Decisions in academy meetings: the case of a mathematics professor
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31391/S2007-7033(2024)0063-012Abstract
Based on the concepts of competence and experience of meaning of the theory of Communities of Practice, we analyze the decision-making process of a university mathematics professor who, in academy meetings, proposes to implement a new teaching strategy. The methodology was qualitative, in the form of a case study. The results indicate that this process is influenced by the interrelation between the professor's daily reflections and the demands of his educational institution. We conclude that the different practices in which the teacher participates in his professional practice contribute to his decisions.
Downloads
References
Bishop, A. J. (1976). Decision-making, the intervening variable. Educational Studies in Mathematics, vol. 7, núm. 1–2, pp. 41–47. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00144357
Bohl, J. V. y Van Zoest, L. R. (2003). The value of Wenger’s concepts of modes of participation and regimes of accountability in understanding teacher learning. En N. A. Pateman, B. J. Dougherty, y J. T. Zilliox (eds.). Proceedings of the 27th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education held jointly with the 25th Conference of PME-NA (pp. 339–346). Center for Research and Development Group.
Borko, H., Roberts, S. A. y Shavelson, R. (2008). Teachers’ decision making from Alan J. Bishop to today. En P. Clarkson y N. Presmeg (eds.). Critical Issues in Mathematics Education (pp. 37–67). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09673-5_4
Chevallard, Y. (2006). Steps towards a new epistemology in mathematics education. En M. Bosch (ed.). Proceedings of the 4th Conference of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 21–30). Universidad Ramon Llull. http://erme.site/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/CERME4_2_Plenaries.pdf
Chevallard, Y. (1999). L’analyse des pratiques enseignantes en théorie anthropologique du didactique. Recherches en Didactique des Mathématiques, vol. 19, núm. 2, pp. 221–266. https://revue-rdm.com/1999/l-analyse-des-pratiques/
Cohen, L., Manion, L. y Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education. Routledge.
Contu, A. y Willmot, H. (2006). Studying practice: situating talking about machines. Organization Studies, vol. 27, núm. 12, pp. 1769–1782. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840606071895
D’Eon, M., Overgaard, V. y Rutledge, H. S. (2000). Teaching as a social practice: Implications for faculty development. Advances in Health Sciences Education, vol. 5, núm. 2, pp. 151–162. http://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009898031033
Engeström, Y. (2001). Making expansive decisions: An activity-theoretical study of practitioners building collaborative medical care for children. En C. M. Allwood y M. Selart (eds.). Decision making: social and creative dimensions (pp. 281–301). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-9827-9_14
Engeström, Y. (1999). Activity theory and individual and social transformation. En Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen y R. L. Punamäki (eds.). Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 19–39). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511812774
Gómez-Blancarte, A. L., y Miranda, I. (2021). Participation and reification: Two basic design principles for mathematics professional development programs. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, vol. 21, núm. 3, pp. 625–638. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42330-021-00175-1
Herbers, M. S., Antelo, A., Etting, D. y Buck, A. M. (2011). Improving teaching through a community of practice. Journal of Transformative Education, vol. 9, núm. 2, pp. 89–108. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541344611430688
Kim, H.-j., Metzger, M. y Heaton, R. M. (2020). Teacher planning sessions as professional opportunities to learn: An elementary mathematics teacher’s re-conceptualization of instructional triangles. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, vol. 20, pp. 1207–1227. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-019-10019-y
Lande, E. y Mesa, V. (2016). Instructional decision making and agency of community college mathematics faculty. ZDM Mathematics Education, vol. 48, núm. 1–2, pp. 199–212. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-015-0736-x
Long, M. (2017). High medieval monasteries as communities of practice: approaching monastic learning through letters. Journal of Religious History, vol. 41, núm. 1, pp. 42–59. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9809.12345
Mercado-Maldonado, R. (2002). Los saberes docentes como construcción social. La enseñanza centrada en los niños. Fondo de Cultura Económica.
Miranda, I. y Gómez-Blancarte, A. L. (2018). La enseñanza de las matemáticas con el enfoque de la teoría de comunidades de práctica. Educación Matemática, vol. 30, núm. 3, pp. 269–288. https://doi.org/10.24844/em3003.11
Morgan, C. (2014). Understanding practices in mathematics education: structure and text. Educational Studies in Mathematics, vol. 87, núm. 2, pp. 129–143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-013-9482-6
Olson, J. K. (1992). Understanding teaching. Beyond expertise. Open University Press.
Orr, J. E. (1996). Talking about machines: An ethnography of a modern job. Cornell University Press.
Pinzón, A. y Gómez, P. (2021). Toma de decisiones en el aula: estudio de casos de profesores de matemáticas. PNA, vol. 16, núm. 1, pp. 1–24. https://doi.org/10.30827/pna.v16i1.15674
Pinzón, A. y Gómez, P. (2019). Un modelo para la toma de decisiones del profesor de matemáticas. PNA, vol. 13, núm. 3, pp. 130–146. https://doi.org/10.30827/pna.v13i3.7908
Potari, D. y Stouraitis, K. (2019). Teacher decision making. En D. Potari y O. Chapman (eds.). International Handbook of Mathematics Teacher Education: Volume 1 (pp. 303–325). Brill. https://brill.com/display/title/60697
Schoenfeld, A. (2011). How we think. A theory of goal-oriented decision making and its educational applications. Routledge.
Shavelson, R. J. (1973). What is the basic teaching skill? Journal of Teacher Education, vol. 24, núm. 2, pp. 144–151. https://doi.org/10.1177/002248717302400213
Shulman, L. S. y Elstein, A. S. (1975). Studies of problem solving, judgment, and decision making: Implications for educational research. En F. N. Kerlinger (ed.). Review of Research in Education (pp. 3–42). F. E. Peacock. https://doi.org/10.2307/1167252
Skott, J. (2013). Understanding the role of the teacher in emerging classroom practices: searching for patterns of participation. ZDM Mathematics Education, vol. 45, núm. 4, pp. 547–559. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-013-0500-z
Star, S. L. (1989). The structure of ill-structured solutions: Boundary objects and heterogeneous distributed problem solving. En L. Gasser y M. N. Huhns (eds.). Distributed artificial intelligence (pp. 37–54). Ptman. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-1-55860-092-8.50006-X
Stockero, S. y Van Zoest, L. (2013). Characterizing pivotal teaching moments in beginning mathematics teachers' practice. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, vol. 16, núm. 2, pp. 125–147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-012-9222-3
Stouraitis, K., Potari, D. y Skott, J. (2017). Contradictions, dialectical oppositions and shifts in teaching mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, vol. 95, núm. 2, pp. 203–217. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-017-9749-4
Sullivan, P. y Mousley, J. (2001). Thinking teaching: Seeing mathematics teachers as active decision makers. En F. L. Lin y T. J. Cooney (eds.). Making sense of mathematics teacher education (pp. 147–163). Kluwer Academic Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0828-0_7
Trouche, L. Gueudet, G. y Pepin, B. (2018). Documentation approach to didactics. En S. Lerman (ed.). Encyclopedia of Mathematics Education (pp. 1–11). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77487-9_100011-1
Wenger, E. (2001). Comunidades de práctica: aprendizaje, significado e identidad (G. Sánchez Barberán, traducción). Paidós Ibérica.
Wenger, E., White, N. y Smith, J. (2010). Learning in communities. En U. D. Ehlers y D. Schneckenberg (eds.). Changing cultures in higher education. Moving ahead to future learning (pp. 257–284). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03582-1_20
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Sinéctica
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International license.
Authors who publish in Sinéctica agree to the following terms:
The authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right of first publication of the authorized work simultaneously under a Creative Commons Attribution License, which allows others to share the work as long as both the authorship of the work and the initial publication in this journal are acknowledged.
Authors may enter into additional separate contractual agreements for non-exclusive distribution of the published version of the journal (e.g., publishing in an institutional repository or a book), with acknowledgement of initial publication in this journal.
Authors are allowed to publish their work in institutional repositories or on their own website before and during the submission process, as it may generate productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of the published work.
Explanatory note: As of 2017 Sinéctica is governed by the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial 3.0 International License, a version that standardizes licenses internationally.
Articles published between 1992 and 2016 are covered by a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International license, which allows a work to be shared and distributed non-commercially and with acknowledgement of the author, but prohibits modification of the original creation.
