“Modified Lesson Plans

Promoting Systemic Change in

Middle School Mathematics Teaching *

Harel Barzilai, Homer Austin, Barbara Wainwright

Dept. of Mathematics/CS, Salisbury University

1.  Introduction

            The Allied Delmarva Enhancement Program for Teachers (ADEPT) consists of interconnected mathematics content courses offered for graduate credit to in-service middle school teachers.   Based at Salisbury University on Maryland's Eastern Shore, the ADEPT program is a collaborative partnership between mathematics and education professors at Salisbury University and mathematics supervisors and teachers in the public schools of twelve counties in Delmarva's tri-state region of Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia.  This paper surveys how the use of modified lesson plans (MLPs), described below, are used throughout the ADEPT program to foster authentic curriculum, practitioner reflection, and content which leads to a profound understanding of fundamental mathematics (PUFM) among participating teachers.

The eight courses in Math ADEPT are the following:  conceptual algebra, number theory, data analysis, mathematical modeling, geometry, mathematical reasoning, technology, and Cartesian triad (algebra, geometry, and Cartesian plane).  So, the content of the ADEPT courses reflects the mathematical content of the middle-school curriculum. The ADEPT curriculum also promotes collaboration among teacher participants and stresses the development of conceptual understandings and contextualization of fundamental mathematics.  Teachers modify existing lesson plans with the support and feedback of colleagues and ADEPT instructors. Thus, the ADEPT program is wed to the middle-school mathematics curriculum.   

In this paper the authors discuss the use of MLPs in three ADEPT courses: number theory, conceptual algebra, and data analysis. A detailed sketch of each of these three ADEPT courses is provided to highlight and bring to life the environment in which the MLP assignments take place. Additionally the focus of each snapshot is to illustrate how the use of MLPs brings about the ARC triad – authentic curriculum, reflection by teachers, and PUFM-enhancing content – which is key to effecting systemic change in the standards-based teaching of mathematics.

2.  Review of Literature

            Research in mathematics education has many faces ranging from traditional positivistic forms to action research (Wiliam, 1999).   Practitioner research, often referred to as educational action research, is but one of these faces.  This kind of research aims to achieve systemic changes, modifications or improvements by intervening in the existing instructional system (Wilkins, 2000).  Practitioner research naturally posits a match between the needs of the practitioners and their policy makers, a match that is often lacking in traditional kinds of research.  Thus, in practitioner research, the quality or nature of instructional processes is examined and investigated.

            There has been considerable concern over the teaching of mathematics in the U.S. during the last several years, and the dearth of mathematics content courses for in-service middle-school teachers has been of particular concern (Before it's too late, 2000; Cuoco, 2001). Perhaps part of the reason for this lack of mathematics content courses stems from a belief that middle-school teachers “occupy an ill-defined niche between elementary and secondary [school] that has no established national consensus concerning appropriate preparation” (Steen, 1995). 

            Apparently there are many beliefs about teacher learning that are commonly held, beliefs that are not grounded in fact, but rather in assumption (Ball).  Some of these beliefs deal with the professional development of in-service teachers.  According to Ball, the following beliefs about professional development are held by many, but need to be tested if they are to be accepted as fact: a.  Working closely with colleagues fosters teacher learning. b.  One effective form of professional development is lesson study. c.  Lesson study is an effective form of professional development in Japan, but not for the U.S. d.  Teachers need to know the mathematics of the school curriculum in depth; advanced courses in mathematics are useless to teaching.

            In order to examine these beliefs, the literature in mathematics education suggests directions for investigations.  Much has been written on the Japanese lesson study groups as a model for professional development for in-service teachers (Fernandez, et. al, 2001).  The TIMSS study noted that in the United States, “education reformers try to change teaching through indirect means, rather than focusing on the quality of classroom lessons” (TIMSS, 1998).  The report also noted that Japanese teachers in collaborative groups critique and continually improve their lessons until quality lessons are produced for teaching mathematics.  Although TIMSS did not specifically recommend that Japanese lesson study groups be used for effecting change, the study did identify the Japanese model as an interesting one for professional development.

There are recurrent themes in mathematics education literature that highlight three other aspects of professional development and point toward a theoretical framework.  Notable among these themes are the ideas of authentic curriculum, practitioner reflection, and PUFM (profound understanding of fundamental mathematics). 

            Even though the literature on authentic curriculum has different definitions depending upon the context, the idea is pervasive that the curriculum should be in keeping with reality.  In order to have an authentic curriculum, it has been argued:  “teachers have to modify their traditional strategies so that they are multi-sensory, individualized, pragmatic, and relevant to the common practice or real-life situations.  Instructional activities need to be more performance-based, have applications that have a direct connection to the students' experience base, and be able to be generalized to daily living situations.  When teachers are able to recognize students' specific needs, they can develop and implement diagnostic-prescriptive teaching, …and modify instructional procedures as needed” (Spinelli, 2001). Also, in another sense, a professional development program for in-service should be authentic to the extent that it is based on the teachers' real life (i.e., classroom realities). The modified lesson plans (MLP's) are a part of the authentic curriculum in the Math ADEPT program of professional development.

            Research on the reflective practitioner reveals the importance of reflective thinking as critical for directing and informing practice.  Using reflective thinking, teachers can learn to interpret and create new knowledge from their own experiences in teaching (Stein, 2004).  As teachers become reflective practitioners, they grow and expand themselves to a greater range of possible choices for their classroom instructional activities and student behaviors (Larrivee, 2000).  They modify their old ways of doing things, and replace them with new ways that have arisen from their own reflections.  It has been said that self-reflection is enhanced by feedback from others, both students and colleagues (Walkington, et.al., 2001).  Also, as teachers do self-reflection, they need to reflect not only on what the activity is, but also on what is behind the activity (Spilkova, 2001). In order for teachers to modify lessons, it is crucial that they become reflective practitioners, for they must decide what is good and not good about their lessons, what needs to be changed and what should stay the same. They must decide how the lessons should be modified, what the changes might accomplish, and how the lessons fit together with other lessons on this topic.   

            When the literature on the knowledge base for middle school teachers is examined, it becomes clear that there is room for expansion.  A comparison of elementary teachers in the U.S. showed that their understanding of fundamental mathematics lagged in comparison to that of Chinese teachers (Ma, 1999). Teachers in the U.S. seemed to think in terms of algorithms and calculations, whereas their Chinese counterparts could not only handle the algorithms and calculations, but could contextualize and explain the conceptual underpinnings of the mathematics. Askey asserts that there are few places one can read comments by U.S. teachers on the deep conceptual meanings in their mathematics lessons, and he believes that more commentaries similar those in Ma's book and more detailed lesson plans by teachers are needed (Askey, 1999).   A conclusion of a recent study in Texas is that "teachers must develop further expertise in the content areas" (Adams, et. al., 2000).   Another study concluded that the greatest obstacle in mathematics teaching reform is the lack of content knowledge on the part of the teachers.  (Koency, et.al., 2000). The MLPs in Math ADEPT courses provide opportunities for teachers to explore the rich meanings of the mathematical content of their lessons.   This activity of modifying lessons also invites them to put more depth into the mathematical content of their lessons, to increase the cognitive tasks required of their students, and to tie their lessons more to standards-based teaching.  They are able to do this with input from colleagues and from ADEPT instructors.

            The Math ADEPT program is but one answer to the dearth of mathematics courses for in-service middle-school teachers.  One of the many features of these mathematics courses is the requirement that teachers must complete the assignment labeled “modified lesson plans  (MLPs).   The MLPs in  ADEPT provide an effective mechanism for effecting ARC.  They also lend themselves well to conducting practitioner research in that this intervention into the classroom is aimed at improving quality and bringing about systemic change in the teaching of mathematics. Through ADEPT’s content courses, the lack of sufficient mathematics content background of teachers, one of the main obstacles to mathematics teaching reform, is being alleviated.

 

 3.  Snapshot #1:  Number Theory course

The course, Number Theory with a Multicultural and Historical Perspective, has been designed and taught (by Austin) with several aims in mind.  First, the course content reflects the NCTM standards with respect to the topics of number sense, number systems, decimal and non-decimal bases, fractions, percents, estimation, primes, and related topics along with their historical/cultural contexts. Second, emphasis is placed on problem solving and on modeling of real-world phenomena and the meanings derived from the mathematical formulations.  Third, teachers enhance their communication skills in group work, discussions, oral presentations, written assignments, and course journals.   Fourth, the historical and multicultural aspects of mathematics are illuminated. Fifth, teachers examine some of the literature in mathematics education that is relevant to middle-school mathematics teaching.

            All of the course content is wed to the middle-school curriculum: conceptual understandings that the teachers are gaining at a higher level are discussed relative to the middle-school learner.  Likewise, all of the course content is considered relative to its historical and multicultural significance.  The reasons for these features of the course are twofold:  teachers need to understand that the development of mathematics has been, and still is, a multicultural or cross-cultural adventure; also, their students, who come from many different cultural backgrounds, bring insights and understandings (from their backgrounds) that influence their learning. Teachers and students together can build bridges to learning from cultural understandings.  When teachers and their students understand this aspect of mathematics, the study of mathematics becomes a human activity. In this regard, speakers from various ethnic backgrounds are invited to speak to the class.  These speakers tell about their schooling in another culture, and in particular, their instructional experiences in mathematics.  Teachers have commented that this aspect of the course is beneficial to them in that it gives them a different perspective on many aspects of teaching.

            The learning environment for the classroom instruction in number theory consists of lots of group work; so much time is given for teachers to talk with each other.  Group work is used for problem-solving activities, discussion of topics, and exploration of O. C.'s (Openings in the Curriculum).  O.C.'s occur quite often in this class because unexpected questions quite often arise, and the questions beg for answers. In many ways, some could argue that the classroom is unstructured, and it would appear that way if someone visited the class.  The classes, though, have been all organized to explore certain content.  The ways in which the teachers do that are sometimes unpredictable.

            In all ADEPT courses, teachers modify existing lesson plans that they already teach in their classrooms.  The use of modified lesson plans in the number theory course provides an avenue to bring about authentic curriculum, reflective thinking, and PUFM in several ways.   Teachers in this course bring their lesson plans, and in groups of three to four, present their lesson plans to each other.  The teachers then give suggestions for modifications of the lessons based on the content of the number theory course.  The instructor goes from group to group and also gives ideas or questions for the teachers to consider in their lesson modifications.

            The activity of modifying lesson plans fosters authentic curriculum in that the content of the number theory course is tied directly to the content in the modified lesson plans.  The content of the lesson plan deals with content from the course, whether it is factoring, least common multiple, number sense or some other topic. The lesson plan is also tied to pedagogical aspects of the course.  The modifications that the teachers make quite often include historical or cultural considerations that were not in the original lesson.  Modifications often are made to incorporate more of the standards from the various states (MD, VA, DE).  Because the modified lesson is one that is taught and will be taught again, there is a transfer of the content of the university course to the middle-school classroom.

            In order to modify the lesson plans, teachers must reflect not only on their specific lesson, but also on how this lesson fits in with other lessons in this same content area.  They also have to decide what they like about the lesson, and what they believe needs changing.   A good aspect of having this activity built into a course is that it gives teachers the chance to revise lessons in an organized and helpful way. They feel supported in this effort by other professionals. They receive creative ideas and other viewpoints from their colleagues. Teachers have repeatedly written on course evaluations that they have found the modification of lesson plans to be valuable in that they were able to talk to other teachers.

            Modification of lesson plans also allows the teachers to develop a profound understanding of the mathematics in the lessons (PUFM).  Many have found that their original lessons were heavy on rote manipulation or calculations and light on conceptual understandings of the topics. So, a modification to the lesson plan often includes some hands-on activities to shed light on the mathematical content underlying the concepts being taught.  Some might modify their lessons to include physical models of the concepts.  Others might include lists of probing questions to bring about class discussions of the concepts. When teachers incorporate any of these strategies into their lessons, their understanding of fundamental mathematics is sharpened.

                       

            Example of modified lesson:

Ms. Brown (pseudonym) has taught for approximately ten years in a middle school in a rural area.  She modified a lesson on "factoring polynomials."  Her motivation for this topic came from seeking shortcuts for multiplying positive integers, thus making a connection between algebra and arithmetic. Ms. Brown’s lesson includes a pre-assessment of the backgrounds of her students before the lesson.  She clearly states the objectives for her lesson.  The lesson includes group work with manipulatives (algebra tiles) where each group has been given a list of tasks to do with the tiles.  These lists of activities lead them to discover factors of quadratic polynomials.  Ms. Brown indicates in her lesson plan the modifications she has made to improve the lesson.  She has included more work on problem solving by asking the students to “apply and adapt a variety of appropriate strategies to solve the problems:  try using negative factors using the 'cover-up' approach.”  She has included a modification to make and investigate conjectures by having the students “try different types of factoring; i.e., perfect square trinomials and difference of squares.”  She has also included an activity to help her students make connections.  She guides her students “to use factoring to solve quadratic equations in word problems.  For example, use word problems dealing with the dimensions of a picture frame or a structure bordered by a walkway.”

            Ms. Brown's modifications indicate that she has done constructive reflection on her lesson, increased the complexity of the work required of her students, made connections to other situations, and led her students to a more profound understanding of the mathematical content of the lesson.  She has modified a lesson that could have been dull with mechanical manipulations to one that is conceptual in nature with hands-on activities for the students.  Her modifications of the lesson plan indicate that she has brought the lesson into an “authentic curriculum” in that she will teach the lesson again with a more “profound understanding” on her part.  This understanding has been the result of her reflections on the lesson, her willingness to make modifications, and her interactions with other teachers. 


4.  Snapshot 2:  Conceptual Algebra

ADEPT's algebra course, Conceptual Algebra, is designed and taught (by Barzilai) to help teachers encourage their students to move beyond the “symbol-manipulation” school of algebra -- and to ground algebra in meaning and understanding. Towards that end, the course incorporates, and is fundamentally based upon, several thematic strands. The primary, and often overlapping strands are as follows.

Problem solving and modeling. Teachers analyze number patterns and seek to find algebraic representations. They also seek to model word problems by translating a given situation into algebraic language. Teachers are not merely allowed but encouraged to use multiple strategies and to find several solutions. This theme of multiple paths provides teachers with experiences which they can use to support a diversity of learning styles among their students. More than that, it also reinforces their own understanding that there is often more than just "one way" to solve a problem in mathematics. Teachers also experience first-hand how the multiple representations which grow out of having a variety of strategies, can help deepen one's understanding of a given problem, method, or concept.

Error Analysis. Using examples provided by the instructor, along with a standard reference work (Ashlock, 2001), teachers analyze common student mistakes, and seek out the conceptual root-causes behind these frequent and recurring mistakes. This keeps the teachers who are taking this course honest about keeping meaning – rather than memorized mechanical manipulation – at the heart of algebra. After all, if the focus is to shift away from memorization and towards understanding in the teaching and learning of algebra, then it is with an eye toward the diagnosis of conceptual errors that teachers must tailor their approach to common student errors.

Connections between algebra and other fields of mathematics are explored -- particularly connections to arithmetic, combinatorics, and geometry. One teacher remarked on her weekly written summary of her learnings in the class that, “After rereading my notes from last week, I felt like I was beginning to make connections between things I have done as challenge problems in my classes that I didn't even know were related. For example I have done the Gauss problems and the handshake problem and never did I see that both answers were arrived at (or could be) arrived at using n(n+1)/2.” Another teacher wrote that “I was surprised at the number of connections that are being made in class to problems that I have seen before but thought were very separate types of problems”; another wrote, “Algebra doesn't seem so unconnected to me as it once was.” The class also employs picture proofs or visual representations which demonstrate why the distributive property holds, why (a+b)2 does not equal a2+b2 and where the extra terms come from.

Written mathematical exposition assignments are used throughout the semester. Teachers summarize what I have learned this week as well as questions or confusions I have in complete sentences and paragraphs, along with tables, graphs, labeled diagrams, definitions, examples, proofs, and so forth. These, along with careful, precise write-ups of selected problem-solving exercises completed in class are written up and handed in, with individualized handwritten comments and feedback provided by the ADEPT instructor. Teachers select from among their mathematical expositions as they build their Course Portfolio, which along with the Modified Lesson Plans (MLPs) make up the concrete products teachers take back to their schools after completing the course. Related to mathematical exposition is the notion of correct mathematical grammar. For example, given a problem like if c = 12t+4, and if t=3, find c we should not write “12*3 = 36 + 4 = 40”; teachers in conceptual algebra not only explain why not, but find their ears become better tuned to seek out such mistakes, and report being "more careful with my own mathematical grammar" as well as that of their students, in their own classes.

The above are the main thematic strands of the course. The course uses a combination of a primary textbook (Driscoll, 1999) along with NCTM materials (Friel, 2001), and activities and materials designed by the course instructor. In content, conceptual algebra progresses from patterns to “algebrization” or the process of getting from “I see the pattern!” to finding a correct general formula. The course discusses graphical representations, functions and functional notation, linear functions, quadratic functions, and some discussion of exponential functions and qualitative aspects such as “increasing at a decreasing rate”. Particular attention is given to studying relatively elementary concepts from a more advanced, teacher's point of view. For example, teachers are asked such questions as: what can be said about a function having the property that f(k*a) = k*f(a) for all k and a? What can be said about a function which satisfies f(x+a) = f(x) + ca for all a and x (and where c is fixed)? Are these two the same classes of functions? Why or why not?

Pedagogically, the course is very hands-on. Virtually every class starts with a “warm-up” –  mathematical problem-solving which builds on earlier material and extends it in a new direction. These are usually completed individually, although collaboration is allowed for some of the more advanced problems. Anonymous comments from teachers on mid-semester feedback forms indicates teachers appreciate this feature, with statements like “I can count on my brain being challenged every class..very enjoyable” and “In spite of my trepidation in taking this course, I am enjoying it and it is stretching my brain” being typical. A similar candid remark from a teacher was that “At first I was scared, but I have come to enjoy the challenge and the conversations/lessons in class. I am learning [smiley face]” The warm-up leads to a discussion, and often to presentations of one, two, or more solutions at the board by the teachers. The course includes highly interactive lecture-presentations, and in-class groupwork for problem-solving along with the written assignments discussed above.

Although the class meets once per week, a web-based discussion board allows teachers enrolled to stay in touch between class meetings for informal exchanges, and occasionally for a required commentary on readings, which come from the textbooks, and from sources such as articles in NCTM journals. Technology is also incorporated through the use of java applets such as those at illuminations.nctm.org (Illuminations) and http://argyll.epsb.ca/jreed/math9/.  Manipulatives, which are the most concrete of technologies, complement the course. The Hands On Equations system (Borenson) is introduced, along with both its strengths and the care on the part of the teacher that is required for fostering conceptual learning in algebra.

For the Modified Lesson Plans assignment, the course designer/instructor of conceptual algebra (Barzilai) uses a step-wise approach. Teachers complete a three-part concept map of algebra customized to the algebra course they teach. This concept map includes "inputs/prerequisites" coming before their course, “outputs” including future applications, and a central web of inter-related concepts and how they fit together. Feedback is provided by the ADEPT instructor as well as by fellow teachers, and this input is used for creating a revised version. This process really encourages teachers to introspect and reflect about the content they teach, and about where it fits into the wider curriculum including other classes as well as state and national standards. Remarked one teacher, “One of the main lessons I've learned this week is how to think about my own thinking. The problems we solved in class made it possible to look at the way we teach. The way we understand mathematical problems as teachers helps us guide our students when they are faced with the same problems.”

At the outset, teachers are provided with a rubric of the key elements that will be valued in their MLP assignment (http://barzilai.org/courses/541/activs/rubric.lessons.html). These elements include organization; an introduction; a professional look; new mathematical content and mathematical correctness; innovative pedagogy; clearly highlighted differences between the old lesson plans and the new; clear objectives for the lessons and some plan for assessment; a listing of relevant local, state, and national standards; and a reflective concluding narrative.

Next, one-on-one meetings with the instructor are held in class with each teacher. The course’s ADEPT Teaching Assistant facilitates groupwork during these consultations, which help teachers focus on which potential topic(s) for MLP revision would be most appropriate and more professionally relevant to their needs. The topic is then due usually at the Week 4 or Week 5 class. The choice of topic depends, of course, on what “algebra” means for each particular teacher: a pre-algebra class, Algebra I, Algebra II, or a special pre-teaching class for students needing extra help, for example. A few ADEPT participants are resource teachers and their MLP consists of their working with another teacher at their school to modify her or his own lesson plans.

Teachers are also encouraged to collaborate by working in teams to give feedback and constructive suggestions on their lesson plans. Additional consultations with the instructor are always available, and the web-based discussion boards are sometimes used for brainstorming as teachers share their local situations, challenges, and the lesson plans they are considering revising. This provides yet another layer of professional development as a culture of mutually supportive colleagues is strengthened among the teachers, while also providing further opportunities to introspect about their teaching practice.

By week 9, a formal Outline is due and additional one-on-one consultations between teachers and the instructor normally take place at this time. The Outline includes a specification of the class, grade level, and a three-column table organized under the headings of Topic; Old Plans; New Plans. In this way the teachers visually organize a 1 or 2 page overview of what they believe the most important areas of content and pedagogy are which they plan to change, add to, or leave as is.  The final MLPs are handed in during week 13, and presentations at the board, sometimes complemented with computer presentations, take place during weeks 14 and 15 to round out the semester. Here again professional growth and sharing take place as teachers are encouraged to hand out hardcopy of parts of their lessons which their fellow teachers may find useful.

 

Examples of MLPs

One teacher, Ms. Jones, focused the enhancements she made in her MLP project on operations with polynomials. Instead of restricting herself to examples, guided practice, and workbook, her new lesson plans use algebra tiles which were introduced in the class. Several others teachers have incorporated Hands On Equations. Almost all the teachers added conceptual dimensions highlighted in class for their MLP project. Most popular among these were the use of picture proofs; the use of color to highlight structure when going form patterns to algebraic formulas; the use of written assignments and more open-ended explorations for their students; and the importance of their modeling correct mathematical grammar for – and expecting it from – students in their middle school algebra classes.

 

Teachers leave the course stronger and more confident in algebra, and aware of the importance of ongoing professional development to deepen their background. Remarked one teacher in her course evaluation, “This class certainly met the needs of me as an elementary-certified teacher. Although at times this class was difficult, I understand more algebra and how it fits into my curriculum than I did [upon enrolling]. Consequently, I certainly know more about algebra for teachers than I thought I would ever understand. It also makes me aware of exactly how much more I need to learn..I look forward to the remaining ADEPT courses as it can only enhance my ability as a teacher”

Finally, the process of experiencing new ways to learn algebra personally, combined with the MLP assignment which links the course directly to their own middle school classroom, leaves teachers more confident to make changes they might not have otherwise been ready to make. An email from one teacher a half year after her course reads:

         “This summer, I took the Concepts of Algebra class. Immediately upon returning to school I began implementing the ideas in my classes. With trepidation I invested a lot more time than I thought prudent in the development of algebraic thinking through examining and verbally explaining patterns , writing, twisting the circumstance, then revising... before the lessons on translating expressions into symbols, and finding function rules for simple functions.

         I am still amazed at how immediately the task was accomplished. My most unmotivated students are involved, all have been successful at some level...”

 

5.  Snapshot #3:  Data Analysis Course

The Data Analysis course has been developed and taught (by Wainwright) with the objective to provide middle school teachers with a profound understanding of descriptive and inferential statistics.  Since the call for data-driven statistics courses in the early nineties (Moore & Witmer, 1991), there has been a shift in courses from textbook problems to data analysis.  This course was designed around the same perspectives on the teaching of statistics as those described by Wainwright and Austin (1991); that is to say, the course is data-driven and focuses more on interpretation than calculation.    An emphasis is also placed on the various types of data and the kinds of descriptive and inferential statistics that are appropriate for these types of data.   What makes this course different from an introductory-level statistics course is the level of understanding and synthesis of the material that is expected at the graduate level.  Although this is not a methods course, pedagogy is woven throughout the content material. 

Many middle school teachers do not have much content knowledge in the area of statistics.  They are often teaching lessons involving basic data analysis.  These teachers routinely follow handouts/lessons provided by the Maryland State Curriculum or use lessons straight out of the textbook.  Throughout the Data Analysis course, these teachers learned more content and asked relevant questions pertaining to topics they teach on a regular basis.  Individuals expressed interest in learning certain content areas with which they were uncomfortable.  During the class sessions they also conducted hands-on experiments and simulations in groups, many of which they could modify for their own students.  

            The focus of this course is on the interpretation of statistics.  The calculated statistics are often obtained using a calculator or computer; however, how would one then use these to describe the data or make reliable inferences about a population?  These are things that both the middle-school students and the middle school teachers need to learn.  The teachers also need to learn correct terminology, as well as correct mathematical and statistical grammar. These middle-school teachers admitted that they did not understand the concept of  "standard deviation" or its usage.  They could construct boxplots and have their students construct boxplots using the graphing calculators, but they could not read and interpret the graphs!  On one assignment, it was discovered that they could not correctly read and compare histograms.  Many were interpreting the heights of the bars, i.e., frequencies, as the actual measurements.  Using simulations, the teachers studied probability.  They also discussed and compared theoretical and empirical probabilities.  Several of the teachers stated that they had heard of both theoretical and empirical probabilities, but they did not know what the difference was until they conducted these explorations. 

            This class met once a week for three hours.  The class met in a regular classroom for the first half of the period.  A computer lab was reserved for the second half of the period.  For most of the weeks, the teachers went to the lab after taking a short break half way through the period.  Whether they moved to the lab or stayed in the classroom depended upon the activities planned for that half of the period.  The computer software MINITAB was used in the lab for some of the simulations and for statistical analyses of data.  Although most teachers do not have access to MINITAB in their own classrooms, some teachers were downloading trial versions of MINITAB for possible use in their schools. Activities were also performed using the graphing calculators, since many teachers have access to them in their own classrooms.

            As with each ADEPT course, each teacher is required to modify an existing lesson plan.  In this course, they are also required to conduct a group project. Students are required to generate a problem or question they want answered, design an experiment or a survey instrument, collect data, perform the appropriate descriptive statistics, carry out the appropriate statistical analysis, and make inferences or conclusions to answer their question.  Each group gives a report of the project results at the end of the semester.  By midterm, the students were required to have selected the members of their group and to have a project topic or question approved.  At this time they were also asked to inform the instructor concerning the lesson that they planned to modify.  The teachers were then encouraged to share the lesson with classmates to get feedback.  During the latter part of the semester, the teachers were given the last 30-45 minutes of the lab time to work on the modified lesson plan and/or the group project.  During this time the teaching assistant and the instructor circulated around the room and offered assistance.

The requirement of a modified lesson plan gives the teachers the opportunity to reflect on their own teaching and work on ways to improve or modify their lessons.  These modifications would include added content and different activities to enhance student learning.  For some teachers who have not yet taught statistics lessons, a lesson from a textbook or website was used and further enhanced based on content and pedagogical methods acquired in the Data Analysis course.  In these cases, the curriculum is not as realistic as it is for those who are revising existing lessons that they actually teach, but they do have the experience of changing a lesson to bring about different levels of cognitive tasks for the middle-school students.  In this way these teachers, who are not teaching statistics now, can reflect on current teaching practices and concentrate on how they might in the future teach a statistics lesson, paying attention to both content and pedagogy. Modifying these lessons allows the teachers to develop a more profound understanding of the statistics content with which they have previously struggled and misinterpreted.

 

 

Example of Modified lesson plan:

Ms. Smith chose to modify a lesson involving probabilities associated with families having three children.  In the past she has had her students simulate the experiment.  The students are generally provided with results of 40 trials and are asked to simulate ten more trials by flipping a coin and creating a family: if the coin falls “heads”, the child is a girl; if the coin falls “tails”, the child is a boy.  The original lesson then had “the students calculate the experimental probability based on the forty given trials plus the ten additional trials that they conducted.” 

To modify the lesson, Ms. Smith extended it to “not only look at the experimental probability but to also calculate the theoretical probability.”  She plans to have the students use tree diagrams to aid in counting all the possible combinations of a family with three children.  Ms. Smith also plans to combine the total of fifty trials from each student to have a total of several hundred trials (depending on class size).  Students will then be able to compare the results of their fifty trials to the combination of all the trials and to the theoretical probabilities.  This will lead to a discussion of the Law of Large Numbers.

Ms. Smith's modification of her lesson shows that she has gained a deeper understanding of the ideas of probability.   Her comparison of empirical results to theoretical probabilities shows that she understands the idea that the theory of probability is only a mathematical model.   The empirical results most likely will be close to, but slightly different from, the theoretical probabilities.   Her extension of this concept to lead into the law of large numbers shows that Ms. Smith is building a context for a future lesson.   Thus, she has laid the groundwork for having her students perform cognitive tasks that are more challenging than the ones in her previous lesson.

 

Conclusion

The use of MLPs to effect systemic change provides valuable insights into the untested beliefs about professional development (see Ball in related literature). Although no definitive answers to these research questions have been obtained, the use of MLPs in the Math ADEPT courses has shown that the activity of teacher participants working closely with colleagues can foster teacher learning.  Data from multiple sources in the ADEPT program support this assertion.  No claim is being made that this is always the case, but it seems that collaboration can be efficacious in some cases.  The use of MLPs, a form of lesson study, is also an effective form of professional development for the ADEPT participants.  Again, no claim is being made that the use of MLPs is always an effective form of professional development for all teachers.    

K-12 Professional development programs for in-service mathematics teachers present multiple challenges for both institutions of higher education and participating school systems. Mathematics content courses designed for in-service teachers, in particular, need to combine mathematical rigor with a real-world relevance and applicability to schools, without which systemic changes will not easily follow. Through the use of MLPs, the ADEPT program grounds the experiences of participating teachers in professionally relevant projects which tie the rigorous mathematical content, as well as the authentic curriculum and pedagogy of the ADEPT courses, directly to the everyday practice of revising lesson plans in which teachers must engage. The process of revisiting and revising existing lesson plans also necessitates practitioner reflection, which is a prerequisite for “profound understanding” of mathematics by teachers.

Based on informal feedback and preliminary assessment from a variety of data sources, the ADEPT program is working well in a tri-state region and serving the needs of teachers who have a variety of mathematical backgrounds and needs. The authors believe, based on this experience, that this program, and particularly the MLP aspect of ADEPT, can be adapted for use in other universities’ in-service professional development programs for mathematics teachers; nevertheless, additional field-testing and research are needed to examine more closely how replicable this model is. Future research is planned in which PUFM will be defined through the performance of K-12 students on higher-level cognitive tasks and reflective teaching practice and authentic curriculum will be likewise defined and measure through parallel assessments and data collection.

Finally, a natural extension of the use of MLPs would be the establishment of Japanese-style Lesson Plan Study groups. It would seem that a community of teacher-colleagues, all having gone through a personal revision of their lesson plans, should – if suitably supported by post-secondary institutions – be able to transition to a regular and ongoing Lesson Plan Study model.

 

References:

 

Ashlock, Robert B. Error Patterns in Computation: Using Error Patterns to Improve Instruction (Prentice Hall, 2001).

Askey, Richard, "Knowing and Teaching Elementary Mathematics,"  American Educator/American Federation of Teachers, 1999.

Ball, Deborah Loewenberg, " What do we believe about teacher learning and how can we learn with and from our beliefs,"  Proceedings of the twenty-fourth annual meeting of the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Atlanta, 2002.

Barzilai, Harel. Conceptual Algebra in a Meanings-based Curriculum: Turning student errors into learning opportunities, The Banneker Banner, journal of the Maryland Council of Teachers of Mathematics (Spring/Summer 2003).

Before It's Too Late: A Report to the Nation from the National Commission on Mathematics & Science Teaching for the 21stCentury, National Commission on Mathematics & Science Teaching, 2000.

Borenson, Henry, Hands-On Equations, http://www.borenson.com

Cuoco, Al, "Teaching Mathematics in the United States," Notices 48(2001), 168-174.

Driscoll, Mark. Fostering Algebraic Thinking, A Guide for Teachers Grades 6-10. Heinemann (1999).

Friel, Susan (with Sid Rachlin and Dot Doyle) Navigating through Algebra in Grades 6-8 (NCTM, 2001).

Fernandez, Clea and Makoto Yoshida, "Lesson Study as a Model for Improving Teaching:  Insights, Challenges and a Vision for the Future,"  Conference of Council for Basic Education, 2001.  Available at http://www.c-b-e.org/PDF/EyeoftheStormFernandez.pdf. 

Germann, Paul, Kim Young-Soo, and Martha D. Patton, "Heighteniing Reflection Through Dialogue:   A Case for Electronic Journaling and Electronic Concept Mapping in Science Classes,"  Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education [online serial], 1, (3).   Available:  http://www.citejournal.org/vol11/iss3/currentissues/science/article1.htm

Illuminations. See: http://illuminations.nctm.org/ Other applets include "Learning about Rate of Change in Linear Functions Using Interactive Graphs: Constant Cost per Minute" at http://standards.nctm.org/document/eexamples/chap6/6.2/

Larrivee, Barbara, "Transforming Teaching Practice:  becoming the critically reflective teacher,"  Reflective Practice, Vol. 1, No. 3, 2000.

Ma, Liping, Knowing and Teaching Elementary Mathematics, Lawrence Erlbaum

Associates, Mahwah, NJ, 1999.

Moore, Thomas L. and Jeffrey A. Witmer, " Statistics Within Departments of Mathematics at Liberal Arts Colleges," American Mathematical Monthly, Vol. 98, pp. 431-435, 1991.

"Policy Brief:  What the TIMSS Means for Systemic School Improvement," 1998.  Available at http://www.ed.gov/pubs/TIMSSBrief/execsum.html.

Spilkova, Vladimira, "Professional Development of Teachers and Student Teachers through Reflection on Practice,"  European Journal of Teacher Education, 2001.

Spinelli, Cathleen G., "Interactive Teaching Strategies and Authentic Curriculum and Assessment:  A Model for Effective Classroom Instruction," Hong Kong Special Education Forum, Vol. 4 No. 1, 2001.

Steen, Lynn  Arthur, "Preparing Teachers of Mathematics:  Asking the Right Questions,"   a discussion document prepared for a February 1995 workshop on the preparation of science and mathematics teachers sponsored by the National Science Foundation, available at http://www.stolaf.edu/people/steen/Papers/teacherprep.html .

Stein, David, "Teaching Critical Reflection," Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.  Available:  http://ericacve.org .

Wainwright, Barbara A. and Homer W. Austin, “A Perspective on Teaching   Elementary Statistics," PRIMUS, Vol.7, No.2, 1997.

Walkington, Jackie, Hans Peter Christensen and Hanne Kock, "Developing critical reflection as a part of teaching training and teaching practice," European Journal of Engineering Education, 2001.

Wiliam, Dylan, "Types of Research in Mathematics Education," Psychology of Mathematics Education, 1999.

Wilkins, Raphael, "Practitioner Research in LEA-directed INSET" Journal of In-service Education, Vol. 26, No. 1, 2000. 

 

 

 

* Support for Math ADEPT and the six Math ADEPT courses was provided by the National Science Foundation ESIE division, Teacher Enhancement program grant #5-28050. Support for Maryland Math ADEPT (MD-ADEPT) and the two MD-ADEPT courses was provided by the Maryland Higher Education Commission (MHEC) via Eisenhower funds, grant 4-30150. "This material is based in part upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. 0101907." -- "Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation."