1001941

The Mathematical Understandings That Prospective Teachers Bring to Teacher Education
Author(s): Deborah Loewenberg Ball

Source: The Elementary School Journal, Vol. 90, No. 4 (Mar., 1990), pp. 449-466
Published by: The University of Chicago Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1001941
Accessed: 15-01-2017 04:48 UTC
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1001941?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about
JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms
The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
The Elementary School Journal
This content downloaded from 69.9.24.222 on Sun, 15 Jan 2017 04:48:31 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
The Mathematical
Understandings That
Prospective Teachers
Bring to Teacher
Education
Deborah Loewenberg Ball

Michigan State University
Abstract
This article focuses on the subject matter knowl-
edge of preservice elementary and secondary
mathematics teachers. In order to examine what

teacher candidates understand about mathematics as they enter formal teacher education, results
from questionnaires and interviews with 252

prospective teachers participating in a large
study of teacher education are discussed. The
results reveal the mathematical understandings
that these elementary and secondary teacher
candidates brought with them to teacher education from their precollege and college math-
ematics experiences, understandings that tended

to be rule-bound and thin. Based on these data,
the article challenges 3 common assumptions
about learning to teach elementary or secondary

mathematics: (1) that traditional school mathematics content is not difficult, (2) that precollege
education provides teachers with much of what
they need to know about mathematics, and (3)
that majoring in mathematics ensures subject
matter knowledge. These assumptions underlie
current teacher education practices as well as
proposals to reform the preparation of teachers.
I am really worried about teaching something to kids I may not know. Like long
division-I can do it-but I don't know if
I could really teach it because I don't
know if I really know it or know how to

word it. [Cathy, elementary teacher education student]
Teaching the material is no problem. I

have had so much math now-I feel very
relaxed about algebra and geometry.

[Mark, mathematics major, secondary
teacher education student]
I'm not scared that kids will ask me, you
know, a computational question that I
The Elementary School Journal
Volume 90, Number 4
C 1990 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved.
0013-5984/90/9004-0004$01.00
cannot solve; I'm more worried about answering conceptual questions. Right now,
my biggest fear-and I'm going to have
to confront this on the third of February-
450 THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL JOURNAL
is what I am going to
do if
they
askaverages,
me
quirements,
such
as grade point
some kind of question like, "Why are
major fields of study, test scores, or courses.

there negative numbers?" [Cindy, mathRarely are the
understandingseduof prospecematics major, secondary
teacher
tive teachers explored: How do they uncation student]
derstand the subjects they plan to teach?

do they know
and how
do they think ar
Cathy, Mark, andWhat
Cindy
(all
names
about it?
pseudonyms) are preservice
teachers wh
In this article,
I present
a perspective
differ in what they think
they
need
to on
know
in order to teach mathematics. While Mark
what subject matter knowledge for teaching
mathematics entails and analyze the mathhas confidence in the sufficiency of his
ematical understandings of a sample of promathematics knowledge, both Cindy and
spective elementary and secondary teacher

Cathy suspect that they may come up short
education students. The understandings
when they try to teach. The comments of
these three teacher candidates exemplify that
al- these students-both the elementary
candidates and the mathematics majorsternative points of view about the subject
brought with them to teacher education

matter preparation of teachers. Cathy's
view-that she understands the mathemat-
ics herself but needs to learn to teach it-is
raise serious questions about their subject

matter preparation for mathematics teach-
ing. The data highlight the need to reexthe basis for traditional formal preservice
amine common assumptions about what
teacher education, where students are
prospective teachers need to know and how
taught methods for teaching but rarely
they can learn it, assumptions that underlie
study content. Mark expresses a view that
current teacher education as well as, paraundergirds many of the current proposals
to reform traditional teacher education: that
doxically, proposals to reform teacher prepis, that people who have majored in math- aration. I conclude the article with a closer
ematics are steeped in the subject matterlook at three of these assumptions.
and have thus acquired the subject matter
Method
knowledge needed to teach. Cindy's fear
that, although she can do the mathematics,This article draws on data from the Teacher
she may not have the kind of mathematicalEducation and Learning to Teach Study
understandings she will need in order to(TELT) currently under way at the National
help students learn, is not shared by many Center for Research on Teacher Education
who consider the preparation and certifi- (NCRTE) at Michigan State University. The
cation of teachers.
study examines what teachers are taught
This article focuses on the subject matter and what they learn in 11 diverse preser-
knowledge of prospective mathematics vice, induction, in-service, and alternativeteachers. Although no one would disagree route programs around the country, comthat subject matter is a critical componentbining case studies of programs with lonof what teachers need to know, it has not gitudinal studies of participants' learning
been the focus of research on teacher learn- (see Ball and McDiarmid [1988] and NCRTE
ing (Ball & McDiarmid, in press). Moreover, [1988] for additional information about the
even when it is discussed, there is little
program and learner components of the
agreement about what is meant by "subject TELT study).
matter knowledge for teaching"-what
This article focuses on one part of the
would count as adequate understanding of
large study: the understandings of mathea domain and how to know if someone has
matics held by 252 preservice teacher canthat kind of understanding. Discussion didates at the point at which they entered
about prospective teachers' subject matter formal teacher education in five preservice
knowledge tends to center on suitable re- program sites: Dartmouth College, UniverMARCH 1990
PROSPECTIVE TEACHERS 451
particularState
question, weUniversity,
are interested in
sity of Florida, Illinois
Michigan State University,
learning what puzzles
and
them about
Norfolk
it. Despitesample
these explanations,
we realize that217
State University. This
includes
elementary education
participants'
majors
responses
and
cannot35
be equally
mathreliable
or valid.to teach high
ematics majors who
plan
school. The sample was
not
selected
to
be
For the
analysis
reported in this
article,
representative of the
frequencies
population
were calculated
of
for prorelevant
spective teachers. Still,
questionnaire
the
responses.
demographic
Careful substandata indicate that thetive
subjects
are
very
simanalyses of the
interview
questions
led
ilar to the general population
teacher
to the creation of
of a set
of responseedcate-
ucation students in terms of characteristics
gories for each question. These categories

such as ethnicity, gender, social class, and
were modified in the course of data analysis
to better accommodate teacher candidates'
age.
The study design is longitudinal. At reresponses. Most questions were cross-anapeated intervals, we administer a questionlyzed on several dimensions: subject matter
naire to all college students in the sample.
understanding, ideas about teaching, learnWe also interview and observe a smaller
ing and the teacher's role, and feelings or
"intensive" sample of students whom
we
attitudes
about mathematics, pupils, or self.
follow more closely throughout their preProspective
Teachers' Knowledge of
service program and into their first year
of
Division with Fractions
teaching.
Both the questionnaire and the interThis section opens with a close analysis of
view were designed to explore participants'
the prospective teachers' understanding o
ideas, feelings, and understandings about
one particular mathematics topic-division
with fractions-and then moves to a more
mathematics and writing, about the teaching and learning of mathematics and writgeneral discussion of the qualitative dimening, and about students as learners of these
sions of their mathematics knowledge. This
subjects. Many of the questions are
grounded in scenarios of classroom teaching and woven with particular subject matter topics. Among the mathematical topics
are rectangles and squares, perimeter and
area, place value, subtraction with regrouping, multiplication, division, fractions, zero
and infinity, proportion, variables and solving equations, theory and proof, slope and
graphing.'
We have tried to help the students who
are participating in this longitudinal study
understand the purposes of our research.
Participants know that we are interested in
what they think about a host of issues related to teaching and that we are trying to
track whether and how any of their ideas
change over the course of their teacher education program. We explain that many of
the questions we ask are puzzling and that
people's responses vary widely, that if par-
ticipants are puzzled or confused about a
close look illustrates the level of analysis
needed, both of the teacher candidates'
ideas and ways of thinking as well as of the

content itself, in exploring and appraising
prospective teachers' subject matter knowledge. Examining a specific topic also makes
more vivid the contrast between some key
characteristics of what preservice teachers
have learned as students and what they
need to know as teachers.
Explanation of the Concept

Division is a central concept in mathematics at all levels and figures prominently
throughout the K-12 curriculum. When
studying division, students can learn about
rational and irrational numbers, place
value, the connections among the four basic

operations, as well as about the limits and
power of relating mathematics to the real
world. Because students often have diffi-
culty learning division, teachers should un-
derstand it well. I discuss

briefly
tions. A typical division
eighth-grade textbook
introduction
division of fractions
states
here in order to help
theto reader
appraise
t
simply,
"Dividing by a fraction
is the same
prospective teachers'
knowledge
in the
sec
tion that follows.
as multiplying by its reciprocal" (Bolster et
At its foundation, division has to do with al., 1978, p. 147). Little or no attention is
forming groups. Two kinds of groupings are given to the meaning of division with frac-
possible:
1. Forming groups of a certain size. For
example, the teacher might take a class of
28 students and form groups of four. The
problem is, How many groups of that size
tions, and no connections are made be-
tween division with fractions and division
with whole numbers. Each is treated as a
special case.
Dividing by fractions, however, is not

different conceptually from dividing by
to as the measurement model of division.
whole numbers. Suppose, for example, that
you owe a friend $100 and must repay the
2. Forming a certain number of groups. For
money, although without interest. You can
example, the teacher takes a class of 28 stucan be formed? This is sometimes referred
explore how long it would take to repay this

dents and forms four groups. The problem
debt, given different payment amounts. If
is to determine the size of each group. This
you pay $2 per week, it will take you 50
model is sometimes referred to as the par-
titive model of divison.
weeks. This can be formulated mathemat-
Consider a typical division statementically as 100 + 2 = 50. Now, consider how
with whole numbers, such as 7 +- 2, whichlong it will take you if you repay at a rate
may represent one of two kinds of situa- of 504 per week. Fifty cents = 1/2 dollar, so
tions:
1. I have 7 slices of pizza. If I want

to serve 2 slices per person, how many
portions do I have? (Measurement interpretation-answer: 31/2 portions.)
2. I have 7 slices of pizza. I want

to split the pizza equally between 2
people. How much pizza will each
person get? (Partitive interpretation-answer: 31/2 slices.)
Because these two situations represent

different meanings of division, the referent
for 31/2 is different in the two. In the first
situation, the answer is a number of portions
this option can be expressed as 100 - 1/2.

If you understand division and have a feel
for amounts of money, you know that 200
weeks is a reasonable answer to this (al-
though 4 years to pay back $100 will probably jeopardize your friendship). If you are
uncertain about your calculations, you can
verify them by multiplying the number of
weeks by the amount of the payment. For
example, 200 X .50 = $100.00 (or 200 X
1/2 = 100). Both of these repayment plans

model the first meaning of division abovethat is, take $100 and form "groups"-first
of $2 and then of one-half dollar. The prob-
lem in both cases is how many "groups"(the size of the portion was already de- or payments-of the given amount there are
cided); in the second, the answer is a num- in $100, a measurement representation of

ber of slices per portion (the question was 100 + 1/2.
how large each portion would be). In each
To see a partitive model of the same
case, multiplying the result (31/2) by the expression, try the following. Imagine that
number used to divide the original total you are packing apples in crates. You have
yields that total (31/2 X 2 = 7).
100 apples and find that they fill exactly half
What about the specific topic at hand, a crate. How many apples will it take to fill
division with fractions? Remembering to a crate? In this case, the number 1/2 re"invert and multiply"-that is, to invert the presents the number of groups already on
divisor and multiply it by the dividend-is hand. The question is, How many will be
one way of understanding division by frac- in each whole group? Notice that this repMARCH 1990
divide fractions
and asked them
show us
resentation corresponds
directly
to to
the
alby doing 13/4 1/2. Then
told them
that
gorithm "invert and multiply":
in we
fact,
one
try toof
come doubling
up with pictures,
would think about it many
in teachers
terms
stories, or
realfill
world half
representathe number of apples models,
it takes
to
a
tions
help pupils
understand
mathematcrate. Worth noting too
is tothat
the
procedure
anduniquely
asked them whether
they
"invert and multiply" ical
is ideas
not
suited
could think of
something to represent the
to dividing with fractions.
Understanding
statement 13/4 is
1/2. a
If they
were able to
why "invert and multiply"
plausible
describe a representation,
we probed as
their
strategy entails understanding
division
understanding ofwith
its correspondence
to their
the inverse of multiplication,
integers
paper-and-pencil
calculations.
If theythe
were
and fractions. For instance,
6 +
2 yields
same result as 6 X 1/2
(where
has inunable
to come up one
with anything,
we told
them that many
people
find this difficult
verted the 2 and multiplied
the
result
by
and asked them
why
they thought
it was
the dividend, 6). Yet rarely,
if
ever,
is this
hard toSince
do.
made explicit to pupils.
division with
is entailed
in answering these
fractions is most oftenWhat
taught
algorithmically, it is a good sitequestions?
for examining
To use "invert and promultiply,"
the mixed number must first be of
converted
spective teachers' understanding
the
meaning of division.
to an improper fraction-that is, 13/4 + 1/2

becomes 7/4 X 2/1. Multiplying the numerExploring Prospective
Teachers'
ators and
denominators produces 14/4, which
Understandings
should be expressed as 31/2. What does the
answer 31/2 mean?

lies the essence
of
We used two approaches
toHerein
learn
how
preservice teachers the
understood
algorithm's conceptualdivision
background. As
with fractions: a questionnaire

item
and
in any division, 13/4
- 1/2 has
to do an
with
groups-in this case, groups of a certain size:
Questionnaire item. This item asks re- 1/2. How many groups of that size can be
interview task.
spondents to select from among a set of four formed out of 13/4?
story problems those that represent a given

Asking the prospective teachers how
division statement, for example:
they learned to solve 13/4 + 1/2 allowed us
Which of the following is a good story
problem to illustrate what 1/4 + 1/2 means?
Choose all that apply.

a) A recipe calls for 41/4 cups of milk.
How much milk is needed for half a
batch?
b) It takes 41/4 hours to drive 200 miles.

How far will we have gone in half an
hour?
c) Jim needs 41/4 pounds of lentils. How

many half-pound bags should he buy?
d) None of these. Instead:
e) I'm not sure.
to see whether they knew the algorithm

"invert and multiply" or any other procedure for dividing by fractions. Asking them
to generate a representation gave us a view
of their understanding of division.
Results
The elementary candidates as well as the

secondary students (who were majoring in
mathematics) had significant difficulty "unpacking" the meaning of division with frac-
tions. These results fit with evidence from
other parts of the interviews and questionAlthough only one of the options (c) is
naires that suggest that the teacher educaa mathematically appropriate representa-tion students' substantive understanding of
mathematics was both rule bound and comtion of the division, respondents are di-
rected to mark all that apply.

partmentalized.
Interview task. We first asked the pro- Selecting a representation. Selecting an
spective teachers how they were taught to
appropriate representation of division from
representations.
Only four tha
among an array of Appropriate
options
is easier
out of only
35 teacher candidates
in the
intensive
generating one. Still,
30%
of
the pr
sample (11%)
were able
to describe
a comservice teachers chose
the
story
proble
pletely1/2.
appropriate
representation
of 13/4 + ar
that represented 13/4
These
results
1/2. Correct
not come
easily,
further tempered by
the responses
fact did
that
many
however. correct response als
those who selected the
For incorrect
example, Connie, a mathematics
selected one or more
respons
major, to
said she
did not have
any that
problems ap
(they were instructed
"circle
all
ply"). For example, "doing
30%
it" of
(i.e., inverting
the respondent
and multiplying
selected the story that
to get themodeled
answer) but that she
41/4
was not good
2 as
at creating story problems.
She thought
for d
well the one that represented
41/4
1/2,
a moment and then said she might
use "repspite the fact that differentiating
betwee
resentations
on paper, on the blackboard,
these two is the key
conceptual
issue.
addition, even when
thingspresented
like that.... I guess I would,
with
I could
fou
a number line. You know,
let's mark
off o
choices, 10% of theuseelementary
and
6%
the secondary teacher
candidates
select
where it is;
here's one-and-three-quarters
the "I don't know"and

option.
1 show
there's a half. Table
Now how many
times
the distribution of does

responses
to
the
item
a half count there?
Then
you get
this
among elementary
farand
and thensecondary
you have to talk about cand
that.
How much of a half is that?" Connie ex-
dates.
Generating a representation. The in-
plained that this representation would be

terview results help us understand reasons good because it showed that the question
was: How many halves are in 13/4?
for responses to the questionnaire item. VirAlthough the other three prospective
tually all of the teacher candidates were
able to calculate 13/4 1/2 during the inter- teachers who gave correct representations
views. They remembered to invert and mul- understood the meaning of division with
tiply-the rule they had been taught-and fractions, they had more difficulty develalthough a few were momentarily unsure oping representations. Their problems had
about which number to invert, most were
a somewhat forced quality. For example,
Tony first said he could not "think of anyable to carry out the procedure.
However, very few secondary teacher thing specific." Then he said he would use
candidates and no elementary candidates pizza:
were able to generate a mathematically appropriate representation of the division. Table 2 shows the distribution of responses
across these three categories among ele-
mentary and secondary teacher candidates.
If you took the pizza and took 1/2 of a

pizza and you took a whole pizza and 3/4
of a pizza (that would be 13/4). You put
the 1/2 of the pizza on top of each piece.
So first you'd take the whole pizza and
TABLE 1. Preservice Teachers' Representations of 13/4 * 1/2 on Questionnaire
Teacher Candidates (N = 252)
Elementary (%) Secondary (%)

Response (n = 217) (n = 35) Totals
Appropriate representation 30.3 40.0 31.1
Inappropriate representation 60.2 54.3 59.2
Unable to generate a representation 9.5 5.7 9.7
NoTE.--Respondents were instructed to "mark all that apply" fro

representations; 30% of those who selected the appropriate represe
more of the inappropriate representations.
MARCH 1990
TABLE 2. Preservice Teachers' Representations of 1

Teacher Candidates N = 35
Elementary Secondary
Responsea (n = 25) (n = 10) Totals
Appropriate representation 0 4 4
Inappropriate representation 10 2 12
Unable to generate a representation 15 4 19
a Data are frequencies.
you'd put it on top of it. Then

take
give ayou'd
careful conceptual
that off, whatever it fits on, and you'd do
explanation of
how to split the pizza equally: "If there's
it again. Only take if off if it fits the whole
three-quarters
here and first you want
thing. If... both pieces are
equal. over
Then
to
tackle
that
part
before
you go through the 1/2 a piece and do the we break into the
nice pizza
that's still
there ... and then if
same for that. Take that off.
Then
you
get that last piece and you each
... of
well,
that's
us eat half,
ate half of a three-quarthe way I'd explain it.
ters for each of us, then each of us ate half
of the whole, then we'll eat all the pizza."

Tony then explained what She
the
answer
(31/2)
said each
person would
get 7/8 of a pizza
meant in this context: "You'd take the 1/2
altogether.
and the answer would be how many times Abby's was by far the most common re-
you got a whole half (if you want to say

sponse. Most of the prospective teachers
that). Of the ... whatever's left over, whatused round food-pizzas or pies-and depart of it is of the half. I guess you couldscribed two people sharing the food. The
say. You'd have a 1/4 left, which is 1/2 of reasons

a
for this are understandable but
half."i
nonetheless troubling. Two are particularly
This makes sense, although layingstriking: the students' preoccupations and
pieces of pizza on top of whole pizzas forces

confusions with fractions and their tendthe imagination a bit and suggests that itency to confound everyday and mathematwas not easy for Tony to devise a realisticical language.
story. All four teacher candidates' examples Concerning preoccupations and confuappropriately represented division withsions with fractions, the teacher candidates'
fractions. Their answers, while a bit awk-comments showed that they saw the ques-
ward, indicated that they understood the tion as one about fractions instead of diviproblem in terms of division, that they
sion. When asked, for example, what made
thought about how many halves there arethe task difficult, most commented that it
in 13/4.
was hard (or impossible) to relate 13/4 1/2
Inappropriate representations. Twelve
to real life because, as Lee said, "you don't
out of 35 teacher candidates (34%) generthink in fractions, you think more in whole
ated representations during interviews that
numbers." Not only did their explanations
did not correspond to the problem. The
most frequent error was to represent division by 2 instead of division by 1/2. For ex-
ample, Abby, a mathematics major, gave

the following story: "If we had one and
three-quarters pizzas left and there were
two of us dying to split it, then how would
we be able to split that?" She proceeded to
reveal that they framed the problem in

terms of fractions but also that many were
uncomfortable with fractions as real quantities. Several commented that they did not
"like" fractions.
Round models account for most pictorial

representations of fractions in school textbooks. Focusing on fractions therefore in-
a change
in the referenttoward
unit from wholes
clined the prospective
teachers
cir
to fourths.
Here is a typical
supcular representations.
Food
wasexample:
commo
pose you
have 13/4
to splitbe
equally
because they assumed
that
it pizzas
would
in
trinsically more interesting
to students
between two hungry
teenagers (13/4 than
- 2).
Each pizza objects
is divided into 4 (Ball,
pieces, so you
have
other divisible circular
1988
7
pieces.
Therefore
each
person
gets
7/8
of a
In responding to our question, the prospec
pizza,
which istheir
31/2 pieces
of pizza. Howtive teachers tripped
over
interpret
ever, to
divide
something in half means
to
tion of the problem
as
essentially
"abou
divide
it into two equal
parts (4- 2); to di- o
fractions" and their
limited
conception
vide something by one-half
means to form
and repertoire for representing
fractions.
of 1/2
(see Fig. 1).
The respondents groups
also
confounded
ev-
The teacher
candidates' error resulted
eryday language and
mathematical
lan
from a common but problematic confoundguage. Lee, a prospective elementary
teacher, was one of only a few who de- ing of everyday language with mathemat-
parted from round food models-pizzas and ical language. Orr (1987) discusses some of
pies. Thinking of food at first, she said that the mismatches between linguistic and
it was impossible to use food as a model mathematical use of prepositions. Aware"because it's hard to have 1/2 a person" shar-
ness of such confusions is at the heart of
ing the food. Then it occurred to her to use what teachers must know if they are to help
pupils understand mathematics.
a "time problem":
I was just thinking that a plane ride,
maybe, a plane flight takes an hour and

three-quarters and you . .. were going to
stop halfway through and pick up more
passengers-so how much time would
No representation. Nineteen (15 elementary, 4 secondary) of 35 teacher candidates (54%) were unable to generate a
representation for 13/4 1/2. Most of them
tried to use the numbers (13/4 and 1/2) but
have passed from the time that you left

the airport till the time you made it to
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
your first stop or something like that. It's
a really good example-the whole trip

takes an hour and three-quarters and
halfway through you're going to stop and
pick up some more people and you left

at, you know, 9:00 in the morning and,
you know, you're supposed to get to your
destination at 11:45 (sic). When you
stopped to pick up the passengers, what

time would it be then? It would be half-
way through the flight.
4 +-- 8
Although Lee was able to come up with

a novel context for her representation, she,
like most others, represented division by
two instead of division by one-half. The re-
spondents tended to confuse dividing in

half with dividing by one-half, and they did
not seem to be aware of the difference, even
though the answer they got to their story

problems (7/8) differed from their calculated
answer (31/2).
The teacher candidates did not notice
4 - 2 2
FIG. 1. An illustration of the difference between
division by one-half and division by two.

this discrepancy because it was masked by
MARCH 1990
did not represent division.

thought the task For
was impossible
example,
may have
revealed a view of mathematics as a domain
Mary tried the following:
where algorithms, not meanings, are cenUm, about a classroomtral.on a field trip and
one-and-three-quarters of the class went
one way and one-half of the class went
Summary
the other way, and we're solved-oh,

Although few of the prospective teachers
wait a minute, that wouldn't work,
would it? One-and-three-quarters di- even mentioned division explicitly, the difvided by [pause], um, I think I would still ficulties all of them experienced (including
use it as a group of people [pause], dithose who generated appropriate represenvided by half of it [pause], half of a wall
or something that they walked by, and tations) suggest a narrow understanding of
then how much of the class was left on
division. Although they worried about the
the one side of the wall?
fractions in the problem, they only considered division in partitive terms: forming a
The interviewer asked, "Half of a wall? Is
certain number of equal parts. This meaning
that what you said, or half of a class?" Mary (in this case, forming 1/2 group out of 13/4 of
tried again: "Half of the wall, like, that something) corresponds less easily to diviwouldn't work either. One-and-three-
sion with fractions than does the mea-
quarters [laughs], I guess I can't do it

that
surement
model (in this case, forming
way. I don't know. That would be groups

reallyof 1/2 out of 13/4 of something). In a
hard to do because you couldn't, youstudy

can't of preservice elementary teachers
give like a half of something will divide
the
understanding
of division, Graeber, Tirosh,
class, or, you know, something like and
that."
Glover (1986) found that preservice
teachers
Mary's story revealed confusions about
and tended to think in terms of this
discomfort with fractions. Simply trying
to interpretation. Few of the preserpartitive
represent the numbers themselves in
some
vice teachers in their study were able to
real context was difficult for many write
of the
story problems that modeled a measprospective teachers. One teacher candidate
urement interpretation of division. This
commented that it was hard to "[find]
findingaoffers another insight into why the
model or a story to teach division bytask
fracof making meaning out of 13/4 1/2
tions. To me fractions are hard towas
begin
so difficult for the prospective teachers
with, and then the division part of it is
inconour study.
fusing to the mind, I think; to me it is, it can
Subject
be confusing." Respondents who did
not Matter Knowledge for
Teaching
generate a representation at all seemed
to
fall into two groups. Some recognized
the
Underlying this analysis is the assumption
conceptual problem. They initially
prothat
the goal of mathematics teaching is for
posed stories or models that represented
di- to develop mathematical understudents
vision by 2 and then realized this. Others
standing. On one hand, this implies that
seemed to think that it was not a feasible
pupils should acquire knowledge of mathtask-that 13/4 +1/2 could not be representedematical concepts and procedures, the re-
in real-world terms.
These responses reflect significantly dif-
lationships among them, and why they

work. On the other hand, understanding
ferent understandings. In one sense, those equally implies learning about mathematiwho saw the conceptual problem revealedcal ways of knowing as well as about matha better grasp of the idea than those who ematical substance. The two are interrepresented division by 2. Still, despite thistwined. In order for students to develop
recognition, they were unable to figure outpower and control in mathematics, students
what "division by 1/2" meant. Those who must learn to validate their own answers.
They must have opportunities

nally, teachers must appreciate
to make
and under
co
jectures, justify their
and
stand claims,
the connections
amongengage
mathematica
ideas: how fractions
related
to division,
mathematical argument,
all are
of
which
d
pend upon and canhow

extend
pupils'
under
place value figures
in multiplication
standings of concepts
and procedures
(Bal
computation,
and the connections and
dis1988; Lampert, 1986,
in among
press).
tinctions
measurements of distance,
In order to facilitate this kind of under-
area, and volume.

standing, teachers must understand math- In addition to this kind of substantive
ematics deeply themselves. Neither a per- knowledge, another critical dimension of

fect textbook lesson nor a smooth proceduresubject matter knowledge for teaching is
for calling on pupils will bail out the teacher knowledge about mathematics. This includes
who is confronted with students who want
understandings about the nature of mathto know why, when they divide 13/4 by 1/2,ematical knowledge and of mathematics as
a field. What counts as an "answer" in
the answer (31/2) is "larger." Teachers must
understand mathematics well themselves if
mathematics? What establishes the validity
they are to be able to respond to such of

a an answer? What is involved in doin
mathematics? In other words, What do

question-whether it is by directly answermathematicians
do? Mathematical knowling the question or by reframing the question so that students can figure it out them-edge is based on both convention and logic.
selves. Teachers should understand the
Which ideas are arbitrary or conventional
subject in sufficient depth to be able to repand which are logical? What is the origin of
resent it appropriately and in multiple
some of the mathematics we use today and
ways-with story problems, pictures, situhow does mathematics change? Similar unations, and concrete materials. They need
derstandings about subject matter are cruto understand the subject flexibly enough
cial to teaching in other areas, such as sciso that they can interpret and appraiseence,
stu- history, and literature.
dents' ideas, helping them to extend and

Prospective Teachers' Substantive
formalize intuitive understandings and
Knowledge
challenging incorrect notions.
What does subject matter knowledge for

The assumption that people understand
teaching entail, then? Hardly anyone would
the meanings of the mathematical proceargue with the claim that teachers need subdures they have learned to perform is a falstantive knowledge of mathematics-oflacy
par(Hatano, 1982). Many children and
ticular concepts and procedures (rectangles,
adults perform mathematical calculations
functions, and the multiplication of deciwithout understanding the underlying prinmals, for example). This substantive knowlciples or meaning. As one of the math maedge of mathematics is what others most
jors we interviewed reflected, "I absolutely
easily recognize as "subject matter knowldo it by the rote process-I would have to
edge." Three criteria characterize the think
kindabout it." Although almost all the pro-
of substantive knowledge teachers need.

spective teachers were able to calculate
First, teachers' knowledge of concepts13/4and1/2 correctly, strikingly few were able

procedures should be correct. Thus, to
they
represent the meaning underlying the
should be able to draw a rectangle, identify
procedure they had learned.
a function, and calculate 13/4 + 1/2, for inDivision of fractions is but one example
stance. Second, they must understandofthe
this phenomenon. Our interviews indiunderlying principles and meanings-what
cate that prospective teachers lack explicit
understanding
of concepts and principles
it means for 13/4 + 1/2 to be 31/V2 or why
the
numbers "move over" on each line of aeven
long
when they can perform the calculamultiplication problem, for instance.
Fi-involved. In order to help someone
tions
MARCH 1990
else understand and do

mathematics,
howgebraic
equations). They knew a different
ever, being able to "do

it" oneself
is even
not
rule or procedure
for each case and,
though we pressed
on howbe
they could
sufficient. Teachers must
notthem
only
able
to describe the steps explain
forthese,
following
they were unable an
to go beal-
gorithm but also discuss

yond these rules
the
(Ball,judgments
in press-a). Simi-
made and the meanings

of and
reasons
for
larly, although
all could
multiply large
certain relationships numbers,
or procedures.
Teachfew prospective teachers
meners must be able to generate
explanations
tioned the centrality
of place value in the
or other representations,
onlarge
the
spot
procedure often
for multiplying
numbers
in response to a student
question.
This
(why the numbers
in each partial
product is
more than "metacognitive
awareness"
of
"move over") (Ball,
in press-b).
It is critical to note
here that the standard
the processes used in solving
a mathematics
curriculum that most
problem or carrying school
outmathematics
a procedure;
it includes the ability to prospective
talk about
and
model
teachers have
studied
treats the
concepts and procedures.
subject as though it consisted of discrete bits
Few prospective teachers,
including
the
of procedural
knowledge. As discussed
math majors, seemedabove,
to for
have
this
kind of
example,
most mathematics
textbooks introduce division of fractions
a
explicit conceptual understanding.
As as
Ben,
one of the math majors,
reflected
dinew topic
and do not showabout
its relationship
vision by zero, "I just
know
I don't
to division
withthat....
whole numbers.
Rarely are
really know why.... students

It's almost
become
a
encouraged or
helped to make
fact ... something that

it's among
just the
there."
connections
disparate ideas and
With regard to connectedness
of thein proprocedures they encounter
their mathespective teachers' knowledge,
of
the
matics classes. These few
prospective
teachers'
teacher candidates explicitly
interpreted
the
responses to our
questions were therefore
division with fraction tasks as cases of dinot surprising, given the way in which they
vision. When they were asked how theyhad probably been taught mathematics
learned to do 13/4 + 1/2, they were able tothemselves.

produce the specific rule for division of frac-
tions and to use it. This specific algorithmic
Prospective Teachers' Knowledge
about Mathematics
knowledge was inadequate, however, for

representing the meaning of division of As discussed above, knowledge of confractions. As students themselves, what
cepts and procedures-substantive underthey had to learn was the rule "invert and standing of mathematics-is only part of
multiply." Knowing the rule and being able
to use it had been sufficient to pass math
tests; consequently, they had learned to di-
vide fractions without focusing on the

meaning of division of fractions as part of
the larger concept of division.
Our interviews with prospective teachers showed that they varied in how clearly
they remembered particular rules or procedures, but few connected particular ideas
to larger concepts. For example, almost all
of the prospective secondary teachers focused exclusively on the surface differences
among three cases of division (division by
zero, division by fractions, division in al-
knowing mathematics. In examining prospective teachers' understandings of mathematics, another critical area of inquiry and
analysis is the way in which their ideas
about mathematics influence their representations of mathematics. What do they think
an explanation is? How do they sort out

convention from logic with respect to par-
ticular principles or ideas? What do they
think it means to "know" or to "do" mathematics?
The prospective teachers focused on

procedures and rules for reasons that
seemed to go beyond the nature of their
substantive knowledge, reasons based in
their ideas about mathematics.

Some prelieved that they knew mathematics.
All of
them reflected
agreed strongly with
dominant assumptions
in questionnaire
their in
items
about being
good at math. As such,
terviews included:
doing
mathematics
they were
more likely to say that
the mathmeans following set
procedures
step-by
ematical ideasknowing
could be explained.
The elstep to arrive at answers;
math
ementary
candidatesto
simply
could
not rematics means knowing
"how
do
it";
an
member some
of the content included
in
mathematics is a largely
arbitrary
collectio
of facts and rules.this

Although
section; consequently
people
they didhav
not
know
whether an of
idea could
be explained
many ideas about the
nature
mathemat
or not.
ics, these ideas are generally
implicit, bui
One example was in
the statement,
up out of years of experience
math "The
clas
slope ofin
a vertical
line is undefined."
rooms and from living
a culture
in Almost
whi
mathematics is both revered and reviled.
a third of the elementary candidates said

they were not sure. In contrast, none of the
The prospective teachers seemed to take
secondary candidates was unsure, and over

their assumptions about mathematics for
90% said that this could be explained. Howgranted. Unlike their understandings of the
substance of mathematics, which some ofever, in the interview, when we asked the
them wished to increase or deepen, the
secondary majors how they would explain
this idea to their pupils, almost all of the
preservice teachers did not focus on their
understandings about mathematics. They
explanations were simply restatements of
did not seem dissatisfied with them, nor didrules. Most referred to division by zero,
which they said was "undefined." "You

they even seem to consider them.
can't ever do this. It's a rule you should
The prospective teachers' assumptions
about the nature and value of mathematical
never forget," explained Tony.
knowledge and what it means to know On the questionnaire, a third of the secsomething in mathematics affected their re- ondary candidates thought that most mathsponses to all of the interview questions. In
ematics could not be explained, while twice
this section, I focus on one specific idea that as many elementary candidates thought it
was widely shared by the teacher candicould not be explained. The interviews sugdates: that mathematics is a collection of
gested that what respondents meant by an
arbitrary rules to be memorized.
"explanation" was actually to give a rule,
however. Almost all the prospective teachKnowing Something in Mathematics:ers in both groups agreed that remembering
rules and facts was essential. The difference
Rules as Explanations
The questionnaire presented a setwas
of that the secondary candidates rememmathematical ideas that are often reprebered these rules better than the elementary
sented as rules (e.g., "invert and multiply"
majors and used them as explanations. In
or an/am = an-m). We asked the preservice
other words, the rules were explanations.
teachers to indicate whether they thought
For example, the most common explanation
each idea could be explained, must be memfor division by zero was to say that "it's
orized, or whether they were not sure. undefined."
The
Although true, this does not
answers to these questions illustrate theexplain
inwhat that means or why dividing by
zero is undefined.
teraction of what the prospective teachers
knew and what they believed it means to The prospective teachers' ideas about
know something in mathematics.
what it means to know something in mathSome interesting differences between
ematics generally centered on remembering
prospective elementary and secondary

rules and being able to use standard proteachers appear on this issue. The seconcedures. Obviously ideas about mathematdary candidates (mathematics majors)ics
bedo not exist separately from substantive
MARCH 1990
understandings of particular
concepts
orones in
terview questions,
especially the
procedures. Many preservice

teachers
which they have to
deal with mathematical
lacked explicit and connected

ideas. Giggles, conceptual
sighs, exclamations, shaky
voices, and comments
all contribute
understanding of mathematical
ideas
and information
about
the
interaction
between
their
procedures. As such, many of them could
do little else but respond
in
terms
of
rules
feelings and understandings. Third, in the
and procedures.
interviews we asked prospective teachers
what they remembered about their exFeelings about Mathematics
periences with mathematics throughout
Like their understandings
about
mathematschool-in
elementary,
middle, and high
ics, the prospective teachers'
about
school, as feelings
well as in college.
Their accounts
math figured in the way they
about helping
give us a thought
biographical perspective,
and experienced mathematics
were
us to understand and
how they
feel about mathtightly bound up with their
ematics,substantive
how they feel about unthemselves in
derstandings of the discipline.
relation to mathematics, and how those
Many researchers have
been
feelings
bothinterested
affected and were influenced
in teachers' and prospective
"atby theirteachers'
school experiences
with mathe-
matics.
titudes" toward mathematics
(e.g., Bassarear, 1986; Dutton, 1954;I focus
Ferrini-Mundy,
here on the questionnaire re1986; Smith, 1964; Thompson,
1984).
They
sponses only.
As one would
expect, we
have developed scales with
which
to
measfound considerable variation among the
ure teachers' interest in,teacher
enjoyment
of, and
candidates regarding
their feelings
confidence with mathematics,
generally
about mathematics. Some seemed to enjoy
treating attitude as separate
from
undermath and
were eager
to take additional
standing.
courses; others were obviously tense about
Yet, people's understandings of mathethe subject. Some were confident in their
matics are interrelated with how they feel
own ability to do and understand matheabout themselves and about mathematics.
matics; some believed that they were not
The teacher candidates' knowledge, ways
good at math and were anxious about both
of thinking, beliefs, and feelings jointly affected their responses. Their approaches to
figuring out problems were shaped by their
self-confidence, their repertoire of strate-
gies, what they were able to remember
about related concepts, as well as what they

believed about the fruitfulness of trying to
figure out a problem in the first place. Together these comprise the way they participate in and experience mathematics.
We are using three approaches to explore prospective teachers' feelings about

mathematics and about themselves in relation to math. The questionnaire includes
studying and teaching it.

In this area, substantial variation was
apparent between elementary and secondary candidates' responses. Only half of the
elementary teacher candidates said they enjoyed and were good at mathematics; over
a third of them felt that they were not good
at math and said they tried to avoid it. In

contrast, all of the secondary candidates enjoyed mathematics and thought they were
good at it. The secondary candidates all believed they were capable of understanding
even "advanced" math; almost half of the
elementary majors believed they were not.
a number of items designed to elicit re- The interviews suggest that this gap is even
spondents' feelings. A second approach, greater than it appears, for what the ele-
better suited to learning about the relation- mentary majors meant by "advanced math"
ship between affect and cognition, is to pay was often algebra and geometry, while the
attention to affective dimensions of the
mathematics majors were thinking of adteacher candidates' responses to all the in- vanced calculus and group theory.
precollege
and the
"liberal arts"
college mathPreliminary analyses
of
interviews
ematics candidates'
classes. This typical arrangement
show that the teacher
feeling
about mathematics and about their own
reflects implicit and questionable assumptions about the understandings of mathemathematical capabilities were interwoven
matics that prospective teachers bring to
with how much mathematics they felt they
teacher education, about what they need to
knew, their views of the subject, and what
they believed about mathematical abilityknow
in in order to teach mathematics, and
where
and when that can best be learned.
general. It is not surprising that the most
anxious teacher candidates also had taken
the fewest mathematics courses in high

school and college and thought of mathe-
Traditional School Mathematics
Content is Simple
matics as a collection of arbitrary facts. They This first assumption underlies the following three and is based on the notion that
generally also viewed mathematical ability
as innate. This combination of ideas was
topics such as addition, decimals, graphing,
and factoring are not very complicated. Imaccompanied by intense feelings of dislike,
plicitly, the message is: If you can "do"
fear, and anxiety. In contrast, other teacher
these topics, then you can teach them.
candidates thought they knew mathemat-
this assumption, it is logical for

ics, thought mathematics was a bodyGiven
of
teacher
educators to leave subject matter
knowledge, and thought mathematical abil-
preparation to precollege and college math

ity was largely a matter of effort and desire.
classes and to concentrate on teaching

methods
and knowledge of children inteachers who exhibited a calmer feeling of
confidence and control. These teacher canstead. This assumption is founded, howThese ideas characterized prospective
didates were much surer of themselves and
ever, on an unexamined conception of sub-
ject matter knowledge for teaching

of their responses, despite the fact that
many of their responses reflected significantmathematics, one that accepts remembering
and doing as indices of mathematical unmisconceptions about particular mathematical ideas or about the discipline of math-derstanding.
ematics itself.
Assuming that the content of first-grade
These complex combinations of ideas mathematics is something any adult unand reactions that undergird the teacher derstands is to doom school mathematics to
candidates' feelings about mathematics and a continuation of the dull, rule-based cur-
about themselves seemed to influence their
riculum that is so widely criticized.
responses during the interviews. Prospec-Throughout our interviews, many college

students had difficulty working beneath the
tive teachers' feelings are part of the way
surface procedural level of so-called "simthey participate in and understand matheple" mathematics.
matics, not a separate affective dimension
The discussion of division of fractions in
called "attitude," and are a critical area of
focus for teacher education.
this article shows the insufficiency of this
conception of knowledge by illustrating
Rethinking Common Assumptions what Duckworth (1987) refers to as the
Despite the fact that subject matter knowl"depths and perplexities of elementary
edge is logically central to teaching (Buch-arithmetic." Lampert's work (1985, 1986, in
mann, 1984), it rarely figures prominentlypress) also reveals in detail the mathematin teacher preparation. Constraints on for-ical complexity of the "simple" content of
mal preservice teacher education (e.g., toothe school curriculum. However, without
little time, too few credits) are often offeredreviewing and explicating the meanings un-
as the explanation for the fact that the subderlying this simple content, many project matter preparation of teachers is left to spective teachers will be unprepared to do
MARCH 1990
more than teach rules such as "invert and
ture, is one of a linear, rule- and fact-filled
multiply."
body of knowledge in which perspective,
interpretation, and argument are irrelevant.

Elementary and Secondary School
Prospective teachers are therefore unlikely
Mathematics Classes Can Prepare
to acquire an appropriate view of the disTeachers to Teach Mathematics
cipline as a result of precollege mathematics
This assumption flows logically from the
experience. The view they do hold is likely
first. Whatever the contributions of college
to shape not only the way in which they
mathematics study to teachers' disciplinary
teach mathematics once they begin teaching
knowledge, a large part of what they teach
but also the way in which they approach
is material that they studied in elementary
learning to teach mathematics (Ball, 1988):
and secondary school. The fact that proA vicious cycle emerges.
spective teachers study very little school
mathematics content as part of their formalMajoring in Mathematics Ensures

teacher preparation implies that this secondSubject Matter Knowledge
assumption is widely shared.
Some people do not make the second
Our research sheds some light on the

assumption. In fact, some completely overvalidity of this assumption. In order to relook prospective teachers' precollege mathinstruction and assume instead that
spond to the questions and tasks on ematics
the
questionnaire and in the interviews, the
subject matter preparation for teaching oc-
teacher candidates drew on what they had

curs at the university. Others would remedy
the shortcomings of precollegiate mathemajors, most of whom had taken over seven
matics education through university coursecollege math courses, had to recall what
work. Many recent proposals for reforming
they had learned in their elementary andteacher education and certification (e.g.,
high school classes in order to answer the
Carnegie Task Force, 1986; Holmes Group,
questions. When they did this, seeking par1986) recommend that elementary teachers
ticular mathematical concepts, procedures,
specialize in an academic discipline. Other
or even terms, they found loose fragments--reforms propose to certify college graduates
rules, tricks, and definitions. Most did notwho have completed an academic major but
find meaningful understanding or even the
have had no teacher education. Underlying
knowledge with which to figure out suchsuch proposals is the assumption that the
understandings on the spot.
study entailed in a college major can equip
While troubling, it is also unsurprising
a prospective teacher with a deep and broad
given the widespread criticism of the alunderstanding of subject matter.
gorithmic understanding fostered in many In mathematics, however, we are findmath classrooms (e.g., Davis & Hersh, 1981;
ing less difference in substantive underGood, Grouws, & Ebmeier, 1983; Goodlad,standing between elementary and seconlearned in school. Even the mathematics
1984; Madsen-Nason & Lanier, 1987; Stodary teacher candidates than one might
dolsky, 1988; Wheeler, 1980). Our findings

expect (or hope). Although the latter, besuggest that what prospective teachers have
cause they are mathematics majors, had
learned in their precollege mathematics
taken more mathematics, this did not seem
classes is unlikely to be adequate for teachto afford them substantial advantage in aring mathematical concepts and procedures
ticulating and connecting underlying conmeaningfully.
cepts, principles, and meanings.
At the same time, the image of matheSome propose that this is due largely to
matics implicit even in good elementary and
the poor academic caliber of teacher edusecondary mathematics classrooms
cation students. However, our interviews
(Schoenfeld, in press), as well as in our cul-with mathematics majors who are not plan-
know mathematics. Unlike

mathematics
ning to teach (not reported
in the
this
article)
do not support this majors,
suggestion.
They,
they tended to blame
their gapstoo,
in
struggle with making
knowledge
sense
on the
of
arbitrariness
division
of the subwith
fractions, relating mathematics
to the real
ject and on their own inadequacies.
What iswith
not at all clear
is the extent to
world, and coming up
explanations
that go beyond the which

restatement
the experience of majoring
of rules.
in mathematics
contributed
these differences,
Furthermore, many
of
the tosecondary
teacher candidates in
our with,
sample
are
good
compared
for example,
differences
that derive from
other social,entrance
cultural, and
students, with impressive
college
exam scores and high
grade
point
averages
individual
influences.
Furthermore,
recency
in their college math
Athe
more
plauwas courses.
a factor. Some of
elementary
candidates
had not
had a mathematics class for masible explanation for
the
mathematics
jors' problems is that
successful
perover even
3 years, while
the secondary candiformance in traditional math classes does
dates were all currently enrolled in math-
not necessarily develop the kinds of ematics

un- courses.
derstanding needed to teach mathematics Clearly, being anxious about mathefor understanding, for success in these
matics is a disposition not well suited to
classes often derives from memorizing forteaching math. Hilton (1980) writes about
mulae and performing procedures. Morethe cyle of poor mathematics education and
over, studying calculus does not usuallymath
af- anxiety that results from having illford students the opportunity to revisit
or
prepared
and anxious teachers teaching
mathematics. However, confidence, couextend their understandings of arithmetic,
algebra, or geometry, the subjects they pled
will with thin and rule-based understandteach.
ing, can pose a threat to student learning if
We are also seeing few differencesteachers
in
confidently proclaim wrong ideas
ideas about mathematics between the eleor portray mathematics in misleading ways.
mentary candidates and the mathematics
In any case, requiring teachers to major in
majors. Most of the prospective teachersmathematics,
in
or even increasing the mathboth groups tended to see mathematicsematics
as
course requirements for prospective
a body of rules and facts, a set of procedures
teachers, will not necessarily ensure in-
to be followed step by step, and they concreases in their substantive understanding

sidered rules as explanations. Clearly, some
or changes in their ideas or feelings about
mathematics.
secondary candidates did not see mathe-
matics this way, while all the elementary
candidates did. However, the overlap Conclusion

between the two groups was larger than one
In deciding on the content and focus of
might expect, given that the secondary canpreservice teacher education, teacher educators
didates had had far more opportunity to
be must ask themselves: Of all the
immersed in the discipline than had thethings
elteachers need to know, which do
ementary candidates.
prospective teachers already know? Which
Our data suggest that the biggest difcan be learned on the job from experience?
ference between the two groups lies in the
Our data suggest that the mathematical un
area of feelings. Most of the secondary canderstandings that prospective teachers
didates were confident that they knew the
bring are inadequate for teaching mathe-
mathematics and were less tentative in their
matics for understanding. And, although

responses. If they could not figure someteachers claim to learn subject matter from
thing out, they assumed they were "rusty." teaching it, this is an empirical question
The elementary candidates were more anx- and one as yet unanswered (Ball & Mcious and more convinced that they did not Diarmid, in press). Common sense would
MARCH 1990
dorsement of may
the OERI/ED
(grant OERI-Gsuggest that, while teachers
figure
out
0001).
the meaning of division with fractions from
1. Readers may obtain copies of the NCRTE
teaching it, they do not
necessarily
uncover
questionnaire
and interviews by writing
to the
National Center for

Research on Teacher Edu- all
the concepts and principles
underlying
116 Erickson
Hall, Michigan
Unithe many rules they cation,
have
learned
nor State
the
versity, East
Lansing,
MI 48824.
connections among them,
and
they
probably do not change their ideas about math-
ematics.
Although it is widely acknowledged asReferences

a central component of what teachers need
to know, the subject matter preparation of
Ball, D. L. (1988). Knowledge and reasoning in
teachers is rarely the focus of any phase of mathematical pedagogy: Examining what proteacher education. Instead, everyone is will- spective teachers bring to teacher education.
ing to assume that it will happen some- Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan
where else: prior to college, in liberal arts State University, East Lansing.
Ball, D. L. (in press-a). Prospective elementary
classes, from teaching. What we are learnand secondary teachers' understandings of
ing about the understanding of mathemat- division. Journal for Research in Mathematics
ics that prospective teachers bring with
Education.
them to teacher education suggests the danBall, D. L. (in press-b). Research on teaching
ger of this assumption and points to the mathematics: Making subject matter knowl-
need to make it a central focus. Doing that
edge part of the equation. In J. Brophy (Ed.),
Advances in research on teaching (Vol. 2).
requires not only changes in emphasis, Greenwich, CT: JAI.
since much mathematics teaching does not

Ball, D. L., & McDiarmid, G. W. (1988). Research
produce the kind of understanding of math-
on teacher learning: Studying how teachers'
ematics that teachers need. Attending se- knowledge changes. Action in Teacher Education, 10(2), 17-24.
riously to the subject matter preparation of
Ball, D. L., & McDiarmid, G. W. (in press). The
elementary and secondary math teachers subject matter preparation of teachers. In W.
implies the need to know much more than R. Houston (Ed.), Handbook of research on
we currently do about how teachers can be teacher education. New York: Macmillan.
Bassarear, T. (1986). Problem solving with dehelped to transform and increase their understanding of mathematics, working with tectives and light bulbs. New England Mathematics Journal, 3-9.
what they bring and helping them move
Bolster, L., Cox, G., Gibb, E., Hansen, V., Kirk-
toward the kinds of mathematical under-
standing needed in order to teach mathe-
matics well.
Note
patrick, J., McNerney, C., Robitaille, D.,
Trimble, H., Vance, I., Walch, R., & Wisner,

R. (1978). Mathematics around us (Grade 8).
Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman.
Buchmann, M. (1984). The priority of knowledge
and understanding in teaching. In J. Raths &
L. Katz (Eds.), Advances in teacher education
(Vol. 1, pp. 29-48). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Carnegie Task Force on Teaching as a Profession.
An earlier version of this article was pre(1986). A nation prepared: Teachers for the 21st
sented at the annual meeting of the American
century. Washington, DC: Carnegie Forum
Educational Research Association, New Orleans, on Education and the Economy.
April 1988. Preparation-of this article was sup-Davis, P., & Hersh, R. (1981). The mathematical
ported by the National Center for Research on experience. New York: Houghton Mifflin.
Teacher Education (NCRTE), Michigan State

Duckworth, E. (1987). Some depths and per-
University. The NCRTE is funded primarily by

plexities of elementary arithmetic. Journal of
the Office of Educational Research and Improve- Mathematical Behavior, 6, 43-94.
ment, U.S. Department of Education. The opinDutton, W. H. (1954). Measuring attitudes
ions expressed herein are my own and do not
toward arithmetic. Elementary School Journal,
55, 24-31.
necessarily reflect the position, policy, or en-
Ferrini-Mundy, J. (1986,
Mathematics
phyApril).
(Ed.), Advances
in research on teaching:
teachers' attitudes and beliefs:
Implications
for (Vol
Teaching for
meaningful understanding
1). Greenwich,
CT: JAI.
inservice education. Paper
presented
at the
Madsen-Nason,
A., & Educational
Lanier, P. (1987). Pamel
annual meeting of the
American
Research Association, San
Kaye'sFrancisco.
general math class: From a computaGood, T., Grouws, D., & Ebmeier,
H. (1983).
Actional to a conceptual
orientation (Research
tive mathematics teaching.
New
York:
Series No.
172). East
Lansing:LongInstitute for
man.
Research on Teaching, Michigan State UniGoodlad, J. (1984). A place called school:
Prospects
versity.
National Center for Research on Teacher Edufor the future. New York: McGraw-Hill.
(NCRTE).
Graeber, A., Tirosh, D., & Glover, R.cation
(1986,
Sep- (1988). Teacher education
tember). Preservice teachers' beliefs
per- to teach: A research agenda.
andand
learning
formance on partitive and measurement
Journal diviof Teacher Education, 39(6), 29-32.
E. W.
(1987). Twice as less: Black English and
sion problems. Paper presented Orr,
at the
eighth
the performance
of black students in matheannual meeting of the North American
chapmatics and science. New York: Norton.
ter of the Study Group for the Psychology
of Mathematics Education, EastSchoenfeld,
Lansing, A.
MI.
(in press). When good teaching
leads to bad results:
Hatano, G. (1982). Cognitive consequences
of
The disasters of well-
taughtskills.
mathematics courses. In P. Peterson
practice in culture-specific procedural
Quarterly Newsletter of the Laboratory
& T.of
Carpenter
Com- (Eds.), Learning through inparative Human Cognition, 4(1), 15-18.
struction: The study of students' thinking
Hilton, P. (1980). Math anxiety: Some
during
causes
instruction
and
in mathematics. Educational
Psychologist,
Vol 23.
suggested cures (pts. 1 and 2). Two
Year
College Mathematics Journal, 11(3,4),
Smith,
174-188,
F. (1964). Prospective teachers' attitudes
246-251.
toward arithmetic. Arithmetic Teacher, 11,
Holmes Group. (1986). Tomorrow's teachers: 474-477.
A
report of the Holmes Group. East Lansing:Stodolsky,
ColS. (1988). The subject matters: Cla
room activity in math and social studies. Chi
lege of Education, Michigan State University.
University of Chicago Press.
Lampert, M. (1985). Mathematics learning cago:
in
context: The voyage of the Mimi. Journal
of
Thompson,
A. (1984). The relationship of teach
Mathematical Behavior, 4, 157-167.
ers' conceptions of mathematics and math
Lampert, M. (1986) Knowing, doing, and teachematics teaching to instructional practice. Ed
ucational Studies in Mathematics, 15, 105ing multiplication. Cognition and Instruction,
127.
3(4), 305-342.
Wheeler, D. (1980). An askance look at remeLampert, M. (in press). Choosing and using mathdiation in mathematics. Outlook, 38, 41-50.
ematical tools in classroom discourse. In J. Bro-
MARCH 1990

1001941

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

1001941

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

The Mathematical Understandings That Prospective Teachers Bring to Teacher Education

Author(s): Deborah Loewenberg Ball

Deborah Loewenberg Ball

edge of preservice elementary and secondary

mathematics teachers. In order to examine what

from questionnaires and interviews with 252

ematics experiences, understandings that tended

the article challenges 3 common assumptions

about learning to teach elementary or secondary

I could really teach it because I don't

know if I really know it or know how to

Teaching the material is no problem. I

relaxed about algebra and geometry.

teacher education student]

I'm not scared that kids will ask me, you

know, a computational question that I

The Elementary School Journal

Volume 90, Number 4

C 1990 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved.

450 THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL JOURNAL

some kind of question like, "Why are

major fields of study, test scores, or courses.

derstand the subjects they plan to teach?

in order to teach mathematics. While Mark

what subject matter knowledge for teaching

spective elementary and secondary teacher

brought with them to teacher education

view-that she understands the mathemat-

ics herself but needs to learn to teach it-is

raise serious questions about their subject

knowledge needed to teach. Cindy's fear

study examines what teachers are taught

PROSPECTIVE TEACHERS 451

ucation students in terms of characteristics

gories for each question. These categories

subjects. Many of the questions are

ticipants are puzzled or confused about a

close look illustrates the level of analysis

needed, both of the teacher candidates'

ideas and ways of thinking as well as of the

have learned as students and what they

need to know as teachers.

Explanation of the Concept

throughout the K-12 curriculum. When

studying division, students can learn about

rational and irrational numbers, place

value, the connections among the four basic

world. Because students often have diffi-

culty learning division, teachers should un-

452 THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL JOURNAL

derstand it well. I discuss

tions, and no connections are made be-

tween division with fractions and division

with whole numbers. Each is treated as a

Dividing by fractions, however, is not

explore how long it would take to repay this

titive model of divison.

weeks. This can be formulated mathemat-

Consider a typical division statementically as 100 + 2 = 50. Now, consider how

1. I have 7 slices of pizza. If I want

2. I have 7 slices of pizza. I want

person get? (Partitive interpretation-answer: 31/2 slices.)

Because these two situations represent

this option can be expressed as 100 - 1/2.