreach; such departments can make significant
contributions to improving the preparation of this nation’s
mathematics teachers.
The following recommendations concerning faculty and
curriculum and programs represent voluntary guidelines
for institutions in Texas involved in the education of
prospective mathematics teachers. The book Supporting and
Strengthening Standards-Based Mathematics Teacher Preparation:
Guidelines for Mathematics and Mathematics Education Faculty
and this policy brief were developed from ideas generated
by participants in the Dana Center higher education
network and members of the Dana Center’s S3MTP
advisory board. The book and this brief also received
substantial input from the Texas Association of Academic
Administrators in the Mathematical Sciences. This policy
brief is also based on a synthesis of guidelines and
recommendations from other resources.
The Charles A. Dana Center, a research unit in the College of Natural Sciences at The University of Texas at Austin, has
developed these policy recommendations as part of a Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education (FIPSE)
grant (2001–04). The Supporting and Strengthening Standards-Based Mathematics Teacher Preparation (S3MTP) project
builds upon the work of a statewide network of Texas faculty that began in 1994 with a previous FIPSE project, which
resulted in the Dana Center’s 1996 publication, Guidelines for the Mathematical Preparation of Prospective Elementary
Teachers. That project also led to the Dana Center’s annual statewide October Mathematics Higher Education Conference,
which serves mathematics and education faculty who have a special interest in mathematics teacher preparation. This
conference has led to a growing network of faculty interested in the mathematical preparation of teachers. For many
faculty, this conference is their once-a-year opportunity to share mathematics content and teacher preparation ideas with
other faculty from across the state, to hear from other higher education mathematics leaders, and to receive updates from
statewide education agency leaders. The conference also provides opportunities for the Dana Center to solicit input for its
higher education publications and initiatives. For more information, see the Dana Center’s higher education website, at
www.utdanacenter.org/mathematics/highered/.
The Charles A. Dana Center Issue Brief is published periodically by the Charles A. Dana Center, The University of
Texas at Austin, 2901 N. IH-35, Suite 2.200, Austin, TX 78722. This issue brief can be downloaded (in Adobe
Acrobat PDF format) from the Dana Center website: www.utdanacenter.org.
These policy recommendations are unanimously endorsed by the Texas Association of Academic Administrators
in the Mathematical Sciences (TAAAMS).
6
Supporting Mathematics Teacher Education: Policy Recommendations
avoid assigning creative scholarly work to the
service or teaching category (where it ordinarily
receives less weight in the overall process)
simply because it is different from traditional
1
research.” That is, certain scholarly work in
mathematics education may be incorrectly
classified as “teaching” or “service” rather
than appropriately being classified as “research
and creative activity.” One such example is
incorrectly classifying the development of grantfunded curriculum materials in the “teaching”
category rather than the “research and creative
activity” category.
Faculty
1. Recruit highly qualified faculty with serious
interest and promise in mathematics teacher
education. Find faculty who are committed to
scholarly work in and involvement with mathematics
teacher preparation and professional development
and who are interested in influencing decisions
about what is taught in K–12 schools.
•
•
Mathematics departments should determine
the specific qualifications that would make
candidates suitable for positions involving
teacher preparation in their department.
For example, some four-year colleges and
universities may require a Ph.D. in mathematics
or statistics, while others may search for
candidates who have a Ph.D. in mathematics
education and the equivalent of a master’s
degree in mathematics.
•
Departments should formally define the
responsibilities and expectations for positions
focusing on mathematics teacher education
and/or outreach, while allowing flexibility
similar to that of other faculty in the
department. In some cases it may be appropriate
to compose a written agreement between the
faculty member and the department chair
regarding the focus and unique nature of the
faculty member’s scholarly work, teaching, and
service in the area of mathematics education
and outreach.
Research or its Creative Equivalent (Scholarship)
o Obtain external funding to support research
and professional activities, including
outreach.
o Publish research or expository articles in a
variety of appropriate journals (pedagogical,
outreach, etc.) and in conference
proceedings. Publish book chapters and
externally reviewed curriculum materials.
This broad range of scholarly outlets reflects
the nature of the work in mathematics
teacher preparation and outreach and the
importance of the work having an impact
beyond an immediate research community.
2. Support—with merit, tenure, and promotion—
those faculty with significant involvement
and responsibilities in mathematics teacher
preparation and professional development.
In evaluating faculty, the impact of a faculty
member’s professional work on mathematics
teaching and learning beyond their own classroom
must be considered. The unique nature of work
in mathematics education and outreach should be
noted in criteria for merit, tenure, and promotion.
For example,
•
1
Departments must reexamine the traditional
categories of criteria (research, teaching, service)
for merit, tenure, and promotion to include
specific expectations for evaluating mathematics
teacher educators and outreach mathematicians.
A list of specific expectations might address,
but not be limited to, the areas listed below.
(The levels of activity and recognition may vary
by academic rank.)
o Engage in other scholarly and creative
activities that are subject to external peer
review.
o Contribute to policy-making bodies such as
the Texas Education Agency, the National
Council of Teachers of Mathematics, the
Texas Higher Education Coordinating
Board, and so on.
If traditional categories—research, teaching,
and service—are used to evaluate mathematics
teacher educators, caution must be used “to
o Participate in the production of materials
that relate to mathematics teacher education.
McCallum, W.G. (October 2003). “Promoting Work on Education in Mathematics Departments,” Notices of the American Mathematical Society, Vol.
50, No. 9, p. 1096.
Spring 2005
2
Dana Center Issue Brief
Supporting Mathematics Teacher Education: Policy Recommendations
o Offer high-quality professional
development—including professional
development for university faculty—to
address district needs and strengthen the
capacity of K–12 teachers.
o Develop and maintain contacts with
mathematics teachers and students that
improve the quality of mathematics
learning.
o Develop working partnerships with area
school administrators.
o Present refereed, invited, and contributed
talks and lectures at professional conferences
and/or teacher conferences (for example,
local, state, and national meetings of the
Mathematical Association of America
and the National Council of Teachers of
Mathematics).
o Serve on national, statewide, and local
advisory boards that strengthen mathematics
teacher preparation.
o Serve as a conference organizer or program
committee member for conferences related
to mathematics teacher education and/or
outreach.
o Be visible and professionally active as a
mathematics teacher educator, receiving
recognition at the state and national levels
for these efforts or serving in a leadership
role on education initiatives at the state and
national levels.
Curriculum and Programs
1. General Recommendations
Teaching
•
Prospective teachers should have access to
mathematics courses and programs that help
them develop a deep understanding of the
fundamental ideas of school mathematics.
Where possible, special courses should be
designed for prospective teachers.
•
All courses designed for prospective teachers
should develop the habits of mind associated
with mathematical thinking, should emphasize
understanding of conceptual relationships, and
should demonstrate and develop a variety of
teaching styles.
•
Faculty involved in the mathematical education
of teachers should be familiar with relevant
current recommendations and reports as well
as national and state standards for mathematics
teacher certification.
•
The mathematical education of teachers should
be seen as a cooperative partnership between
mathematics and mathematics education faculty
in colleges and universities, between faculty
from two-year and four-year institutions, and
between faculty from these institutions and
K–12 schools.
o Serve as an adviser for prospective
mathematics teachers and individuals
involved in graduate and/or professional
development programs targeting
mathematics teachers.
o Work with other interested mathematics
department faculty in developing a variety of
teaching techniques that illustrate effective
strategies for prospective mathematics
teachers.
o Work in program development related
to mathematics teacher preparation at
the undergraduate and graduate (where
applicable) levels.
o Work with school districts and K–12
teachers to build capacity and improve
student learning.
Service
o Serve on university, college, and
departmental committees with
responsibilities related to teacher
preparation.
o Disseminate relevant information related
to mathematics teacher education to the
mathematics department and the university.
o Participate in deliberations about K–12
education at the local, state, and national
levels.
Dana Center Issue Brief
3
Spring 2005
Supporting Mathematics Teacher Education: Policy Recommendations
2. Specific Recommendations
This issue brief, Supporting Mathematics
Teacher Education: Policy Recommendations, is a
publication of the Charles A. Dana Center at The
University of Texas at Austin. Authors are James
Epperson, Assistant Professor of Mathematics,
University of Texas at Arlington; Deborah
Pace, Associate Professor of Mathematics and
Statistics, Stephen F. Austin State University;
and Jasper Adams, Professor and Chairman,
Department of Mathematics and Statistics,
Stephen F. Austin State University. Editors were
Rachel Jenkins and Susan Hudson Hull of the
Dana Center; Dana Center senior designer
Phil Swann was responsible for design and
layout. The FIPSE project was codirected
by James Epperson, Susan Hudson Hull,
Mathematics Director at the Dana Center, and
Philip (Uri) Treisman, Professor of Mathematics
and Director, Charles A. Dana Center at The
University of Texas at Austin.
Faculty who design courses and programs for
prospective mathematics teachers should have a
firm knowledge of the requirements of core school
mathematics content topics for the various levels of
certification. As appropriate for the targeted teacher
certification level, programs should develop in
prospective teachers:
•
Deep understanding of the fundamental
mathematical ideas in the content areas
of number concepts, algebra and functions,
geometry and measurement, and probability
and statistics.
•
Awareness of the mathematical knowledge
central to the grade levels both below and
above those for which the prospective
teachers are seeking certification.
•
Attitudes and habits of mind that encourage
life-long learning and allow prospective
teachers to reason and communicate
mathematically and to make important
connections between mathematical ideas.
Although quality is as important as quantity, the specific amount of recommended coursework is outlined below
according to teacher certification levels.
Certification in grades Early Childhood–4 Mathematics
At least 9 semester-hours focused on fundamental ideas of elementary school mathematics.
Certification in Grades 4–8 Mathematics
At least 24 semester-hours of mathematics that includes at least 12 semester-hours on fundamental ideas of
school mathematics appropriate for teachers of the middle grades. These courses may overlap some of those
for grades Early Childhood–4, but should reflect more depth of content and should not simply be a subset
of the courses required for a major.
Certification in Grades 8–12 Mathematics
The equivalent of an undergraduate major in mathematics that develops strong technical skills and a deep
understanding of the mathematical ideas central to the secondary curriculum. The program for prospective
secondary teachers should also include either:
o Core mathematics courses redesigned to help prospective teachers make meaningful
connections between the advanced mathematics they are learning and mathematics they will be teaching, or
o A 6-hour mathematics capstone sequence developed to focus on conceptual difficulties and fundamental
ideas and techniques of secondary mathematics examined from an advanced standpoint.
Spring 2005
4
Dana Center Issue Brief
Supporting Mathematics Teacher Education: Policy Recommendations
For further reading
Early Childhood–12 Mathematics Standards for EC–4,
4–8, and 8–12, Texas State Board for Educator
Certification (SBEC), Fall 2002. Available for
download at http://www.sbec.state.tx.us/
SBECOnline/standtest/edstancertfieldlevl.asp
Reflections of a Department Head on Outreach
Mathematics,” John B. Conway. Notices of the
American Mathematical Society, November 2001.
Vol. 48, No. 10, pages 1169–1172. Available
for download via the AMS Notices site,
www.ams.org/notices/.
Guidelines for the Mathematical Preparation of Prospective
Elementary Teachers, Austin, Texas: the Charles
A. Dana Center’s Texas Statewide Systemic
Initiative, 1996. Available for download
via the Dana Center’s online catalog, at
www.utdanacenter.org/catalog, under Higher
Education Resources.
Supporting Faculty Involvement In Mathematics Teacher
Preparation and Professional Development:
Summary of TAAAMS Policy Recommendations,
Texas Association of Academic Administrators
in the Mathematical Sciences, April 2003.
Towards Excellence: Leading a Doctoral
Mathematics Department in the
21st Century, John Ewing, editor;
Providence, RI: American Mathematical
Society Task Force on Excellence, 1999.
The Mathematical Education of Teachers, Conference Board
of the Mathematical Sciences, Providence
RI and Washington DC: published by the
American Mathematical Society in cooperation
with the Mathematical Association of America,
2001. Available for download on the web
at www.cbmsweb.org/MET_Document/
index.htm; Part I (executive summary) may be
ordered free from CBMS; Parts I and II may be
purchased from the AMS or the MAA.
“On the Mathematical Preparation of Teachers: A Joint
Position Statement,” The Texas Association of
Academic Administrators in the Mathematical
Sciences (TAAAMS) and the Texas Association
of Colleges of Teacher Education (TACTE).
Published in Austin, Texas, by the Charles
A. Dana Center’s Texas Statewide Systemic
Initiative, n.d. Available for download from
www.utdanacenter.org/mathematics/highered/
publications.html.
Principles and Standards for School Mathematics,
Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of
Mathematics, 2000. Available at www.nctm.org/
standards/.
“Promoting Work on Education in Mathematics
Departments,” William G. McCallum. Notices
of the American Mathematical Society, October
2003. Vol. 50, No. 9, pages 1093–1098.
Available for download via the AMS Notices site,
www.ams.org/notices/.
Dana Center Issue Brief
5
Spring 2005
The Charles A. Dana Center at The University of Texas at Austin works to support education leaders
and policymakers in strengthening Texas education. As a research unit of UT Austin’s College of Natural
Sciences, the Dana Center maintains a special emphasis on mathematics and science education. For more
information visit the Dana Center website at www.utdanacenter.org.
Development of this issue brief was funded in part by Grant Award #P116B011116, from the Fund for the
Improvement of Postsecondary Education (FIPSE), a program of the Office of Postsecondary Education of
the U.S. Department of Education, with additional funding support by the Charles A. Dana Center at The
University of Texas at Austin. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in these
materials are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of FIPSE or The University of
Texas at Austin.
Copyright © 2005, The University of Texas at Austin. All rights reserved. Permission is given to any person,
group, or organization to copy and distribute this publication, for noncommercial educational purposes
only, so long as appropriate credit is given.
Questions or comments regarding the content of this issue brief should be directed to Susan Hull at
shhull@mail.utexas.edu.
This issue brief can be downloaded from the Dana Center website at www.utdanacenter.org.
The University of Texas at Austin
The Charles A. Dana Center
2901 N. IH 35, Suite 2.200
Austin, TX 78722–2348
Non-Profit Org.
US Postage
PAID
Permit No. 391
Austin, TX