Effect of Teachers’ Mathematical Knowledge for Teaching (Mkt) on Mathematical Content Knowledge (Mck) and Mathematics Achievement of Students at Secondary Level
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61841/qtp0gm39Keywords:
Mathematical knowledge for teaching (MKT),, mathematical content knowledge (MCK), mathematics achievement,, help in study at home, teachers, studentsAbstract
The purpose of this study was to find out the effect of teachers’ Mathematical Knowledge for Teaching (MKT) on the students’ Mathematical Content Knowledge (MCK) and the students’ achievement in mathematics at secondary level. The research was causal comparative. The participants of the study were 100 mathematics teachers and 1500 grade 10th and 11th students randomly selected from 33 secondary and all the 17 higher secondary public schools of district Lahore. Two instruments were developed out of the Study of Instructional Improvement (SII) survey (Hill, Schilling, & Ball, 2008) to measure teachers’ MKT and students’ MCK. A mathematics achievement test was developed by the researchers according to the national curriculum of secondary level. All the three instrument were validated from experts and pilot tested. Descriptive statistics, correlation and ANOVA were applied on the data. The result showed that there was a significantly positive relationship between teachers’ MKT and students’ MCK and between students’ MCK and students’ achievement in mathematics. However, no significant relationship was found between teachers’ MKT and students’ achievement in mathematics. Further analysis of demographic variables revealed that another variable “help in study at home” is affecting the MCK and achievement of students as an intervening variable.
Downloads
References
1. Ball, D. L. (1990). The mathematical understandings that prospective teachers bring to teacher education. Elementary School Journal, 90(4), 449-466.
2. Ball, D. L. (1993). With an eye on the mathematical horizon: Dilemmas of teaching elementary school mathematics. Elementary School Journal, 93(4), 373–397.
3. Ball, D. L., & Bass, H. (2000). Interweaving content and pedagogy in teaching and learning to teach: Knowing and using mathematics. In J. Boaler (Ed.), Multiple perspectives on the teaching and learning of mathematics (pp. 83–104). Westport, CT: Ablex.
4. Ball, D. L., & Bass, H. (2003). Making mathematics reasonable in school. In G. Martin (Ed.), Research compendium for the principles and standards for school mathematics (pp. 27–44). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
5. Ball, D. L., Hill, H. C., & Bass, H. (2005). Knowing mathematics for teaching: Who knows mathematics well enough to teach third grade and how can we decide? American Educator, 14-46.
6. Ball, D. L., Thames, M. H., & Phelps, G. C. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special?
. Journal of Teacher Education, 59(5), 389-407.
7. Harbison, R. W., & Hanushek, E. A. (1992). Educational performance for the poor: Lessons from rural northeast Brazil. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
8. Hill, H. C., Rowan, B., & Ball, D. L. (2005). Effects of teachers' mathematical knowledge for teaching on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 42(2), 271-406.
9. Hill, H. C., Schilling, S. G., & Ball, D. L. (2004). Developing measures of teachers’ mathematics knowledge for teaching. Elementary School Journal, 105(1), 11-30.
10. Hill, H. C., Schilling, S. G., & Ball, D. L. (2008). Learning mathematics for teaching: Mathematical Knowledge for Teaching (MKT) measures: Mathematics released items 2008. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Study of Instructional Improvement. Available at http://www.umich.edu/~lmtweb/files/lmt_sample_items.pdf.
11. Mullens, J. E., Murnane, R. J., & Willett, J. B. (1996). The contribution of training and subject matter knowledge to teaching effectiveness: A multilevel analysis of longitudinal evidence from Belize. Comparative Education Review, 40, 139–157.
12. Panel, N. M. A. (2008). Foundations for success: The final report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
13. Rowan, B., Chiang, F., & Miller, R. J. (1997). Using research on employees’ performance to study the effects of teachers on students’ achievement. Sociology of Education, 70, 256–284.
14. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
15. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1-22).
16. Thanheiser, E., Browning, C., Edson, A. J., Lo, J.-J., Whitacre, I., Olanoff, D., & Morton, C. (2014). Prospective Elementary Mathematics Teacher Content Knowledge: What Do We Know, What Do We Not Know, and Where Do We Go? The Mathematics Enthusiastic, 11(2), 433-448.
17. Wilson, S., Shulman, L. S., & Richert, A. (1987). 150 different ways of knowing”: epresentations of knowledge in teaching. In J. Calderhead (Ed.), Exploring teachers’ thinking (pp. 104-123). Eastbourne, UK: Cassell.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
