Research in

didactics of

mathematics

Faculty members

ass.prof. Madis Lepik

lect. Jüri Kurvits

researcher Kirsti Kislenko

lect. Tiiu Kaljas

Ph.D.students:

Indrek Kaldo

Regina Reinup

Problem areas to attract most interest and research

attention

teachers’ , students’ and pupils’ beliefs about teaching

and learning of mathematics (Lepik, Kislenko, Kaldo)

proof and proving in school mathematics (Lepik)

textbook research (Lepik)

development of mathematical knowledge (Kurvits,

Reinup)

technology in mathematics education (Kurvits)

Teaching and learning of proof

Proof is a current issue in mathematics education and

there is a renewed emphasis on proof and reasoning in

many countries.

In this project we explore:

- What is the status/role of proof and reasoning in the

school curricula in the countries involved in the study?

- How do secondary school teachers relate to proof and

the teaching and learning of proof in these countries?

- How is proof dealt with in mathematics textbooks?

- How to develop proving skills?

Publications on proof

Hemmi, K.; Lepik, M.; Viholainen, A. (2013). Analysing proof-related competences in Estonian,

Finnish and Swedish mathematics curricula—towards a framework of developmental proof.

Journal of Curriculum Studies, 45(3), 354 - 378.

Lepik, M. (2012). The role of proof in Estonian curricula of lower and upper secondary

mathematics . Teacher Education, 16(1), 56 - 61.

Hemmi, K.; Lepik, M.; Viholainen, A.; Raman, M. (2012). Proof and proving in Estonian, Finnish

and Swedish upper secondary school curricula . In: Proceedings of Norma 11, The Sixth Nordic

Conference on Mathematics Education : Norma 11, The Sixth Nordic Conference on Mathematics

Education in Reykjavík, May 11-14, 2011 . (Toim.) G. H. Gunnarsdóttir, F. Hreinsdóttir, G.

Pálsdóttir, M. Hannula, M. Hannula-Sormunen, E. Jablonka, U. Reykjavík, Iceland: University of

Iceland Press , 2012, 309 - 318.

Hemmi, K.; Lepik, M.; Viholainen, A. 2011.Proof and proof related items in estonian, Finnish and

Swedish compulsory school mathematics curricula. In: H. Silferberg, J. Joutsenlahti (Eds.).

Integrated research into mathematics and science education in the 2010s. Tampere University

Press, 132 – 150

Lepik, M. 2011. Tõestamisest koolimatemaatikas. Koolimatemaatika XXXVIII. Tartu: Tartu Ülikool,

58 – 64

Hemmi, K.; Lepik, M.; Viholainen, A. 2011. Upper secondary school teachers’ views of proof and

proving- An explorative cross-cultural study. Current state of research on mathematical beliefs

XVI. Tallinn: Tallinn University, 137 - 157

Textbook research (grant from NordForsk)

From many studies it is well documented that the

textbook is one of the most influential element for pupils’

mathematical learning. In the Nordic and Baltic countries

the mathematics textbook is dominating in the teaching

and teachers are heavily dependent on textbooks.

The main aim of the network is to increase the Nordic

and Baltic collaboration in research on mathematics

textbooks. Some of aspects to be explored:

-how teachers use textbooks

-how pupils use textbooks

-how textbooks influence pupils’ learning of math

-how textbook facilitates teacher learning

Publications on textbook use

Bjarnadottir, K.; Christiansen, A.; Lepik, M. (2013). Arithmetic

textbooks in Estonia, Iceland and Norway - similarities and

differences during the ninetheenth century. Nordic Studies in

Mathematics Education, 18(3), 27 - 58.

Lepik, M., Grevholm, B., Viholainen, A. (in press). Textbook use in

mathematics classroom: the teachers’ view. Nordic Studies in

Mathematics

Development of mathematical knowledge

Jüri focuses on students’ understandings of rational number different

meanings and representations. The object of his longitudinal study

(4 years) is transition from whole numbers to rational numbers, and

misunderstandings that occur in this process. At the same time the

development of students` proportional reasoning is also observed.

Publications:

Kurvits, Jüri; Kleemann, Kait (2012). Õpilaste lahendusstrateegiad

proportsionaalse mõtlemise ülesannetes. Lepmann Lea, Lepmann

Tiit, Kokk Katrin (Toim.). Koolimatemaatika XXXIX (23 - 36).Tartu

Ülikooli Kirjastus

Kurvits, J. (2010). Operations with rational numbers in grades 5 to 7.

Daugulis Peteris (Toim.). 11th International Conference Teaching

Mathematics: Retrospective and Perspectives (61 - 65). Daugavpils,

Latvia: Academic Press "Saule"

Web-based instruments in teaching/ learning of math

Jüri develops different teaching/learning strategies, materials and

innovative teaching methods which help teachers to implement

student-centered, collaborative based approaches to learning.

He is very active in conducting different in-service courses.

Participated in Conrad Wolfram’s innovative project “Computer-

Based Math”, developed innovative computer-based learning

materials to teach data analyses.

Publications:

Kurvits, J.; Kurvits, M. (2013). High School Students' Acquisition of

Knowledge and Skills through Web-Based Collaboration. The

International Journal for Technology in Mathematics Education, 20(3),

95 - 102.

Development of mathematical knowledge

Regina’s PhD project is in teaching and learning of percentages. It includes

investigating students' conceptual understanding and attitudes towards this

topic. The aim is to develop more understandable and emotionally gripping

learning materialson this topic.

Publications • Reinup, R. 2012. Teaching the topic of percentages in the secondary school. Proceedings of the

Sixth Nordic Conference on Mathematics Education, University of Iceland Press, 707.

• Reinup, R. 2011. Teaching nimber lins, fractions, decimals and percentages as an integrated

system. C. Winslow, R. Evans (Eds.). Didactics as Design Science. Copenhagen University

Press, 71 – 81.

• Reinup, R. 2010. Developing of mathematics teachers’ community: five groups, five different

ways. Proceedings of the Sixth Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics

Education. Paris, Institut National de Recherche Pédagogique, 1831 - 1840

• Reinup, R. 2010. Mearuring pupils’ attitudes: an experience of a study. Proceedings of the

conference MAVI-15: Ongoing research on beliefs in mathematics education. Department of

Mathematics, University of Genoa, 193 – 203.

• Reinup, R. 2009. Emotional teaching methods in the elementary stage of percentage learning. In

J. Maasz, W. Schloeglmann. Beliefs And Attitudes In Mathematics Education, Sense Publishers,

87 – 98.

Students’ view of mathematics

Indrek Kaldo explores university students’ view of mathematics across the disciplines

having at least one compulsory mathematics course. More specifically, we want to

answer the following questions:

a) What kind of structure can be identified to describe the construct view of mathematics?

b) What are the general tendencies in the Estonian university students’ mathematics

related View of mathematics as measured through motivational orientation, Value of

Mathematics, Competence beliefs, Perception of Teacher Role, and Cheating

Behaviour?

c) Is there a difference between science and non-science students’ view of mathematics

in Estonian universities?

Publications:

• Kaldo, I. (2011). Structure of students’ view of mathematics in an Estonian Business School.

Nordic Studies in Mathematics Education, 16(1-2), 77 – 94.

• Kaldo, I., & Hannula, M. S. (2012). Structure of university students’ view of mathematics in

Estonia. Nordic Studies in Mathematics Education, 17(2), 5 – 26.

• Kaldo, I., & Reiska, P. (2012). Estonian science and non-science students’ attitudes towards

mathematics at the university level. Teaching Mathematics and Its Applications: International

Journal of the IMA, 31(2), 95-105.

• Kaldo, I., & Hannula, M. S. (2014). Gender differences favouring females in university students’

views of mathematics in Estonia. Nordic Studies in Mathematics Education, 19(1), 3-22.

• Kaldo, I. (2014). View of mathematics – an investigation of Estonian university students. Nordic

Studies in Mathematics Education, 19(2), 5-33.

Teachers’ beliefs

Belief research in mathematics education has focussed on how teachers view the nature of mathematics, its learning and teaching, and teaching in general (Dionne, 1984; Ernest, 1991; Liljedahl, Rösken, & Rolka, 2007).

Teachers’ beliefs concerning mathematics, its teaching and learning reflect a teacher’s priorities for the practices of mathematics classrooms and play a significant role in shaping teachers’ characteristic patterns of instructional behaviour (Thompson, 1992).

It is assumed, that what one beliefs influences what one does – beliefs act as teacher’s pedagogical predispositions. Beliefs are factors shaping teacher’s decisions, for example, about what teaching routines are apropriate, what goals should be accomplished and what should the learning look like (Schoenfeld, 1998).

NorBa study

It was agreed to focus on teachers’ beliefs about:

school microculture;

general pedagogical approach (conceptions of teaching/ learning in general);

effective/good teaching of mathematics;

their own classroom practice and textbook usage.

Research method: survey with Likert scale statements

Colleagues from Norway, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Russia agreed to participate.

Overall sample size at the moment is approximately 1500 Nordic&Baltic teachers + 1000 Russian teachers.

General Pedagogical beliefs

Items of the questionnaire were subjected to Principal Component Analyses.

The number of factors extracted was determined by eigenvalues and scree diagrams. Based on these criteria it was decided to explore solutions of four, three and two factors.

The best solution was found in two-component structure.

The two-component solution explained a total of 32% of the variance.

The first factor (DF1) was labeled as

Reasoning and conceptual understanding (α=.73).

The second factor (DF2) was labeled as

Mastery of skills and facts (α=.68).

Good teaching means:

Mastery of skills and facts

- learning algorithms and drill of exercises

- learning facts

- quiet classrooms

Reasoning and conceptual understanding

- students own discoveries

- students work on practical and real-life problems

- students working, explaining and discussing in small

groups

- facilitating the students’ conceptual understanding

Two factors model

It is interesting that constructs described by factors 1 and 2 appeared as independent components and not as opposite extremes of one scale.

So in case of individual teacher they both may exist in parallel.

Teacher who emphasizes constructivist approach to teaching may value highly also practicing of routine procedures.

Belief profiles

According to the different degrees of agreement with ideas

regarding these two factors typical belief profiles could be derived

(DF1 x DF2) (9 possible profiles).

These belief profiles describe models of teachers’ conceptions of

good mathematics teaching.

DF1= agree

DF2= neutral

These teachers compromise both approaches.

Transmission of knowledge in combination with construction of

knowledge. Rear use of discoveries and small group activities.

Instrumental aspect is not stressed. Neutral towards formal training

of skills.

326 teachers (40%)

Estonia 42%

Latvia 37%

Finland 47%

Belief profiles: modest compromise

DF1= fully agree

DF2= fully disagree, disagree

Teaching via discoveries, real-life problems; small group activities.

Facilitating conceptual understanding.

Formal training of skills is not valued. Instrumental aspect is not

stressed.

31 teachers (4%)

Estonia 1%

Latvia 6%

Finland 4%

Belief profiles: radical constructivists

DF1= disagree, neutral

DF2= fully agree, agree

Teachers who tend to see the most important goal of mathematics

instruction in formal training of skills. They value teaching through

practicing of routines. Instrumental understanding is stressed.

Teaching is considered first and foremost the direct transmission of

knowledge from the teacher to the pupil.

Teaching doesn’t use discoveries, nor real-life problems; nor small

group activities. Transmission of knowledge.

16 teachers (2%)

Estonia 2.4%

Latvia 2.1%

Finland 2.1%

Belief profiles: radical traditionalists

DF1= fully agree

DF2= fully agree, agree

Teachers believing into both approaches in parallel. They

emphasize teaching activities aiming at developing conceptual

understanding and at the same time value highly instrumental part of

mathematical knowledge and stress training of routines and learning

of facts and skills.

Teaching via discoveries, small group activities.

Teaching of skills, fluency through practicing of routines.

38 teachers (5%)

Estonia 5.1%

Latvia 5.1%

Finland 1.1%

Belief profiles: reconciliation of polarities

Contextual influences on beliefs

The implementation of teacher’s beliefs into the practice

is influenced also by the context: norms and pedagogical

traditions in the country, school culture, social

background of the students, etc.

This makes the relationship between teachers’ beliefs

and their teaching practice not linear; research often

reports inconsistencies between teachers’ beliefs and

their actions (Cooney, 1985; Skott, 2009).

Cross-cultural differences

So far, there have been few studies that compare teacher beliefs across countries (e.g., Andrews, 2007; Andrews & Hatch, 2000; Felbrich, Kaiser & Schmotz, 2012, OECD, 2009).

One commonly recognised finding is that beliefs are culturally informed and impact differentially on classroom practice (Andrews & Hatch, 2000; Felbrich, Kaiser & Schmotz, 2012).

Cross-cultural differences in teachers’ beliefs can provide important information regarding the scope of possible classroom practice and teachers’ inclination to different teaching approaches.

As such, beliefs held by mathematics teachers in different countries provide an interesting window through which to study mathematics teaching in those countries.

Two levels of contextual factors

We suggest an overall theoretical frame for the role of culture, school

micro-culture, and teacher beliefs in the formation of actual classroom

practices:

CULTURE

Nationality

Language

SCHOOL MICROCULTURE

TEACHER BELIEFS

General teaching beliefs

Mathematics teaching beliefs

TEACHING

PRACTICES

Publications: belief studies Lepik, M.; Kislenko, K. (2014). Estonian Mathematics Teachers' Beliefs about Teaching and Their

Self-Reported Practices. A.Liimets, M. Veisson (Eds.). Teachers and Youth in Educational Reality.

Frankfurt: P. Lang, 23 – 41.

Lepik, Madis; Elvisto, Tiina; Oder, Tuuli; Talts, Leida (2014). Õpetajate üldpedagoogiliste

uskumuste struktuur ja tüüpprofiilid. Krull, E.; Leijen, Ä.; Lepik, M.; Mikk, J.; Talts, L.; Õun, T. (Toim.).

Õpetajate professionaalne areng ja selle toetamine. Tartu: Eesti Ülikoolide Kirjastus, 248 - 273.

Pipere, A.; Lepik, M. (2013). Job satisfaction, beliefs and instructional practice: The case of

Latvian and Estonian mathematics teachers. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational

Psychology, 11(1), 162 - 192.

Lepik, M.; Pipere, A.; Hannula, M.S. (2013). Comparing mathematics teachers’ beliefs about good

teaching: the cases of Estonia, Latvia and Finland. Nordic Studies in Mathematics Education,

17(3-4), 177 - 198.

Hannula, M.; Pipere, A.; Lepik, M.; Kislenko, K. (2013). Mathematics teachers' beliefs and

schools' micro-culture as predictors of constructivist practices in Estonia, Latvia and Finland.

A.Lindmeier; A.Heinze (Toim.). Proceedings of the 37th conference of the International Group for

the Psychology of Mathematics Education (433 - 440). Kiel, Germany: PME

Lepik, M.; Pipere, A.; Hannula, M. (2013). Mathematics teachers' beliefs about good teaching: A

comparision between Estonia, Latvia and Finland. M. Hannula, P. Portaankorva- Koivisto, A.

Laine & L. Näveri (Eds.). Current State of Research on Mathematical Beliefs. Helsinki: University

of Helsinki Press, 327 – 340.

Hannula, M.S.; Lepik, M.; Pipere, A.; Tuohilampi, L. (2013). Mathematics Teachers' Beliefs in

Estonia, Latvia and Finland. Proceedings of the Eighth Congress of the European Society for

Research in Mathematics Education. Middle East Technical University, Ankara: ERME, 1865 – 1875.

Lepik, M.; Pipere, A. (2012). Baltic- Nordic comparative study on mathematics teachers' beliefs:

Designing research instrument to describe the beliefs and practices of mathematics teachers.

Acta Paedagogica Vilnensia, 27, 115 - 123.

Metaphors …

Metaphors enable people to understand one

phenomenon by comparing it to something else

Metaphors reflect teachers’ unconscious beliefs

about teaching and the teacher’s role

Metaphors are seen as a “blueprint” of professional

knowledge of teachers’ thinking (Martinez, 2001).

Metaphors are the “master swich” to change teachers’

beliefs (Tobin, 1990)

Metaphor study

“Teacher is like ... My brief explanation of the metaphor is as

follow.”

What?

- Didactics expert

- Pedagogigal expert

- Subject expert

Who?

- Self-referential

Where?

- Contextual

(Beijaard, Verloop and Vermunt 2000,

Löfström, Poom-Valickis and Hannula, 2011)

Categorazing the metaphors –

The extended Beijaard model

The second mother- who teaches, helps, cares, supports... all of

my students, all the time and they know that. They can always talk

to me, discuss whatever problems they want and share all their joys

with me as well.

Gardener - who sows seeds, weeds, waters, cuts off branches

when needed. And so it goes round and round every year, whatever

flood or drought there might be, the gardener should always

guarantee the blossoming of his/her garden with whatever effort it

takes!

Guide - whose task it is to prepare his/her students for real life,

guiding the child carefully and gradually into the grown-ups’ world.

Book – offering knowledge and concrete help whenever students

ask a question, they will either get an answer or are guided to find

the answer themselves.

Categorazing the metaphors –

emotional connotation (positive, neutral, negative)

A teacher is like a ray of sun that makes others happy creating a

friendly and motivated atmosphere

Teacher is like a fool, everyone can call her names, she needs not

to be listened to and it is better to disrupt the class