A Framework for Problem-Based Learning: Teaching Mathematics with a Relational Problem-Based Pedagogy
Main Article Content
Abstract
One recommendation for encouraging young women and other underrepresented students in their mathematical studies is to find instructional methods, such as problem-based learning (PBL), that allow them to feel included in the learning process. Using a more relationally centered pedagogy along with more inclusive instructional methods may be a way to foster an interest in studying mathematics in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. However, many mathematics teachers are at a loss in not only how to instruct with PBL methods but also how to create the environment that encourages optimal learning.
Article Details
1. Publication and Promotion: In consideration of the Publisher’s agreement to publish the Work, Author hereby grants and assigns to Publisher the non-exclusive right to print, publish, reproduce, or distribute the Work throughout the world in all means of expression by any method now known or hereafter developed, including electronic format, and to market or sell the Work orany part of it as Publisher sees fit. Author further grants Publisher the right to use Author’s name in association with the Work inpublished form and in advertising and promotional materials
2. Copyright: Copyright of the Work remains in Author’s name.
3. Prior Publication and Attribution: Author agrees not to publish the Work in print form prior to publication of the Work by the Publisher. Author agrees to cite, by author, title, and publisher, the original Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning publication when publishing the Work elsewhere
4. Author Representations: The Author represents and warrants that the Work:
(a) is the Author’s original Work and that Author has full power to enter into this Agreement;
(b) does not infringe the copyright or property of another;
(c) contains no material which is obscene, libelous, defamatory or previously published, in whole or in part.
Author shall indemnify and hold Publisher harmless against loss of expenses arising from breach of any such warranties.
5. Licensing and Reuse: Reuse of the published Work will be governed by a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0; http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by-nc/4.0/). This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon the Work non-commercially; although new works must acknowledge the original Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning publication and be non-commercial, they do not have to be licensed on the same terms.
References
Anderson, D. L. (2005). A portrait of a feminist mathematics classroom: What adolescent girls say about mathematics, themselves, and their experiences in a “unique” learning environment. Feminist Teacher, 15, 175–193.
Beauboeuf, T. (2007). The listening guide: Using a voice-centered feminist tool to research “strength” among black women. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the America Sociological Association. Retrieved August 11, 2007, from http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p178102_index.html
Becker, J. R. (1995). Women’s ways of knowing in mathematics. In P. K. Rogers & G. Kaiser (Eds.), Equity in mathematics education: Influences of feminism and culture (pp. 163–174). Washington, DC: Falmer.
Belenky, M., Clinchy, B., Goldberger, N., & Tarule, J. (1986). Women’s ways of knowing: The development of self, voice, and mind. New York: Basic Books.
Biesta, G. (2004). Mind the gap. In C. Bingham & A. M. Sidorkin (Eds.), No education without relation (pp. 11–22). New York: Peter Lang.
Bingham, C. (2004). Let’s treat authority relationally. In C. Bingham & A. M. Sidorkin (Eds.), No education without relation (pp. 23–38). New York: Peter Lang.
Boaler, J. (1997). Reclaiming school mathematics: The girls fight back. Gender and Education, 9(3), 285–305.
Boaler, J. (2002). Experiencing school mathematics: Traditional and reform approaches to teaching and their impact on student learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Boaler, J. (2008). Promoting “relational equity” and high mathematics achievement through an innovative mixed-ability approach. British Educational Research Journal, 32(2), 167–194.
Boaler, J., & Greeno, J. G. (2000). Identity, agency and knowing in mathematical worlds. In J. Boaler (Ed.), Multiple perspectives on mathematics teaching and learning (Vol. 1, pp. 171–200). Westport, CT: Ablex Publishing.
Brown, L. M., & Gilligan, C. (1991). Listening for voice in narratives of relationship. In M. B. Tappan & M. J. Packer (Eds.), Narrative and storytelling: Implications for understanding moral development (pp. 43–61). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Brown, L. M., & Gilligan, C. (1992). Meeting at the crossroads: Women’s psychology and girls’ development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Bryk, A. S., & Schneider, B. (2003). Trust in schools: A core resource for school reform. Educational Leadership, 60(6), 40–44.
Burton, L. (2002). Recognising commonalities and reconciling differences in mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 50, 157–175.
Cobb, P., & Hodge, L. L. (2002). A relational perspective on issues of cultural diversity and equity as they play out in the mathematics classroom. Mathematical Thinking & Learning, 4, 249–284.
Donovan, M. S., & Bransford, J. D. (Eds.). (2005). How students learn: Mathematics in the classroom. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
Doucet, A., & Mauthner, N. S. (2008). What can be known and how? Narrated subjects and the listening guide. Qualitative Research, 8(3), 399–409.
Fine, M. (1987/2012). Silencing in public schools. In C. Grant & T. Chapman (Eds.), History of multicultural education (Vol. 2). New York: Routledge.
Frankenstein, M. (1983). Critical mathematics education: An application of Friere’s epistemology. Journal of Education, 165, 315–339.
Gattegno, C. (1976). The common sense of teaching foreign languages. New York: Educational Solutions.
Gilligan, C., Spencer, R., Weinberg, M. K., & Bertsch, T. (2003). On the listening guide: A voice-centered relational method. In P. Camic, J. Rhodes & L. Yardley (Eds.), Qualitative research in psychology: Expanding perspectives in methodology and design (pp. 157–169). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Griffiths, M. (2008). A feminist perspective on communities of practice [electronic version]. Retrieved August 4, 2009, from http://orgs.man.ac.uk/projects/include/experiment/morwenna_griffiths.pdf.
Gutstein, E. (2007). “And that’s just how it starts”: Teaching mathematics and developing student agency. Teachers College Record, 109(2), 420–448.
Hanna, G. (2003). Reaching gender equity in mathematics education. Education Forum, 67, 204–214. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00131720309335034
Hesse-Biber, S. N., & Leavy, P. L. (Eds.). (2007). Feminist research practice: A primer. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hiebert, J., & Carpenter, T. P. (1992). Learning and teaching with understanding. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 65–97). Reston, VA: NCTM.
Hill, C., Corbett, C., & St. Rose, A. (2010). Why so few: Women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Washington, DC: American Association of University Women.
Hoang, T. N. (2008). The effects of grade level, gender and ethnicity on attitude and learning environment in mathematics high school. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 3(1): 47–59.
Jacobs, J. E., & Becker, J. R. (1997). Creating a gender-equitable multicultural classroom using feminist pedagogy. In Yearbook (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics) (pp. 107–114). Reston, VA: NCTM.
Keller, E. F. (1985). Reflections on gender and science. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Kellermeier, J. (1996). Feminist pedagogy in teaching general education mathematics: Creating the riskable classroom. Feminist Teacher, 10(1), 8–12.
Kurz, T., & Batarelo, I. (2005). Using anchored instruction to promote mathematical growth and understanding. Jour- nal of Educational Technology Systems, 33, 421–436.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). But that’s just good teaching: The case for culturally relevant pedagogy. Theory into Practice, 34, 159–165.
Lampert, M. (2001). Teaching problems and the problems of teaching. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Leder, G. C. (2003). Mathematics and gender: Changing perspectives. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook on research in mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 597–617). Reston, VA: NCTM Publications.
Lim, J. H. (2008a). Adolescent girls’ construction of moral discourses and appropriation of primary identity on a mathematics classroom. ZDM—International Journal of Mathematics Education, 40, 617–631.
Lim, J. H. (2008b). Double jeopardy: The compounding effects of class and race in school mathematics. Equity and Excellence in Education, 4(1), 81–97.
Lloyd, J. E. V., Walsh, J. Y., & Sheni, M. (2005). Sex differences in performance attributions, self-efficacy, and achievement in mathematics: If I’m so smart, why don’t I know it? Canadian Journal of Education, 28, 384–408.
Lubienski, S. T. (2007). What we can do about achievement disparities? Educational Leadership, 65, 54–59.
Maher, F. A., & Thompson Tetreault, M. K. (2001). The feminist classroom. New York: Rowman & Littlefield.
Mau, S. T., & Leitze, A. R. (2001). Powerless gender or genderless power? The promise of constructivism for females in the mathematics classroom. In J. E. Jacobs, J. R. Becker, & G. Gilmer (Eds.), Changing the faces of mathematics: Perspectives on gender (pp. 37–41). Reston, VA: NCTM.
McCain, T. (2005). Teaching for tomorrow: Teaching content and problem-solving skills. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
McGraw, R., Lubienski, S. T., & Strutchens, M. (2006). A closer look at gender in NAEP mathematics achievement and affect data: Intersections with achievement, race/ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 37(2), 129–150.
Meece, J., & Jones, G. (1996). Girls in mathematics and science: Constructivism as a feminist perspective. High School Journal, 79, 242–248.
Mendick, H. (2005a). A beautiful myth? The gendering of being/doing “good at maths.” Gender & Education, 17, 203–219. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0954025042000301465
Mendick, H. (2005b). Only connect: Troubling oppositions in gender and mathematics. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 9, 161–180.
Modi, K., Schoenberg, J., & Salmond, K. (2012). Generation STEM: What girls say about science, technology, engineering and math. No. 978-0-88441-793-4. New York: Girl Scout Research Institute.
Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., & Foy, P. (2005). Achievement by gender in the mathematics cognitive domains at the fourth and eighth grades. In IEA TIMSS 2003 internation report on achievement in mathematics cognitive domains. Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College.
NCTM. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.
Raider-Roth, M. (2005). Trusting what you know: The high stakes of classroom relationships. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Renkl, A., Atkinson, R. K., & Maier, U. H. (2002). From example study to problem solving: Smooth transitions help learning. Journal of Experimental Education, 70, 293– 315. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00220970209599510
Riegle-Crumb, C., King, B., Grodsky, E., and Muller, C. (2012). The more things change, the more they stay the same? Prior achievement fails to explain gender inequality in entry into STEM college majors over time. American Educational Research Journal, 49 (6), 1048–1073.
Rodgers, C. R., & Raider-Roth, M. (2006). Presence in teaching. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 12, 265– 287. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13450600500467548
Savery, J. R. (2006). Overview of problem-based learning: Definitions and distinctions. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 1(1), 9–20.
Schettino, C. (2011/2012). Teaching geometry through problem-based learning. Mathematics Teacher, 105(5), 346–351.
Schettino, C. (2013). Dismantling the birdcage: Adolescent girls’ attitudes towards learning mathematics with a relational pedagogy in a problem-based environment. Doctoral dissertation. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses (Accession Order Number 11007).
Schettino, C. (2014, August, 10). What does “making students metacognitive” mean?—Answering “why should someone learn?” Math [web log post]. Retrieved from http://www.carmelschettino.com/wp/2014/08/10/what-does-making-students-metacognitive-mean/
Schettino, C. (2015). Mathematics 202: Geometry. Retrieved from http://www.carmelschettino.com/wp/in-the-classroom/teaching/mat202-problem-book-2015-16-2/
Solar, C. (1995). An inclusive pedagogy in mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 28(4), 311–333.
Taylor, C., & Robinson, C. (2009). Student voice: Theorising power and participation. Pedagogy, Culture and Society, 17, 161–175. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14681360902934392
Thayer-Bacon, B., J. (2004). Personal and social relations in education. In C. Bingham & A. M. Sidorkin (Eds.), No education without relation. New York: Peter Lang.
Vithal, R. (2002). A pedagogy of conflict and dialogue for mathematics education from a critical perspective. For the Learning of Mathematics, 22, 29–41.
Weiler, K. (2001). Rereading Paulo Friere. In K. Weiler (Ed.), Feminist engagements: Reading, resisting and revisioning male theorists in education and cultural studies (pp. 67–85). New York: Routledge.
Willis, S. (1996). Gender justice and the mathematics curriculum: Four perspectives. In L. Parker, L. Rennie, & B. Fraser (Ed.), Gender, science and mathematics: Shortening the shadow (pp. 41–51). Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Zohar, A. (2006). Connected knowledge in science and mathematics education. International Journal of Science Education, 28(13), 1579–1599.