ONE POINT OF VIEW: On the Mathematical Preparation of Elementary School TeachersAuthor(s): Rick Billstein and Johnny W. LottSource: The Arithmetic Teacher, Vol. 39, No. 3 (NOVEMBER 1991), p. 6Published by: National Council of Teachers of MathematicsStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41195103 .

Accessed: 12/06/2014 20:38

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extendaccess to The Arithmetic Teacher.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.182 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 20:38:59 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ONE POINT OF VIEW

On the Mathematical Preparation of Elementary School Teachers

Rick Billstein and Johnny W. Lott

Rick Billstein Johnny W. Lott

elementary school teach- ers need quality experiences in

mathematics at the preservice level. The importance of the preservice mathematics background of teachers is seen in the Professional Standards for Teaching Mathematics by the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1991, 195) in the following: Whether teachers enter teaching through foür-year, five-year, or induction programs, it is essential that they know the subject matter of mathematics, how

Rick Billstein and Johnny Lott teach at the University of Montana, Missoula, MT 59812. Billstein s main interests are teacher and computer education and curriculum development. Lott has special interests in geometry, Logo, mathematics history, and teacher education.

The views expressed in "One Point of View" do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editorial Panel of the Arithmetic Teacher or the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Readers are encouraged to respond to this editorial by sending double-spaced letters to the Arithmetic Teacher for possible publica- tion in "Readers' Dialogue." Manuscripts of ap- proximately six hundred words are welcomed for review for "One Point of View."

students think about mathematics, strategies for teaching mathematics, how to select or create mathe- matical tasks, and how to create an environment for learning mathematics in which all students learn to think mathematically.

Standard 2 in the "Standards for the Professional Development of Teachers of Mathematics" further addresses these is- sues (p. 132):

Standard 2: Knowing Mathematics and School Mathematics The education of teachers of mathematics should develop their knowledge of the content and discourse of mathematics, including -

♦ mathematical concepts and procedures and the connections among them;

♦ multiple representations of mathematical con- cepts and procedures;

♦ ways to reason mathematically, solve prob- lems, and communicate mathematics effectively at different levels of formality; and, in addition, develop their perspectives on -

♦ the nature of mathematics, the contributions of different cultures toward the development of mathe- matics, and the role of mathematics in culture and society;

♦ the changes in the nature of mathematics and the way we teach, learn, and do mathematics resulting from the availability of technology;

♦ school mathematics within the discipline of mathematics;

♦ the changing nature of school mathematics, its relationships to other school subjects, and its applica- tions in society.

Prospective teachers may not encounter in mathematics courses designed to meet college general-education requirements the types of experiences necessary for them to develop the knowledge described in this standard 2. Such general courses are typi- cally either college algebra or mathemat- ics for liberal arts majors.

College algebra courses are generally an extension of the algebra learned in secondary schools and may reinforce the idea that mathematics is a procession of manipulations. Most such courses are feared by students, do not prepare them for teach- ing mathematics, and engender negative attitudes to be passed on to future elemen- tary school students. Preservice teachers in such classes may learn from an out- moded, technology-devoid curriculum that has little to do with what is important in mathematics in general or school mathe- matics in particular. Preservice teachers are rarely empowered to develop the knowledge or pedagogy required in the aforementioned standard 2.

Future teachers must be exposed to different teaching techniques and content. This change will not happen with pre- service teachers sitting in classes taught by teaching assistants or by faculty who are unfamiliar with current thinking. It is up to such higher education faculty and organizations as NCTM to insure that ap- propriate mathematics courses are designed for, and required of, preservice teachers. Such courses must be taught by instructors who are fully aware of curricular change in mathematics at all levels and who can model this curricular change. Anything less is unacceptable.

Reference

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Com- mission on Professional Standards for Teaching Mathematics. Professional Standards for Teach- ing Mathematics. Reston, Va.: The Council, 1991. Щ

6 ARITHMETIC TEACHER

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.182 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 20:38:59 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions