EQIP Science and Mathematics Teacher Training in Belize

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma Naslund-Hadley
Keyword(s):  
Teacher Training ◽  
Mathematics Teacher ◽  
And Mathematics

scholarly journals Sucesso e fracasso no ensino da Matemática: o que dizem futuros professores de uma IES?

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 55
Author(s):  
Valéria Maria de Lima Borba ◽  
André Pereira da Costa
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Teacher Training ◽  
Data Collection ◽  
Mathematics Teacher ◽  
Mathematics Teaching ◽  
Qualitative Approach ◽  
University Courses ◽  
Academic Center ◽  
And Mathematics ◽  
The Relationship

Resumo: Este estudo objetivou discutir sobre os fatores que contribuem para o sucesso e o fracasso nos cursos de Licenciatura em Ciências e Matemática de um centro acadêmico vinculado a uma Instituição de Ensino Superior (IES) do Estado da Paraíba, Brasil, a partir da compreensão dos licenciandos sobre tais elementos. Assim, buscou-se analisar se estes fatores interferem na permanência e no abandono dos estudantes em seus cursos universitários. Com uma abordagem qualitativa, a pesquisa fez uso de um questionário como instrumento de coleta de dados, que foi aplicado a 22 licenciandos. Os estudantes questionados, em sua grande maioria, colocam a referência para o sucesso basicamente no esforço próprio, salientando a dedicação e a perseverança próprias. Quando se discute a relação que os licenciandos estabelecem com o fracasso, vários foram os fatores considerados como deflagradores dos insucessos ocorridos, com considerável peso na didática utilizada pelos seus professores.Palavras-chave: Matemática; Formação de Professores; Fracasso; Sucesso. Success and failure in Mathematics teaching: what says future teachers of an IES?Abstract: This study aimed to discuss the factors that contribute to success and failure in the degree courses in Science and Mathematics of the academic center linked to an Institution of Higher Education (IES) in the State of Paraíba, Brazil, through students’ understanding of such elements. Thus, it was sought to analyze if these factors interfere in the permanence and the abandonment of the students in their university courses. With a qualitative approach, the research made use of a questionnaire as an instrument of data collection, which was applied to 22 graduates. Most of the questioned students place the reference to success primarily in their own effort, emphasizing their own dedication and perseverance. When discussing the relationship that the students establish with failure, several factors were considered as triggers of the failures occurred, with considerable weight in the didactic used by their teachers.Keywords: Mathematics; Teacher Training; Failure; Success. 

scholarly journals Is there any difference between mathematics and mathematics education students’ views about mathematical proof?Matematik ve matematik eğitimi öğrencilerinin matematiksel ispata yönelik görüşleri arasında fark var mıdır?

2016 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 6020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abdullah Kaplan ◽  
Muhammet Doruk ◽  
Mesut Öztürk ◽  
Murat Duran
Keyword(s):  
Mathematics Education ◽  
Teacher Training ◽  
Mathematics Teacher ◽  
Mathematical Proof ◽  
Secondary Mathematics ◽  
Research Approach ◽  
Education Students ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Secondary Mathematics Teacher ◽  
And Mathematics

The purpose of this study was to determine the levels of mathematics and mathematics education students’ views about mathematical proof and find out whether there was a significant difference among students’ views according to their departments or not. The study was conducted with senior students (n=275) studying in final year at the department of Primary Mathematics Teacher Training (n=98), Secondary Mathematics Teacher Training (n=87) and Mathematics (n=90) at a state university at the beginning of the spring semester of 2014-2015 academic terms in East Anatolia Region of Turkey. Quantitative research approach was adopted in this study. The model of the study was comparative research which was one of the model in the nonexperimental research designs. The data were collected with Conception Scale for Mathematical Proof developed by Doruk and Güler (2014). Results of the study showed that secondary mathematics teacher training students had more negative overall views, more negative views regarding benefits obtained from mathematical proof in mathematical sense, and less self-confidence, and more negative views about meaning assigned to proof than other students. Moreover, it was revealed that mathematics students’ views regarding necessity of proof in mathematics and mathematics education were more positive than other students. ÖzetBu çalışmanın amacı matematik ve matematik eğitimi öğrencilerinin matematiksel ispata yönelik görüşlerinin düzeylerini belirlemek ve öğrenci görüşlerinin öğrenim görülen bölümlere göre farklılık gösterip göstermediğini ortaya çıkarmaktır. Çalışma 2014-2015 öğretim yılının bahar yarıyılının başında, Doğu Anadolu Bölgesi’ndeki bir devlet üniversitesinin son sınıflarında öğrenim gören toplam 275 ilköğretim matematik öğretmenliği (n=98), ortaöğretim matematik öğretmenliği (n=87) ve matematik bölümü öğrencileri (n=90) ile yürütülmüştür. Çalışmada nicel araştırma yaklaşımı benimsenmiştir. Çalışmanın modeli deneysel olmayan desenlerden biri olan karşılaştırmalı araştırma modelidir. Çalışmanın verileri, Doruk ve Güler (2014) tarafından geliştirilen Matematiksel İspata Yönelik Görüş Ölçeği ile toplanmıştır. Çalışma sonucunda, ortaöğretim matematik öğretmenliği bölümü öğrencilerinin ispata yönelik genel görüşlerinin, ispatların kendilerine matematiksel anlamda sağladığı faydalara yönelik görüşlerinin, ispata karşı özgüvenlerinin ve ispata yükledikleri anlamın diğer öğrencilere göre daha olumsuz olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Matematik bölümü öğrencilerinin ispatın matematik ve matematik eğitimindeki gerekliliğine yönelik görüşlerinin ise diğer öğrencilere nazaran daha olumlu olduğu ortaya çıkmıştır.

When Mathematics Teacher Educators Come Under Attack

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 68-74
Author(s):  
Rochelle Gutiérrez
Keyword(s):  
Teacher Education ◽  
Mathematics Education ◽  
Mathematics Teacher ◽  
Teacher Educators ◽  
Mathematics Teacher Education ◽  
Professional Organizations ◽  
Mathematics Teacher Educators ◽  
And Mathematics ◽  
The One ◽  
Historical Moment

We are in an interesting historical moment in mathematics teacher education. On the one and, there is greater realization within our field of the connections between systems of power and mathematics (O'Neil, 2016). We are starting to acknowledge how mathematics education can be viewed as dehumanizing for both students and teachers as well as what might constitute rehumanizing practices (Gutiérrez, in press). Our professional organizations are calling for teachers to move beyond simplistic notions of equity to understand these power dimensions and challenge the system on behalf of (and in community with) Black,1 Indigenous,2 and Latinx3 students in particular

scholarly journals PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE OF JOURNAL OF BALTIC SCIENCE EDUCATION

2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 364-366
Author(s):  
Muhammet Usak
Keyword(s):  
Science Education ◽  
Teacher Training ◽  
Scientific Journal ◽  
School Science ◽  
Scientific Journals ◽  
Related Research ◽  
To Come ◽  
And Mathematics ◽  
First Time ◽  
Science Education Journals

Science Education is a multidisciplinary field of study with roots about three centuries ago. Researches in this field were published for the first time in a scientific journal with School Science and Mathematics, which started in 1901. The number of scientific journals in Science Education has increased in parallel with the increase in the number of related research. The published literature is sometimes about trending topics. In some other cases, they offer novelty and new paradigms. Last 50 years of Science Education are shaped by various topics. Hence, these different issues are being published in scientific journals. At the end of the 70s, studies on constructivism, meaningful learning, misconception, conceptual learning (Driver, & Easley, 1978; Driver, 1983; Driver, & Oldham, 1986; von Glasersfeld, 1984; Ausubel, Novak, & Hanesian, 1978; Novak, 1979 & 1990, Novak, & Gowin, 1984; Novak, & Musonda, 1991) began to come forward. Conferences are being held especially on misconception. Many articles have been published and continue to be published on the topic. Starting with the second half of 80s, studies on PCK, which were first described by Shulman, began to surface in science education journals in the field of teacher training (Shulman, 1986; Usak, 2009, Usak, Ozden, & Eilks, 2011; Usak, Ozden, & Saglam, 2011).

Early Childhood Teachers

2011 ◽  
pp. 126-150 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Thomas ◽  
Kathleen Spencer Cooter
Keyword(s):  
Early Childhood ◽  
Teacher Preparation ◽  
Teacher Training ◽  
Early Childhood Teachers ◽  
Field Experiences ◽  
Technology Training ◽  
Google Earth ◽  
Virtual Manipulatives ◽  
Mathematics Classrooms ◽  
And Mathematics

This chapter reviews the state of technology training for early childhood educators in teacher preparation institutions across the country. Using NCATE and NAEYC standards as benchmarks of practice, the chapter outlines some current issues and research on technology training at the preservice level, such as course sequence, textbook choice, content infusion, field experiences, et cetera. The chapter also outlines three technologies, Web 2.0, Google Earth, and the virtual manipulatives that are accessible, free to users, require little teacher training, and have evidence to support their instructional benefits. These three well-developed technologies can easily be introduced to students and teachers as exemplars of constructivist pedagogical technology in early childhood science and mathematics classrooms. Activities using each are included.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document