Page 186 - Children’s mathematical development and learning needs in perspective of teachers’ use of dynamic math interviews

184
Chapter 6
the use of videorecorded own practices as part of teacher professional development programs to be highly effective (Borko et al., 2011; Heck et al., 2019; Tripp & Rich, 2012).
It was expected that the professional development program would be effective in light of the fact that it was designed with the characteristics of effective professional development clearly in mind (Desimone, 2009; Heck et al., 2019; Van Driel et al., 2012). Effectiveness was demonstrated by the effects of the program on not only the quality of the dynamic math interviews conducted by the teachers but also their positive evaluations of the training program (e.g., satisfaction scores, judgements of utility) (Chapter 4). It is sometimes suggested that professional development programs can be more effective when teachers from the same school participate in a given program (Porter et al., 2010). The evaluative remarks of the teachers who participated in the present research, however, suggest that, the participation of teachers from different schools was beneficial. The teachers did not know each other prior to the program, which made them curious about each other’s experiences and differing school contexts. The collaboration with colleagues from the same grade also stimulated the teachers to exchange information on their practices, explain their instruction decisions, and share other ideas to develop a deeper understanding of children’s mathematics learning and benefit their teaching as a result (Kazemi & Franke, 2004).
On the basis of the outcomes revealed by the application of an analytic framework specifically developed to evaluate elements judged to be critical for the identification of children’s math learning needs, direct positive effects of the professional development program were found (Chapter 4). Compared to the pre-test math interviews, in post- test dynamic math interviews teachers asked significantly more questions about children’s math experiences, beliefs, and emotions; they asked more questions about the children’s reasoning and adopted problem-solving processes; they created a safer but also more stimulating classroom/learning climate; and they identified and stated the children’s math learning needs more often. The teachers also focused their dynamic math interviews on more aspects of children’s mathematical development (e.g., beliefs and emotions, solving