Introduction

 

This literature review will provide support for the need to investigate the relationship between beginning secondary mathematics teachers’ beliefs about the nature of mathematics, mathematics teaching, and mathematics learning and their teaching practices. This will lead to the identification of factors that affecting this relationship between teachers’ beliefs and their teaching practice. The influences of interventions will also be discussed very briefly in this literature review.

 

Relationships between beliefs and practice

 

Poor results in Penilaian Sekolah Rendah (PSR) and Penilaian Menengah Bawah (PMB) are partly due to lack of understanding of the mathematical concepts among students. The lack of understanding of these concepts is partly influenced by the instructional practice the teachers employed. Explain-practice is a typical teaching approach in many mathematics lessons whereby a teacher explains a procedure and then students practice. Thompson (1992) explains that adopting traditional teaching approach (instruction) not only misrepresents mathematics to the students but also has an impact on their poor performance in national and international assessments. In many studies, explain-practice instruction has been shown to not be an effective or a successful way of teaching mathematics. This type of practice has failed to produce good results in mathematics (Stevenson and Stigler, 1992). Teachers view their task as one of presenting mathematics to their students. Their main concern is to ensure that their students learned to perform easily the tasks required by their homework and tests. They teach their students to know how rather than to know why (Kesler, 1985 and McGalliard, 1983).

According to Baroody (1987), all teachers hold beliefs about mathematics, mathematics teaching, and mathematics learning that influence their teaching strategies. Brown & Borko, (1992) suggest that teachers who are initially have nontraditional beliefs about mathematics teaching, tend to employ traditional teaching when faced with constraints in their actual teaching. Over the last 15 years, there has been much research that has been taken in many directions involving the study of the relationship between mathematics teachers’ belief and practice (Raymond, 1997).  Thompson (1992) suggests that research should more closely examine the relationship between conceptions of mathematics and instructional practice.

Taken together the definitions of beliefs used by Cobb (1986), Hart (1989), and  Schoenfeld (1985) and the categorization of mathematics beliefs by Lester, Garofalo, and Kroll, (1989) and McLeod (1989), mathematics beliefs can be defined as personal judgements about mathematics evolved from experiences in mathematics, including beliefs about the nature of mathematics, learning mathematics, and teaching mathematics.

Hersh (1986) claims that teaching must be viewed on the basis teachers’ beliefs of the  best way to teach and also based on their understanding of the nature of mathematics.  Dongherty (1990), Grant (1984),  Kesler (1985), Kuhs (1980),  Lerman (1983), Marks (1987),  McGalliard (1983), Shroyer (1978), Steinberg, Haymore, & Marks (1985), and  Thompson (1984) have indicated that teachers’ beliefs play a significant role in shaping the instructional behavior in class.

According to Garofalo (1989), the development of one’s beliefs about the nature of mathematics and their practice is important as it influences how one thinks, approaches, and follows through on mathematical tasks. This development is also important as it influences how one studies mathematics and how and when one teaches mathematics.

Teachers’ beliefs develop from their teaching experience rather than from formal study. Schuck (1996) argues that these experiences are one of the factors that inhibit the existing beliefs and attitudes to move towards reform in the way mathematics is taught in schools.

 

Models of mathematics teaching

 

Most teachers believe that understanding plays an important role in enables students to master mathematical concepts and skills. This in return, will help students to achieve success in mathematics. Kuhs and Ball (1986) suggested four models of teaching namely Learner-focused; Content-focused with an emphasis on conceptual understanding; Content-focused with an emphasis on performance; and Classroom-focused, to be used in one’s teaching. All the models are equally important and should be used in teaching, depending on the needs and topics taught. However, regretfully, such belief is not put into practice. Content-focused with an emphasis on performance has becoming the most popular choice in teaching field in Brunei.  This is widely or commonly being practiced by most teachers because they have to cater the expectations of parents and administrators whose main concern is for students to pass examinations.

Another model of teachings presented by Perry, Howard, & Conroy (1996) indicates that teaching can be categorized as either a transmission or child-centered. In traditional teacher-centered transmission, the teacher delivers knowledge and skills, whereas in child-centered learning, children are actively involved in constructing their own mathematical knowledge.

Constructivist views of mathematics learning (Cobb & Steffe, 1983; Confrey, 1985; Thompson, 1985; von Glaserfeld, 1987) underlies the learner-focused view of mathematics teaching whereby teaching emphasizes students’ active involvement in the mathematics lesson. This model requires students to explore and formalize ideas. This model is likely to be used by teachers who view mathematics as a dynamic discipline, dealing with self-generated ideas and involving methods of inquiry (Ernest, 1988). Teachers in this model act as facilitators or stimulators of students learning, addressing interesting questions and providing situations for investigations, challenging students to think, and assisting them uncover inadequacies in their own thinking (Kuhs & Ball,1986).

 

Expert-Novice Paradigm

 

In my study, the focus will be on beginning secondary teachers. This group of teachers is chosen because these are the teachers who are believed to be more progressive and anxious to promote different teaching strategies. Leinhardt (1989) explains that the expert is different from a novice is that an expert has the ability to create a lesson which is rich in agendas, spends less time in transition and gives better explanations of new materials. So it is expected that teaching done by the expert is better than that done by the novice.  However, this is not the case in Brunei; it has been observed that the teaching method displayed by most teachers is partly influenced by their teaching experience (length of service). The most progressive teachers are those who have teaching experience of between one to five years. On the other hand, most teachers who have been in the field for more than fifteen years tend to be less progressive.

 Raymond (1997) argued that the relationship between beginning teachers’ mathematics beliefs and practice has been overlooked but are important to study because: “beginning teachers reveal much about their beliefs as they struggle to develop their teaching practice” and “their beliefs about mathematics and mathematics pedagogy are likely to be challenged during the first few years of teaching because their pedagogical ideals are pitted against the realities of teaching”.

 

Mediating factors affecting the relationship between beliefs and practice

 

It has been suggested by many researchers that the relationship between beliefs and practice is weakened when teachers work under perceived constraints, (Thompson, 1984). Though teachers hold very strong beliefs about mathematics teaching and learning, when faced with a situation which is discouraging such as when pressure is exerted by principals, by parents, by class size and so on, their beliefs may not be seen in their practice. However, Kaplan (1991) maintains that “beliefs and practice can always be shown to be consistent, regardless of other contributing factors, when one distinguishes between types of beliefs, such as deep versus surface beliefs, and corresponding practices, such as pervasive versus superficial practice” (pp. 550).

According to Brown (1986), Cooney (1985), Thompson (1984, 1992), the relationship between beliefs and practice is not consistent due to the existence of other mediating factors (Fazio, 1986). Factors like Social teaching norms and the immediate classroom situation can affect the relationship between beliefs and practice (Brown & Borko, 1992; Leinhardt, 1989; Thomson & Schuck, 1987; Westerman, 1990). New teachers who are initially very ambitious to teach, full of creative ideas tend to be put off when they are not getting full support from students, parents, fellow teachers, and administrators. The Principal and parents obviously want their children to achieve success in examinations.  Therefore, they emphasize to teachers the need to cover the syllabus before the examination.

Some inconsistencies between teachers’ beliefs and practice may be due to lack of knowledge and skills. Knowledge and skills play a very important role for a teacher to be able to teach well. Without a strong knowledge and skills, a teacher will not be able to convey content effectively. A teacher needs to be good at varying teaching techniques to provide different alternatives for weak students. Similarly, a teacher needs to be very well versed in subject matter in order for him or her to provide challenging questions for very good students. Lack of strong knowledge and skills tends to limit teachers ability to vary their teaching strategies. One cannot apply the learner-focused model identified by Kuhs and Ball (1986) if the teacher does not have a strong and broad knowledge base in mathematics. Furthermore, without strong knowledge and skills, one will not be able to teach with confidence. 

Teachers’ personal beliefs about their capabilities to help students learn, sometimes, called personal teaching efficacy, have been shown to be an influence in promoting their classroom performance. Teachers with low levels of teaching efficacy make less effort in finding materials and planning that can bring about interesting and challenging lessons for their students. On the other hand, teachers with high levels of efficacy tend to be more progressive, seek resources and are able to develop challenging lessons (Bandura, 1997; Pajares, 1996; Tschannen-Moran et al., 1998).

D’Andrade (1981) suggests that children’s beliefs develop gradually as they react to the situations in which they find themselves. They develop beliefs that are consistent with their experience. This process of developing beliefs is characterized as “guided discovery”. Definitely cultural factors play an important role in this process of developing beliefs. Schoenfeld (1989) emphasizes that in mathematics education most researchers claim that the cultural setting of the classroom influences development of beliefs about mathematics.

Gender is also an important factor that influences the relationship between beliefs and practice. Female teachers tend to show more interest and effort in creating a better learning environment. They are more creative and always come up with interesting teaching models or aids. Male teachers, on the other hand, tend to teach plainly. This scenario is evidently shown in higher institutions which are dominated by female students. Need to find a literature review. 

Language is another factor which contributes to the inconsistencies. English as a second language in Brunei tends to have the greatest impact on teaching and learning. When teachers are not fluent with this language, she or he will not be able to deliver lesson effectively. As a result, the teacher ability to create an interesting is very restricted.

 

Conclusion and Implications

 

Ernest (1988) suggests that teachers’ attitudes towards the subject have an impact on their teaching practice, which in turn impacts upon the ethos and culture of the mathematics classroom. This in turn impacts upon the attitudes of their students which in turn influences teacher’s attitude. As a result, poor attitudes and poor achievements levels are passed from one generation to the next generation. This is very difficult to remove or improve. According to Cooney (1987), substantive changes in the teaching of mathematics to more student-centered learning such as suggested by the NCTM Standards (1989) will be slow in coming and difficult to achieve. This is due to the basic beliefs teachers hold about the nature of mathematics. Collier (1972) and Shirk (1973) suggest that prospective teachers’ conceptions are not easy to change; one should not expect that a single training program can bring about the desired changes. It is not easy to change beliefs. What needs to be changed are the mediating factors (encourage nontraditional beliefs about mathematics teaching and learning) that affect beliefs.

D’Andrade (1981) and Schoenfeld (1988) argue that there is nothing wrong with the students’ mechanism for developing beliefs about mathematics. What needs to be changed is the curriculum (and beyond that, the culture) that encourages such beliefs.

However, there was sufficient indication in data from many surveys and journals, to show that intervention played a significant role in bringing about changes in teachers beliefs. The intervention has to be combined with steps to promote factors that encourage nontraditional beliefs.

A considerable effort in teachers professional development has been made which is intended to help them to be able to conduct lessons that can develop students understanding in mathematics and thus lead to the production of fruitful results and achievement in mathematics education. Nevertheless, this effort will not be meaningful without the cooperation and support of other related agencies or authorities.  Teachers at the same time must make an effort to use the knowledge they acquire from the course and must continuously upgrade themselves with up to date teaching approaches.  Most often, it is found that these teachers who have participated in an in-service program are not practicing what has been taught to them. To develop the teachers’ development in mathematical knowledge and a constructivist pedagogy, they are endouraged to participate relevant workshops (Simon & Schiffer, 1991; Schiffer & Fosnot, 1993; Simon, 1995).

From the findings of this research, it is expected that the influences that effect beliefs and practices will be studied in greater depth. It is also anticipated that findings from this research will provide a starting point for discussion of the influence of interventions on teaching. It is hoping that this study will encourage teachers to reflect on their experiences as students and to discuss how their beliefs and practices may better prepare them to use new approaches.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

23 Feruary 2005

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References

 

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: the exercise of control (NEW YORK; Freeman).

 

Baroody, A.(1987). Children’s mathematical thinking. New York: Teachers College Press.

 

Brown, C.A., & Borko, H. (1992). Becoming a mathematics teacher. In D.A.

Grouws (Ed), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 209-239). New York: Macmillan.

 

Cobb, P. (1986). Contexts, goals, beliefs, and learning mathematics. For the learning of

mathematics. 6(2), 2-9.

 

Cobb. P., & Steffe, L.P. (1983). The constructivist researcher as teacher and model builder. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 14, 83-94.

 

Collier, C.P. (1972). Prospective elementary teachers’ intensity and ambivalence of beliefs about mathematics and mathematics instruction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 3, 155-163.

 

Cooney, T.J. (1985). A beginning teacher’s view of problem solving.. Journal for

Research in Mathematics Education, 16(5), 324-336.

 

Cooney, T.J. (1987). The issue of reform: What have learned from yesterteryear? In Mathematical Sciences Education Board, The teacher of mathematics: Issues for today and tomorrow  (pp. 17-35). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

 

Confrey, J. (1985, April). A constructivist view of  mathematics instruction. Part I: A

theoretical Perspective.  Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago,IL.

 

D’Andrade, R.G. (1981). The cultural part of cognition. . Cognitive science, 5,179-195.

 

Doungherty, B.J. (1990). Influences of teacher cognitive/ conceptual levels on problem-solving instruction. In G. Booker et al. (Eds), Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference for  thePsychology of mathematics Education. (pp. 119-126). Oaxtepec, Mexico: International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education.

 

Ernest, P. (1988, July). The impact of beliefs on the teaching of mathematics. Paper prepared

for ICME VI, Budapest, Hungary

 

Fazio, R.H.(1986). How do attitudes guide behavior? In R.M. Sorrentino. & E.T. Higgins

(Eds), The handbook of motivation and cognition : Foundations of social behavior (pp. 204-243). New York: Guilford Press.

 

 

Garofalo, J. (1989). Beliefs and their influence on mathematical performance. Mathematics

teacher, 82(7), 502-505.

 

 

Grant, C.E. (1984). A study of relationship between secondary mathematics teachers beliefs

about teaching-learning process and their observed classroom behaviors (Doctoral dissertation, University of North Dakota, 1984). Dissertation Abstracts International, 46, DA8507627.

 

Hart, L.E. (1989). Describing the affective domain: Saying what we mean. In D.B.McLeod & V. M. Adams. (Eds).  Affect and mathematical problem solving: A new perspective (pp. 37-48). New York: Spring-Verlag.

 

Hersh, R. (1986). Some proposals for reviving the philosophy of mathematics. In T.

Tymoczko (Ed),  New directions in the philosophy of mathematics (pp. 9-28). Boston: Birkhauser.

 

Kaplan, R.G. (1991, October). Teacher beliefs and practices: A square peg in a

square hole. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. Blacksburg, VA.

 

Kesler, R. (1985). Teachers’ instructional behavior related to their conceptions of

teaching and mathematics and their level of dogmatism: Four case studies (Doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia, 1985). Dissertation Abstracts International, 46, 2606A.

 

Kuhs, T.M, &  Ball, D.L. (1986). Approaches to teaching mathematics: Mapping the

domains knowledge, skills, and dispositions.East Lansing: Michigan State University, Center on Teacher Education.

 

Kuhs, T.M. (1980). Teachers’ conceptions of mathematics. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigen State University, East Lansing.

 

Leinhardt, G. (1989). Maths lessons: A contrast of novice and expert competence.

 Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20(1), 52-75.

 

Lerman, S. (1983). Problem solving or knowledge centered: The influence of philosophy on  mathematics teaching. International Journal of mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 14(1), 59-66.

 

Lester, F.K., Garofalo, J., & Kroll, D.L. (1989). Self-confidence, interest, beliefs, and

metacogniton: Key influences on problem-solving behavior. In D.B.McLeod & V. M.

Adams. (Eds).  Affect and mathematical problem solving: A new perspective (pp. 75-88).

New York: Spring-Verlag.

 

McGalliard, W (1983). Selected factors in the conceptual systems of geometry

teachers : Four case studies (Doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia, 1985). Dissertation Abstracts International, 44A, 1364.

 

McLeod, D.B. (1989). Beliefs, attitudes, and emotions: New views of affect on mathematics.

In D.B.McLeod & V. M. Adams. (Eds).  Affect and mathematical problem solving: A new perspective (pp. 245-258). New York: Spring-Verlag.

 

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards

for school mathematics. Reston VA: Author.

 

Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in achievement settings, Review of Educational  

Research, 66, 543-578.

 

Perry, B., Howard, P., & Conroy, J.(1996). K-6 teaher beliefs about the learning  and

teaching of mathematics. In P.C.Clarkson (Ed), Technology in Mathematics Education (pp. 453-460). Melbourne: Deakin University Press.

 

Raymond, A.M. (1997). Inconsistencies between a beginning elementary school teacher’s

mathematics beliefs and teaching practices. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28, No.5, 550-576.

 

Schoenfeld, A.H. (1985). Mathematical problem solving. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

 

Schoenfeld, A.H. (1988). When good teaching leads to bad results. The disaster of “well-

taught” mathematics courses. Educational Psychologist, 23, 145-166.

 

Schoenfeld, A.H. (1989). Explorations of students’ mathematical beliefs and behavior.

Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20, 338-355.

 

Schuck, S. (1996). Learning and teaching mathematics: Interpreting student teachers’ voices.

Unpublished doctoral thesis, Sydney: UTS.

 

Schirk, G.B. (1973). An examination of conceptual frameworks of beginning mathematics

teachers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign.

 

Shroyer, J.C. (1978, March). Critical moments in the teaching of mathematics.  Paper

presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Toronto.

 

Schiffer, D., & Fosnot, C.T. (1993). Reconstructing mathematics education. New York:

Teachers College Press.

 

Simon, M. (1995). Reconstructing mathematics pedagogy from a constructivist perspective. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 26, 114-145.

 

Simon, M., & Schiffer, D. (1991). Towards a constructivist perspective. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 22, 309-331.

 

Steinberg, R., Haymore, J., & Marks, R   (1985, April). Teachers’ knowledge and

structuring content in mathematics.  Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.

 

Stevenson, H., & Stigler, J. (1992). The learning gap. New York: Summit Books.

 

Thompson, A. (1984).The relationship of teachers’ conceptions of mathematics and

mathematics teaching to instructional practice. Educational studies in Mathematics. 15, 105-127.

 

Thompson, A. (1992).Teachers’ beliefs and conceptions: A synthesis of research. In

D.A. Grouws (Ed), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 127-146). New York: Macmillan.

 

Thompson, P.W. (1985). Experience, problem solving and learning mathematics:

considerations in developing mathematics curricula. In E.A. Silver (Ed), Teaching and learning mathematical problem solving: Multiple research perspectives (pp. 189-236). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

 

Thomson, J.R., & Schuck, R.F.(1987, March). Variables associated with first-year

teacher morale which can be identified in a teacher education program. Paper presented at annual meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association, Mobile, AL.

 

von Glasersfeld, E. (1987). Learning as a constructive activity. In C. Janvier (Ed),

Problems of representation in the teaching and learning of mathematics (pp. 3-17). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

 

Westerman, D.A. (1990). A study of expert and novice teacher decision making: An

integrated approach.(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 322 128).

 

Tschannen-Moran, M., Woolfolk Hoy, A.E., & Hoy, W. (1998). Teacher efficacy: it’s

meaning and measure, Review of Educational  Research, 68, 202-248.