Developing Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Mathematics with In-

Service K-8 Teachers

David S. Allen, Julia E. Bergner, Andrew G. Bennett, and Melisa J. Hancock

Kansas State University

Special Session on Scholarship of Teaching and LearningJanuary 6, 2008

Goals for the program

• Improve K-8 education in the state of Kansas• Increase content knowledge and pedagogical

content knowledge of K-8 teachers• Give teachers the opportunity to use

scholarship of teaching and learning in their own classrooms

The programs

• Advancing Content Understanding in Mathematics through Effective Networking (ACUMEN) 2004-2006

• Infinite Mathematics Project (IMP) 2007-2009

Funded by Kansas MSP grantsPart of the KSU-PDS Partnership Project, funded

by the U.S. Department of Education

Format of the program

• Two-week sessions each summer• Content course in the morning with

mathematics faculty• Pedagogy course in the afternoon with

education faculty• Follow-up sessions during the year, concluding

with teachers presenting their own projects

Participating school districts

• Southwest Kansas– Ulysses– Garden City– Dodge City

• Kansas City, Kansas• Manhattan • Junction City

Content course

• Could be taken for graduate credit in education

• Topics often covered material needed for middle-level certification

• Also considered problem content areas on state test scores

• Pre- and post-tests were used to evaluate the teachers’ learning

Topics covered• 2004 – Geometry and Art

(geometry requirement)• 2005 – History of Computation

(history of math requirement)• 2006 – Mathematics of Finance, Probability, and

Statistics(emphasis on mathematical vocabulary)

• 2007 – Connections Between Algebra and Geometry (beginning of calculus requirement)

Afternoon sessions

• Teachers made action plans for their own classes

• Chose a content area to focus on, based on state test scores

• Gave pre-test and post-test on that material during the year

• Teachers returned later in the year to share their results with other participants

ACUMEN Year 3 – Participants

• 36 teachers of grades 1-9– 13 elementary– 19 middle– 4 high (9th grade)

• 20 highly qualified• 12 middle-level not highly qualified

ACUMEN Year 3 - Content

• Finance, probability and statistics– How mortgages and credit cards work– Why to save for retirement early– Why gambling doesn’t usually pay (with an

evening field trip to a casino)– How to read state test data

• Emphasis on number and operation• Focus on learning mathematical vocabulary

ACUMEN Year 3 - Format

• Extensive use of Excel spreadsheets • Word walls to emphasize vocabulary • Questions of the day to focus the content

ACUMEN Year 3 - Results

• Pre-test average score 25.7%• Post-test average score 78.7%

• Both tests used the “Rule of Four” with problems grouped by use of numbers, symbols, graphs, and words.

• Scores on number problems increased from 29.2% to 89.3%

• Scores on word problems increased from 43.1% to 90.5%

ACUMEN Year 3 – Action Plans

• Most teachers focused on measurement (one of lowest areas on state tests)

• 7 elementary teachers reported gains of 25-40% from pre-test to post-test

• 19 middle-level teachers reported gains of 20-78% from pre-test to post-test

Final comments

• Last year, many teachers commented that they had made financial decisions based on the course content, such as getting out of credit card debt

• State test scores have improved in the participating districts

• Many teachers have participated multiple years, and the districts continue to encourage teachers to attend

Questions?

Contact Julie Bergner at jbergner@math.ksu.edu

Thank you!