You are here:

Technology Beliefs and Practices of Mathematics Education Faculty
Article

, University of South Florida, United States

Journal of Technology and Teacher Education Volume 11, Number 4, ISSN 1059-7069 Publisher: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education, Waynesville, NC USA

Abstract

Using survey methodology, this study examined the beliefs and practices of mathematics teacher educators (MTEs) regarding the integration of technology in their teacher education programs. In addition, the relationship among MTEs' beliefs about the importance of technology, their comfort with using and teaching with technology, and the degree to which they have implemented technology within their mathematics teacher education programs were also examined.

Citation

Kersaint, G. (2003). Technology Beliefs and Practices of Mathematics Education Faculty. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 11(4), 549-577. Norfolk, VA: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education. Retrieved March 26, 2019 from .

Keywords

View References & Citations Map

References

  1. Abramovich, S. , & Nabors, W. (1998). Enactive approach to word problems in a computer environment enhances mathematical learning for teachers. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 17(2/3), 161-180. Adams, T.L. (1997). Addressing students’ difficulties with the concept of function: Applying graphing calculators and models of conceptual change. Focus on the Learning Problems in Mathematics, 19 , 43-57.
  2. Berson, M.J. , Mason, C.L. , Heinecke, W.F. , & Coutts, C.B. (2000 , November). Technology innovation: An examination of beliefs and practices of socials tudies methods faculty. A paper presented at the College and University Assembly of the National Council of Social Studies annual conference. SanAntonio, Texas.
  3. Bitter, G.G. , & Hatfield, M.M. (1993). Integration of the math explorer calculator into mathematics curriculum: The calculator project report. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 12, 59-81.
  4. Bowers, J. , & Doerr, H.M. (2001). An analysis of prospective teachers’ dual roles in understanding the mathematics of change: Eliciting growth with technology. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 4 , 115-137.
  5. Clements, D. , & Battista, M. (1994). Computer environments for learning geometry. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 10(2), 173-197.
  6. Conference Board of Mathematical Sciences (2001). The Mathematics Education of Teachers. Washington, DC: American Mathematical Society& Mathematics Association of America. Doerr, H.M. , & Zangor , R. (2000). Creating meaning for and with the graphing calculator. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 41, 143-163.
  7. Drier, H.S. (1998). How are graphing calculators used in mathematics classrooms? Teachers’ beliefs and practices. Curry Journal of Educa-574 Kersaint, Horton, Stohl, and Garofalo Drier, H.S. (2001). Beliefs, experiences, and reflections that affect the development of techno-mathematical knowledge. In J. Price, D. Willis, N. Davis, & J. Willis (Eds.) , Proceedings from the Twelfth Internation-a l Meeting of the Society for Informational Technology and Teacher Education (pp. 1353-1358). Charlottesville, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.
  8. Dugdale, S. (1998). A spreadsheet investigation of sequences and series for middle grades through precalculus. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 17(2/3) , 203-222. Farrell, A.M. (1996). Roles and behaviors in technology integrated precalculus classrooms. Journal of Mathematics Behavior, 15 , 35-53. Fine, A.E. , & Fleener, M.J. (1994). Calculators as instructional tools: Perceptions of three preservice teachers. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 14(4) , 481-498.
  9. Garofalo, J. , Drier, H.S. , Harper, S.R. , Timmerman, M.A. , & Shockey, T. (2000). Promoting appropriate uses of technology in mathematics teacher preparation. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 1(1), 66-88. [Online]. Available: http://www.citejournal.org.
  10. Graham, A.T. , & Thomas, M.O. (2000). Building a versatile understanding of algebraic variables witha graphic calculator. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 41(3) , 265-282.
  11. Heid, M.K. (1997). The technological revolution and the reform of school mathematics. American Journal of Education, 106, 5 – 61.
  12. Hembree, R. , & Dessart , D. (1986) Effects of handheld calculator in precollege education: A meta analysis. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 17, 83-99.
  13. Hembree, R. , & Dessart , D. (1992). Research on calculator in mathematics education. In J.T. Fey& C.R. Hirsch (Eds.) , Calculators in mathematics education: 1992 yearbook (pp. 23-32). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics
  14. Hollar, J.C. , & Norwood, K. (1999). The effects of a graphing-approach intermediate algebra curriculum on students’ understanding of function. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30(2) , 220-226 Hope, W.C. (1997). Why technology has no t realized its potential in schools: A perspective. American Secondary Education, 25, 2-9. Huang, S.Y. , & Waxman, H.C. (1996). Classroom observations of middle school students’ technology use in mathematics. School Science and Mathematics, 96(10) , 28-34
  15. International Society for Technology in Education (2000). National Educational Standards for Teachers. Eugene, OR: Author.
  16. Jackiw, N. (2001). The Geometer’s Sketchpad (Version 4.0). [Computer Software]. Emeryville, CA: Key Curriculum Press. Kaput, J. (1992). Technology and mathematics education. In D. Grouws (Ed.) , Handbook of research in mathematics teaching and learning (pp. Technology Beliefs and Practices of Mathematics Education Faculty 575 Kulik, J.A. , & Kulik, C.L.C. (1987). Reviews of recent research literature on computer based instruction. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 12 , 222-230. Laborde, J.M. (2000). Cabri. [Computer Software]. Dallas, TX: Texas Instruments Incorporated.
  17. Manoucherhri , A. (1999). Computers and school mathematics reform: Implications for mathematics teacher education. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 18(1) , 31-48.
  18. Mathematics Association of America (1991). A call for change: Recommendations for the preparation of teachers of mathematics. Washington, DC: Author.
  19. Mathematics Sciences Education Board (1991). Counting on you: Actions supporting mathematics teaching standards. Washington, DC: Author. Merriweather, M. , & Tharp, M.L. (1999). The effects of instruction with graphing calculators on how general mathematics students naturalistically solve algebraic problems. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 18(1) , 7-22.
  20. Milou, E. (1999). The graphing calculator: A survey of classroom usage. School Science and Mathematics, 99 , 133-140.
  21. National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (2002). Professional standards for the accreditation of schools, colleges, and departmentof education. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved on Augus t 12 , 2002 from: http://www.ncate.org/standard/m_stds.htm
  22. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1991). Professionals tandards for teaching mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
  23. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
  24. Olive, J. , & Leatham, K. (2000). Using technology as a learning tool is no t enough. Paper presented a t the international conference on Technology in Mathematics Education, Auckland, New Zealand. Oppong , N.K. , & Russell, A. (1998). Using combinations of software to enhance preservice teachers’ critical thinking skills. Mathematics and Computer Education 32(1) , 37-44. Quesada, A.R. , & Maxwell, M.E. (1994). The effects of using graphing calculators to enhance college students’ performance in precalculus. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 27(2) , 205-215. Roberts, D.L. , & Stephens, L.J. (1999). The effects of the frequency of usage of computer software in high school geometry. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 18 (1) , 23-80. Rochow icz Jr. , J.A. (1996). The impact of using computers and calculators on calculus instruction. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 15, 423-435.
  25. Ruthven, K. (1990). The influence of graphic calculator use on translation from graphic to symbolic form. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 576 Kersaint, Horton, Stohl, and Garofalo
  26. Sapsford , R. (1999). Survey research. Thousand Oaks: Sage. Schmidt, M.E. (1998). Research on middle grades teachers’ belief about calculators. Action in Teacher Education, 20(2) , 11-23. Schmidt, M.E. , & Callaghan, L.G. (1992). Teachers and principals’ beliefs regarding calculator in elementary mathematics. Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics, 14(4) , 17-29. Schwarz, B.B. , & Hershkowitz, R. (1999). Prototypes: Brakes or levers in learning the function concepts? The role of computer tools. Journal for Research in Mathematic Education, 30(4) , 362-389. Simonson, L.M. , & Dick, T.P. (1997). Teachers’ perceptions of the impact of graphing calculators in the mathematics classroom. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 16(2), 239-268.
  27. Slavit , J. (1996). Graphing calculators in a “hybrid” algebra II classroom. For the Learning of Mathematics, 15(1) , 9-14. Smith, K.B. , & Shotsberger , P.G. (1997). Assessing the use of graphing calculator in college algebra: Reflecting on dimensions of teaching and learning. School Science and Mathematics, 97 , 368-376.
  28. Stohl, H. (2002). Prospective teachers learning to facilitate social interac-t ion and mathematical problem solving with technology tools. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, NewOrleans, LA.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact info@learntechlib.org.

View References & Citations Map

Cited By

  1. Pre-service teachers’ attitude towards information and communication technology usage: A Ghanaian survey

    Stephen Adu Gyamfi, Catholic University College of Ghana

    International Journal of Education and Development using ICT Vol. 13, No. 1 (Apr 30, 2017)

  2. Identifying Ghanaian pre-service teachers’ readiness for computer use: A Technology Acceptance Model approach.

    Stephen Adu Gyamfi, University of Lincoln, UK, United Kingdom

    International Journal of Education and Development using ICT Vol. 12, No. 2 (Aug 17, 2016)

  3. Factors Influencing Teacher Educators’ Technology Use

    EROL UZAN, Indiana University Bloomington, United States

    Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2014 (Mar 17, 2014) pp. 2317–2321

  4. How do Pre-service Teachers Explain Their Own Technology Growth in a Technology Integration Course?

    Joyce Asing-Cashman & David Rutledge, New Mexico State University, United States

    Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2014 (Mar 17, 2014) pp. 2060–2062

  5. Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: Pre-service Teachers’ Perception and Beliefs in Mathematics

    Cheng-Yao Lin, Southern Illinois University, United States; Yu-Chun Kuo, Jackson State University, United States; Yi-Yin Ko, Indiana State University, United States

    Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2014 (Mar 17, 2014) pp. 1422–1431

  6. Using lesson plans as a proxy for teacher technology integration practices in math and science using TPACK: A transferrable research design

    Kara Dawson & Albert Ritzhaupt, University of Florida, United States

    Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2014 (Mar 17, 2014) pp. 1398–1404

  7. An Exploratory Study of Pre-service Teachers’ Perceptions in Using Free and Open Source Tools

    Binod Gurung & Joyce Asing-Cashman, New Mexico State University, United States

    Global Learn 2010 (May 17, 2010) pp. 3621–3626

  8. The Views of Preservice Teachers About the Strengths and Limitations of the Use of Graphing Calculators in Mathematics Instruction

    S. Asli Ozgun-Koca, Wayne State University, United States

    Journal of Technology and Teacher Education Vol. 17, No. 2 (April 2009) pp. 203–227

  9. Preparing to Teach Mathematics with Technology: An Integrated Approach to Developing Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge

    Hollylynne Lee & Karen Hollebrands, North Carolina State University, United States

    Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education Vol. 8, No. 4 (December 2008) pp. 326–341

  10. Toward Technology Integration in Mathematics Education: A Technology-Integration Course Planning Assignment

    Gladis Kersaint, University of South Florida, United States

    Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education Vol. 7, No. 4 (December 2007) pp. 256–278

  11. Equations with Parameters: A Locus Approach

    Sergei Abramovich, State University of New York at Potsdam, United States; Anderson Norton, Indiana University, United States

    Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching Vol. 25, No. 1 (January 2006) pp. 5–28

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact info@learntechlib.org.