Transforming Elementary Mathematics Classroom Practice: Ideas and Innovation from a Leader’s Perspective

Mathematics teachers serve as instructional leaders in their classrooms to ensure effective teaching and learning of mathematics. This chapter chronicles the conceptualization of a leadership style that promote the teaching and learning of mathematics in rural secondary schools. In this chapter, a prediction of a leadership style that can transform underachieving rural secondary schools for the promotion of teaching and learning of mathematics is presented. In addition, the interaction between transformational and instructional leadership effects in the mathematics classroom are discussed. The chapter defines leadership in mathematics teaching, discusses leadership for the mathematics classroom, presents how leadership was introduced in South African schools, followed by Mathematics instructions and leadership, and principal's perceptions on school leadership and its links to or effects on mathematics performance. Finally, the chapter suggests applied transformational leadership as a proposed tested model that has yielded a good performance in rural mathematics classrooms.

To achieve a successful mathematics education through the implementation of the school mathematics curriculum, the teacher’s beliefs emanating from their experiences (including learning theories) with their environment should be a considerable factor. This is to ensure that all learning situation in mathematics classroom generate understanding among the individuals involve for it to be meaningful. In this paper my goal is to highlight on some issues which are of great importance to mathematics education as a field of study. The issues in focus are; theory and practice, the role of theory in mathematics education research, some widely used learning theories in mathematics education, theories of models and modelling and their impact on mathematics research, teaching and learning, the aims of teaching and learning mathematics, and the status of mathematics education as knowledge field.

To support continuous professional development model in the teaching and learning of mathematics, many districts and schools have begun hiring elementary mathematics coaches and/or specialists (MCSs). However, limited large-scale empirical research exists that determines how the use of MCSs affect student learning and achievement. Kristin E. Harbour and Evthokia Stephanie Saclarides begin to fill in this gap by using data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress to explore the relationship between the presence and responsibilities of elementary MCSs and 4th-grade student achievement in mathematics. Based on their findings, they share practical implications for districts and administrators to consider.

This article, written at the start of April 2021, is a personal reflection on what has and hasn't worked in remote/online education. I have drawn on my own experience of teaching over the course of the past year, observations of classroom practice I have undertaken as a mentor and middle leader with responsibility for teaching and learning in my school, and conversations I have had with colleagues in my school and elsewhere; it is, therefore, highly anecdotal, and the reader is asked to bear in mind the fact that, like many others, my journey into online teaching was enforced by the closure of schools during the first nationwide lockdown in March 2020. My core aim during both lockdowns was to provide for my students the best experience possible until such a time as we could all return to the physical classroom. As it became clear towards the end of 2020 and the start of 2021 that we were going to need to return to remote education, I began to think more deeply about the strategies I was employing in my online teaching, how effective they were for my students, and what I might do to maximise their learning experience and outcomes.

The use of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in the teaching and learning process has been the subject of extensive research in the past few decades. Many studies have discussed the benefits of ICT for teachers and learners. However, little is known about the main factors that influence teachers’ attitudes toward the use of ICT in their teaching practices. This study aimed to explore the attitudes of secondary school EFL teachers in the Western District of Chlef toward ICT use in Algeria. Additionally, the study attempted to investigate the relationship between teachers’ computer attitudes and five independent variables: personal characteristics, computer attributes, cultural perceptions, computer competence, and computer access. Mixed methods research was used to combine both quantitative and qualitative research methods. A questionnaire and semi-structured interview were used in order to collect the data. Both descriptive and inferential statistics as well as content analysis were conducted to analyse the data. The findings indicated that EFL teachers held positive attitudes toward ICT in education. There were statistically significant positive correlations between teachers’ attitudes toward ICT and the five aforementioned independent variables. It was also found that age and academic qualification had negatively correlated with attitudes. The results of this study give meaningful insights for educational practitioners and policy-makers in relation to the implementation of ICT for teaching and learning in the classroom. Finally, the study presented some implications for policy and practice and recommendations for further research that will enhance teachers’ use of ICT in their teaching practices.

Policymakers in the U. S. have been trying to change schools and school practices for years. Though studies of such policies raise doubts about their effects, the last decade has seen an unprecedented increase in state policies designed to change instructional practice. One of the boldest and most comprehensive of these has been undertaken in California, where state policymakers have launched an ambitious effort to improve teaching and learning in schools. We offer an early report on California's reforms, focusing on mathematics. State officials have been promoting substantial changes in instruction designed to deepen students' mathematical understanding, to enhance their appreciation of mathematics and to improve their capacity to reason mathematically. If successful, these reforms would be a sharp departure from existing classroom practice, which attends chiefly to computational skills. The research reported here focuses on teachers' early responses to the state's efforts to change mathematics instruction. The case studies of five teachers highlight a key dilemma in such ambitious reforms. On the one hand, teachers are seen as the root of the problem: their instruction is mechanical, often boring, and superficial. On the other hand, teachers are cast as the key agents of improvement because students will not learn the new mathematics that policymakers intend unless teachers learn that math and teach it. But how can teachers teach a mathematics that they never learned, in ways they never experienced? That is the question explored in this special issue.

This article studies student teachers’ perceptions of the pedagogic and didactic aspects of teaching and learning mathematics in a democratic classroom. It is concerned primarily with issues of democracy in the mathematics classroom, specifically freedom, equality and dialogue. The research was conducted in two mathematics teacher education classes, where students were in their third year of study to major in mathematics. To find these students’ perceptions of democracy in the mathematics classroom the first two stages of the constant comparison method were followed to arrive at categories of democratic and undemocratic acts. The participants in the research emphasised that instructors should refrain from giving some students more time or opportunities to express themselves or act in the mathematics classroom than other students, because this would make them feel unequal and possibly make them unwilling to participate further in the mathematics classroom. The participants also emphasised that instructors should not exert their power to stop the flow of students’ actions in the mathematics classroom, because this would trouble them and make them lose control of their actions. Further, the participants mentioned that instructors would do better to connect to students’ ways of doing mathematics, especially of defining mathematical terms, so that students appreciate the correct ways of doing mathematics and defining its terms.

Purpose – Whilst beneficial, the use of evidence to improve teaching and learning in schools is proving difficult to achieve in practice. The purpose of this paper is to shed new light on this issue by examining the applicability of a model of rational behaviour as relates to the notion of evidence-informed practice (EIP). Specifically, exploring the question: “if EIP is rational behavior, why are not all teachers engaged in it?”, the authors examine whether the beliefs and perspectives of teachers in relation to EIP, align with their evidence-use behaviours. The authors then assess what factors prevent teachers/schools from engaging in EIP. Design/methodology/approach – To examine beliefs, instances of, and barriers to evidence use, the authors employ a Gradient Boosted Tree predictive model to analyse data from a survey of 696 practitioners in 79 schools. Findings – The findings suggest that, should they wish to increase EIP within their schools, school leaders need to: first, promote the vision for evidence-use (i.e. actively encourage its use); second, illustrate how research and evidence can be effectively employed to enhance aspects of teaching and learning; and third, establish effective learning environments, in which learning conversations around the use of evidence, can flourish. Originality/value – Using a new, innovative model of rationality, the authors conclude that despite the focus on EIP in many school systems world-wide, evidence use will never be meaningfully realized unless school leaders prioritize EIP as a school commitment. Simultaneously, given the high-stakes accountability environments facing many school systems it is unlikely that prioritization of EIP will occur until EIP forms part of any education system’s accountability regime.