The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Learning to Teach Hard Mathematics: Do Novice Teachers and Their Instructors Give up Too Easily?
Abstract
This article analyzes from several vantage points a classroom lesson in which a student teacher was unsuccessful in providing a conceptually based justification for the standard division-of-fractions algorithm. We attempt to understand why the lesson failed, what it reveals about learning to teach, and what the implications are for mathematics teacher education. We focus on (a) the student teacher's beliefs about good mathematics teaching, her knowledge related to division of fractions, and her beliefs about learning to teach; and (b) the treatment of division of fractions in the mathematics methods course she took. The student teacher's conception of good mathematics teaching included components compatible with current views of effective mathematics teaching. However, these beliefs are difficult to achieve without a stronger conceptual knowledge base and a greater commitment to use available resources and to engage in hard thinking than she possessed. Further, the mathematics methods course did not require the student teacher to reconsider her knowledge base, to confront the contradictions between her knowledge base and at least some of her beliefs, or to reassess her beliefs about how she would learn to teach. These findings suggest that mathematics teacher education programs should reconsider how they provide subject matter knowledge and opportunities to teach it, and whether and how they challenge student teachers' existing beliefs.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Those Who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching
SHULMAN, L. S. (1986) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x015002004 · Cited by 18,546
Cited by
Content Knowledge for Teaching: What Makes It Special?
Loewenberg Ball, D., Thames, M. H., & Phelps, G. (2008) · Journal of Teacher Education · doi:10.1177/0022487108324554 · Cited by 5,388
Effects of Teachers’ Mathematical Knowledge for Teaching on Student Achievement
Hill, H. C., Rowan, B., & Ball, D. L. (2005) · American Educational Research Journal · doi:10.3102/00028312042002371 · Cited by 2,812
Teachers’ Mathematical Knowledge, Cognitive Activation in the Classroom, and Student Progress
Baumert, J., Kunter, M., Blum, W., Brunner, M., Voss, T., Jordan, A., Klusmann, U., Krauss, S., Neubrand, M., & Tsai, Y.-M. (2010) · American Educational Research Journal · doi:10.3102/0002831209345157 · Cited by 2,100
Professional competence of teachers: Effects on instructional quality and student development.
Kunter, M., Klusmann, U., Baumert, J., Richter, D., Voss, T., & Hachfeld, A. (2013) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0032583 · Cited by 1,553
Stichwort: Professionelle Kompetenz von Lehrkräften
Baumert, J., & Kunter, M. (2006) · Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft · doi:10.1007/s11618-006-0165-2 · Cited by 1,441
Metadata
- Authors
- Borko, H., Eisenhart, M., Brown, C. A., Underhill, R. G., Jones, D., & Agard, P. C.
- Venue
- Journal for Research in Mathematics Education
- Published
- 1992-05
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 194-222
- ISSN
- 0021-8251 (ISSN-L)
- 1945-2306
- OpenAlex
- W2065953104
- Cited by
- 409
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 20.06
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Learning to Teach Hard Mathematics: Do Novice Teachers and Their Instructors Give up Too Easily? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5951/jresematheduc.23.3.0194
- The paper
- Borko, H., Eisenhart, M., Brown, C. A., Underhill, R. G., Jones, D., & Agard, P. C. (1992). Learning to Teach Hard Mathematics: Do Novice Teachers and Their Instructors Give up Too Easily? Journal for Research in Mathematics Education. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.23.3.0194
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.