Challenges of maintaining cognitive demand during the limit lessons: understanding one mathematician’s class practices

References

• National Council of Teachers of Mathematics [NCTM]. Principles to actions: ensuring mathematical success for all. Reston (VA): NCTM, National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, [2014] ©2014; 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Henningsen M, Stein MK. Mathematical tasks and student cognition: classroom-based factors that support and inhibit high-level mathematical thinking and reasoning. J Res Math Educ. 1997;28(5):524–549. DOI: 10.2307/749690. doi: 10.2307/749690
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walczyk J, Ramsey L, Zha P. Obstacles to instructional innovation according to college science and mathematics faculty. J Res Sci Teach. 2007;44(1):85–106. doi: 10.1002/tea.20119.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDuffie AR, Graeber AO. Institutional norms and policies that influence college mathematics professors in the process of changing to reform-based practices. Sch Sci Math. 2003;103(7):331–344. DOI: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.2003.tb18210.x. doi: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.2003.tb18210.x
   Google Scholar
• Liu X. Competence and opportunity to learn. In: Liu X, editor. Linking competence to opportunities to learn: models of competence and data mining. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands; 2009. p. 5–11.
   Google Scholar
• Floden R. The measurement of opportunity to learn. In: Porter A, Gamoran A, editor. Methodological advances in cross-national surveys of educational assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 2002. p. 231–266.
   Google Scholar
• Kim O-K. Teacher decisions on lesson sequence and their impact on opportunities for students to learn. In: Fan L, Trouche L, Qi C, Rezat S, Visnovska J, editor. Research on mathematics textbooks and teachers’ resources: advances and issues. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2018. p. 315–339.
   Google Scholar
• Boston MD, Smith MS. Transforming secondary mathematics teaching: increasing the cognitive demands of instructional tasks used in teachers’ classrooms. J Res Math Educ. 2009;40(2):119–156.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hong DS, Choi KM. A comparative analysis of linear functions in Korean and American standards-based secondary textbooks. Int J Math Educ Sci Technol. 2018: 1–27. DOI: 10.1080/0020739X.2018.1440327.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hsu H-Y, Silver E. Cognitive complexity of mathematics instructional tasks in a Taiwanese classroom: An examination of task sources. J Res Math Educ. 2014;45(4):460–496. DOI: 10.5951/jresematheduc.45.4.0460. doi: 10.5951/jresematheduc.45.4.0460
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• White N, Mesa V. Describing cognitive orientation of calculus I tasks across different types of coursework. ZDM. 2014;46(4):675–690. DOI: 10.1007/s11858-014-0588-9. doi: 10.1007/s11858-014-0588-9
   Google Scholar
• Hong DS, Choi KM. A comparison of Korean and American secondary school textbooks: the case of quadratic equations. Educ Stud Math. 2014;85(2):241–263. DOI: 10.1007/s10649-013-9512-4. doi: 10.1007/s10649-013-9512-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boston M. Assessing instructional quality in mathematics. Elem Sch J. 2012;113(1):76–104. DOI: 10.1086/666387. doi: 10.1086/666387
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rasmussen C, Marrongelle K, Borba MC. Research on calculus: what do we know and where do we need to go? ZDM. 2014;46(4):507–515. DOI: 10.1007/s11858-014-0615-x. doi: 10.1007/s11858-014-0615-x
   Google Scholar
• Ellis J, Hanson K, Nuñez G, et al. Beyond plug and chug: an analysis of calculus I homework. Int J Res Undergrad Math Educ. 2015;1(2):268–287. DOI: 10.1007/s40753-015-0012-z. doi: 10.1007/s40753-015-0012-z
   Google Scholar
• Tallman MA, Carlson MP, Bressoud DM, et al. A characterization of calculus I final exams in U.S. colleges and universities. Int J Res Undergrad Math Educ. 2016;2(1):105–133. DOI: 10.1007/s40753-015-0023-9. doi: 10.1007/s40753-015-0023-9
   Google Scholar
• Bressoud DM, Carlson MP, Mesa V, et al. The calculus student: insights from the mathematical association of america national study. Int J Math Educ Sci Technol. 2013;44(5):685–698. DOI: 10.1080/0020739X.2013.798874. doi: 10.1080/0020739X.2013.798874
   Google Scholar
• Bressoud DM, Mesa V, Rasmussen C. Insights and recommendations from the MAA national study of college calculus. MAA notes. Washington (DC): Mathematical Association of America; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Hagman JE, Johnson E, Fosdick BK. Factors contributing to students and instructors experiencing a lack of time in college calculus. Int J STEM Educ. 2017;4(1):12. DOI: 10.1186/s40594-017-0070-7. doi: 10.1186/s40594-017-0070-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cornu R. Limits. In: David T, editor. Advanced mathematical thinking. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic; 1991. p. 153–166.
   Google Scholar
• Güçler B. Examining the discourse on the limit concept in a beginning-level calculus classroom. Educ Stud Math. 2013;82(3):439–453. DOI: 10.1007/s10649-012-9438-2. doi: 10.1007/s10649-012-9438-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams SR. Predications of the limit concept: An application of repertory grids. J Res Math Educ. 2001;32(4):341–367. DOI: 10.2307/749699. doi: 10.2307/749699
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doyle W. Academic work. Rev Educ Res. 1983;53(2):159–199. DOI: 10.2307/1170383. doi: 10.3102/00346543053002159
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mary Kay S, Barbara WG, Marjorie H. Building student capacity for mathematical thinking and reasoning: An analysis of mathematical tasks used in reform classrooms. Am Educ Res J. 1996;33(2):455–488. DOI: 10.3102/00028312033002455. doi: 10.3102/00028312033002455
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stein MK, Lane S. Instructional tasks and the development of student capacity to think and reason: An analysis of the relationship between teaching and learning in a reform mathematics project. Educ Res Eval. 1996;2(1):50–80. DOI: 10.1080/1380361960020103. doi: 10.1080/1380361960020103
   Google Scholar
• Stein MK, Smith MS. Mathematical tasks as a framework for reflection: from research to practice. Math Teach Middle Sch. 1998;3(4):268–275.
   Google Scholar
• Hiebert J, Wearne D. Instructional tasks, classroom discourse, and students’ learning in second-grade arithmetic. Am Educ Res J. 1993;30(2):393–425. DOI: 10.2307/1163241. doi: 10.3102/00028312030002393
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Code W, Piccolo C, Kohler D, et al. Teaching methods comparison in a large calculus class. ZDM. 2014;46(4):589–601. DOI: 10.1007/s11858-014-0582-2. doi: 10.1007/s11858-014-0582-2
   Google Scholar
• Park J. Is the derivative a function? If so, how do we teach it? Educ Stud Math. 2015;89(2):233–250. DOI: 10.1007/s10649-015-9601-7. doi: 10.1007/s10649-015-9601-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tall D, Vinner S. Concept image and concept definition in mathematics with particular reference to limits and continuity. Educ Stud Math. 1981;12(2):151–169. DOI: 10.1007/bf00305619. doi: 10.1007/BF00305619
   Google Scholar
• Bezuidenhout J. Limits and continuity: some conceptions of first-year students. Int J Math Educ Sci Technol. 2001;32(4):487–500. DOI: 10.1080/00207390010022590. doi: 10.1080/00207390010022590
   Google Scholar
• Roh KH. Students’ images and their understanding of definitions of the limit of a sequence. Educ Stud Math. 2008;69(3):217–233. DOI: 10.1007/s10649-008-9128-2. doi: 10.1007/s10649-008-9128-2
   Google Scholar
• Swinyard C. Reinventing the formal definition of limit: The case of Amy and mike. J Math Behav. 2011;30(2):93–114. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmathb.2011.01.001. doi: 10.1016/j.jmathb.2011.01.001
   Google Scholar
• Berry JS, Nyman MA. Promoting students’ graphical understanding of the calculus. J Math Behav. 2003;22(4):479–495. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmathb.2003.09.006. doi: 10.1016/j.jmathb.2003.09.006
   Google Scholar
• Cottrill J, Dubinsky E, Nichols D, et al. Understanding the limit concept: beginning with a coordinated process scheme. J Math Behav. 1996;15(2):167–192. DOI: 10.1016/S0732-3123(96)90015-2. doi: 10.1016/S0732-3123(96)90015-2
   Google Scholar
• Swinyard C, Larsen S. Coming to understand the formal definition of limit: insights gained from engaging students in reinvention. J Res Math Educ. 2012;43(4):465–493. DOI: 10.5951/jresematheduc.43.4.0465. doi: 10.5951/jresematheduc.43.4.0465
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hemmi K. Three styles characterising mathematicians’ pedagogical perspectives on proof. Educ Stud Math. 2010;75(3):271–291. DOI: 10.1007/s10649-010-9256-3. doi: 10.1007/s10649-010-9256-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lai Y, Weber K. Factors mathematicians profess to consider when presenting pedagogical proofs. Educ Stud Math. 2014;85(1):93–108. DOI: 10.1007/s10649-013-9497-z. doi: 10.1007/s10649-013-9497-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roth MA OGA. Institutional norms and policies that influence college mathematics professors in the process of changing to reform-based practices. Sch Sci Math. 2003;103(7):331–344. DOI: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.2003.tb18210.x. doi: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.2003.tb18210.x
   Google Scholar
• Kontorovich I. The answer depends on your lecturer. Res Math Educ. 2016;18(3):283–298. DOI: 10.1080/14794802.2016.1234405. doi: 10.1080/14794802.2016.1234405
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schoenfeld A. How we think. A theory of goal-oriented decision making and its educational applications. New York: Routledge; 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Barton B, Oates G, Paterson J, et al. A marriage of continuance: professional development for mathematics lecturers. Math Educ Res J. 2015;27(2):147–164. DOI: 10.1007/s13394-014-0134-7. doi: 10.1007/s13394-014-0134-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paterson J, Thomas M, Taylor S. Decisions, decisions, decisions: what determines the path taken in lectures? Int J Math Educ Sci Technol. 2011;42(7):985–995. DOI: 10.1080/0020739X.2011.611912. doi: 10.1080/0020739X.2011.611912
   Google Scholar
• Schoenfeld AH, Thomas M, Barton B. On understanding and improving the teaching of university mathematics. Int J STEM Educ. 2016;3(1):4. DOI: 10.1186/s40594-016-0038-z. doi: 10.1186/s40594-016-0038-z
   Google Scholar
• Son J-W, Senk SL. How reform curricula in the USA and Korea present multiplication and division of fractions. Educ Stud Math. 2010;74(2):117–142. DOI: 10.1007/s10649-010-9229-6. doi: 10.1007/s10649-010-9229-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franke M, Kazemi E, Battey D. Mathematics teaching and classroom practice. In: Lester F, editor. Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishers; 2007. p. 225–256.
   Google Scholar
• Munter C. Developing visions of high-quality mathematics instruction. J Res Math Educ. 2014;45(5):584–635. DOI: 10.5951/jresematheduc.45.5.0584. doi: 10.5951/jresematheduc.45.5.0584
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paoletti T, Krupnik V, Papadopoulos D, et al. Teacher questioning and invitations to participate in advanced mathematics lectures. Educ Stud Math. 2018;98(1):1–17. DOI: 10.1007/s10649-018-9807-6. doi: 10.1007/s10649-018-9807-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Viirman O. Explanation, motivation and question posing routines in university mathematics teachers’ pedagogical discourse: a commognitive analysis. Int J Math Educ Sci Technol. 2015;46(8):1165–1181. DOI: 10.1080/0020739X.2015.1034206. doi: 10.1080/0020739X.2015.1034206
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mesa V, Celis S, Lande E. Teaching approaches of community college mathematics faculty: Do they relate to classroom practices? Am Educ Res J. 2014;51(1):117–151. DOI: 10.3102/0002831213505759. doi: 10.3102/0002831213505759
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moyer PS, Milewicz E. Learning to question: categories of questioning used by preservice teachers during diagnostic mathematics interviews. J Math Teacher Educ. 2002;5(4):293–315. DOI: 10.1023/a:1021251912775. doi: 10.1023/A:1021251912775
   Google Scholar
• Sahin A, Kulm G. Sixth grade mathematics teachers’ intentions and use of probing, guiding, and factual questions. J Math Teacher Educ. 2008;11(3):221–241. DOI: 10.1007/s10857-008-9071-2. doi: 10.1007/s10857-008-9071-2
   Google Scholar
• Vilma M, Sergio C, Elaine L. Teaching approaches of community college mathematics faculty: Do they relate to classroom practices? Am Educ Res J. 2014;51(1):117–151. DOI: 10.3102/0002831213505759. doi: 10.3102/0002831213505759
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomas M, Yoon C. The impact of conflicting goals on mathematical teaching decisions. J Math Teacher Educ. 2014;17(3):227–243. DOI: 10.1007/s10857-013-9241-8. doi: 10.1007/s10857-013-9241-8
   Google Scholar
• Johnson E, Keller R, Fukawa-Connelly T. Results from a survey of abstract algebra instructors across the United States: understanding the choice to (Not) lecture. Int J Res Undergrad Math Educ. 2017. DOI: 10.1007/s40753-017-0058-1.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson E, Ellis J, Rasmussen C. It's about time: the relationships between coverage and instructional practices in college calculus. Int J Math Educ Sci Technol. 2016;47(4):491–504. DOI: 10.1080/0020739X.2015.1091516. doi: 10.1080/0020739X.2015.1091516
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Törner G, Potari D, Zachariades T. Calculus in European classrooms: curriculum and teaching in different educational and cultural contexts. ZDM. 2014;46(4):549–560. DOI: 10.1007/s11858-014-0612-0. doi: 10.1007/s11858-014-0612-0
   Google Scholar