A Radical Constructivist View of Responsive Teaching: Teacher Decentering

Yıl 2021, Sayı: 52, 277 - 304, 31.12.2021

Sinem Baş Ader

https://doi.org/10.53444/deubefd.900196

Öz

Duyarlı Öğretime Radikal Yapılandırmacı Bir Bakış: Öğretmen Merkezsizleştirmesi

Öz

Öğrenci düşünme şekline duyarlı öğretim, öğretmenin ders sırasında öğrenci düşünme şekillerine odaklandığı ve öğretimle ilgili kararlarını bu düşünme şekillerine dayanarak verdiği bir öğretim yaklaşımı olarak tanımlanmaktadır. Geçmiş araştırmalar duyarlı öğretimin bileşenleri ile ilgili önemli sonuçlar ortaya koymuştur. Ancak bu çalışmalarda öğretmenlerin öğretimlerine yön veren zihinsel süreçlerine değinilmemektedir. Bu teorik makalenin amacı, öğrenci düşünme şekline duyarlı öğretimde öğretmenlerin geçtikleri zihinsel süreçleri merkezsizleştirme kavramı çerçevesinde tanımlayarak alan yazına katkıda bulunmaktır. Merkezsizleştirme, genel olarak, kişinin iletişim halinde olduğu diğer kişinin bakış açısını göz önünde bulundurabilmesi olarak tanımlanmaktadır. Öğretmenlerin merkezsizleştirme becerisinin ya da bu becerideki eksikliğin öğrenci ile iletişimini nasıl etkilediğini açıklamak amacıyla, iki tür öğretmen-öğrenci iletişimi tanımlanacaktır: yansıtıcı ve yansıtıcı olmayan iletişim. Örnek olarak, sınıf tartışmalarından alınmış iki matematiksel diyalog, yansıtıcı ve yansıtıcı olmayan iletişim bağlamında incelenecektir. Merkezsizleştirme kavramı kullanılarak yapılacak araştırmaların duyarlı öğretim ile ilgili alan yazına nasıl katkı sunacağının tartışılmasının ardından, yapılabilecek merkezsizleştirme araştırmaları ile ilgili öneriler sunulacaktır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Merkezsizleştirme, duyarlı öğretim, öğretmen-öğrenci iletişimi, matematik eğitimi, radikal yapılandırmacılık

Kaynakça

• Ball, D. L. ve Cohen, D. K. (1999). Developing practice, developing practitioners: Toward a practice-based theory of professional education. L. Darling-Hammond ve G. Sykes (Ed.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice (s. 3-32) içinde. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
• Ball, D. L., Thames, M. D. ve Phelps, G. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special? Journal of Teacher Education, 59(5), 389-407. doi:10.1177/0022487108324554
• Bauersfeld, H. (1980). Hidden dimensions in the so-called reality of a mathematics classroom. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 11(1), 23-41. doi:10.1007/BF00369158
• Boaler, J. ve Brodie, K. (2004). The importance, nature and impact of teacher questions. D. E. McDougall ve J. A. Ross (Ed.), Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Cilt. 2, s. 774-782) içinde. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Institute of Studies in Education/University of Toronto. Erişim adresi: https://www.pmena.org/proceedings/
• Brodie, K. (2011). Working with learners’ mathematical thinking: Towards a language of description for changing pedagogy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(1), 174-186. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2010.07.014
• Carlson, M. P. (1998). A cross-sectional investigation of the development of the function concept. A. H. Schoenfeld, J. Kaput, E. Dubinsky ve T. Dick (Ed.), Research in collegiate mathematics education. III (s. 114-162) içinde. doi:10.1090/cbmath/007
• Carlson, M. P. ve Bloom, I. (2005). The cyclic nature of problem solving: An emergent multidimensional problem-solving framework. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 58(1), 45–75. doi:10.1007/s10649-005-0808-x
• Carlson, M. P., Bowling, S., Moore, K. ve Ortiz, A. (2007). The role of the facilitator in promoting meaningful discourse among professional learning communities of secondary mathematics and science teachers. T. S. Lamberg ve L. R. Wiest (Ed.), Proceedings of the 29th Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (s. 841-848) içinde. Stateline (Lake Tahoe), NV: University of Nevada, Reno. Erişim adresi: https://www.pmena.org/proceedings/
• Carlson, M., Jacobs, S., Coe, E., Larsen, S. ve Hsu, E. (2002). Applying covariational reasoning while modeling dynamic events: A framework and a study. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 33(5), 352-378. doi: 10.2307/4149958
• Carlson, M. P., Oehrtman, M. ve Moore, K. (2016). Precalculus: Pathways to calculus (6. bs.). Phoenix, AZ: Rational Reasoning.
• Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E. ve Frank, M. L. (1996). Cognitively guided instruction: A knowledge base for reform in primary mathematics instruction. The Elementary School Journal, 97(1), 3-20. doi: 10.1086/461846
• Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Peterson, P. L., Chiang, C. P. ve Loef, M. (1989). Using knowledge of children’s mathematics thinking in the classroom teaching: An experimental study. American Educational Research Journal, 26(4), 499-531. doi: 10.3102/00028312026004499
• Davis, B. (1997). Listening for differences: An evolving conception of mathematics teaching. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28(3), 355-376. doi: 10.2307/749785
• Franke, M. L., Webb, N. M., Chan, A. G., Ing, M., Freund, D. ve Battey, D. (2009). Teacher questioning to elicit students’ mathematical thinking in elementary school classrooms. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(4), 380-392. doi:10.1177/0022487109339906
• Hackenberg, A. (2005). A model of mathematical learning and caring relations. For the Learning of Mathematics, 25(1), 45-51. Erişim adresi: https://www.jstor.org/stable/40248486
• Hiebert, J. ve Grouws, D. A. (2007). The effects of mathematics teaching on students’ learning. F. K. Lester Jr (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (Cilt. 1, s. 371-404) içinde. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
• Hiebert, J. ve Wearne, D. (1993). Instructional tasks, classroom discourse, and students’ learning in second-grade arithmetic. American Educational Research Journal, 30(2), 393-425. doi:10.3102/00028312030002393
• Jacobs, V. R. ve Ambrose, R. C. (2008). Making the most of story problems. Teaching Children Mathematics, 15(5), 260-266. Erişim adresi: https://www.jstor.org/stable/41199267
• Jacobs, V. R. ve Empson, S. B. (2016). Responding to children’s mathematical thinking in the moment: an emerging framework of teaching moves. ZDM Mathematics Education, 48(1-2), 185-197. doi:10.1007/s11858-015-0717-0
• Jacobs, V. R., Lamb, L. C. ve Philipp, R. A. (2010). Professional noticing of children’s mathematical thinking. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 41(2), 169-202. Erişim adresi: https://www.jstor.org/stable/20720130
• Johnson, E. M. S. ve Larsen, S. P. (2012). Teacher listening: The role of knowledge of content and students. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 31(1), 117-129. doi:10.1016/j.jmathb.2011.07.003
• Kazemi, E. ve Franke, M. L. (2004). Teacher learning in mathematics: Using student work to promote collective inquiry. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 7(3), 203-235. doi:10.1023/B:JMTE.0000033084.26326.19
• Kertil, M. (2020). Matematik öğretmen adaylarının kovaryasyonel düşünme becerileri: dinamik animasyonlar nasıl etkiliyor? Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 11(2), 312-342. doi:10.16949/turkbilmat.652481
• LaRochelle, R., Nickerson, S. D., Lamb, L. C., Hawthorne, C., Philipp, R. A. ve Ross, D. L. (2019). Secondary practising teachers' professional noticing of students' thinking about pattern generalisation. Mathematics Teacher Education and Development, 21(1), 4-27. Erişim adresi: https://mted.merga.net.au/index.php/mted/article/view/563/359
• Marfai, F. S., Moore, K. C. ve Teuscher, D. (2011). The influence of a teacher's decentering moves on students engaging in reflective thinking. L. R. Wiest ve T. Lamberg (Ed.), Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (s. 138-146) içinde. Reno, NV: University of Nevada, Reno. Erişim adresi: https://www.pmena.org/proceedings/
• Moon, A., Stanford, C., Cole, R. ve Towns, M. (2017). Decentering: A characteristic of effective student−student discourse in inquiry-oriented physical chemistry classrooms. Journal of Chemical Education, 94(7), 829-836. doi:10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b00856
• Moore, K. C., Carlson, M. P. ve Oehrtman, M. (2009). The role of quantitative reasoning in solving applied precalculus problems. Proceedings of the Twelfth Annual Conference on Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina State University. Erişim adresi: http://sigmaa.maa.org/rume/crume2009/
• National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1991). Professional standards for teaching mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
• National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
• National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2014). Principles to actions: Ensuring mathematics success for all. Reston, VA: Author.
• Piaget, J. (1926). The language and thought of the child. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co.
• Sherin, M. G. (2002). When teaching becomes learning. Cognition and Instruction, 20(2), 119-150. doi:10.1207/S1532690XCI2002_1
• Sherin, M. G. ve Han, S. Y. (2004). Teacher learning in the context of a video club. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(2), 163-183. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2003.08.001
• Sherin, M. G., Jacobs, V. R. ve Philipp, R. A. (2011). Mathematics teacher noticing: Seeing through teachers’ eyes. New York, NY: Routledge.
• Sherin, M. G. ve van Es, E. A. (2009). Effects of video club participation on teachers’ professional vision. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(1), 20-37. doi:10.1177/0022487108328155
• Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14. doi:10.3102/0013189X015002004
• Silverman, J. ve Thompson, P. W. (2008). Toward a framework for the development of mathematical knowledge for teaching. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 11, 499-511. doi:10.1007/s10857-008-9089-5
• Speer, N. M. ve Wagner, J. F. (2009). Knowledge needed by a teacher to provide analytic scaffolding during undergraduate mathematics classroom discussions. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 40(5), 530–562. Erişim adresi: https://www.jstor.org/stable/40539355
• Steffe, L. P. ve Thompson, P. W. (2000). Interaction or intersubjectivity? A reply to Lerman. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31(2), 191–209. doi:10.2307/749751
• Steffe, L. P., von Glasersfeld, E., Richards, J. ve Cobb, P. (1983). Children’s counting types: Philosophy, theory, and application. New York, NY: Praeger Scientific.
• Stein, M. K., Engle, R. A., Smith, M. S. ve Hughes, E. K. (2008). Orchestrating productive mathematical discussions: Five practices for helping teachers move beyond show and tell. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 10(4), 313-340. doi:10.1080/10986060802229675
• Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı. (2018). Matematik dersi ogretim programi (ilkokul ve ortaokul 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ve 8. sınıflar). Ankara: T.C. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı.
• Teuscher, D., Moore, K. C. ve Carlson, M. P. (2016). Decentering: A construct to analyze and explain teacher actions as they relate to student thinking. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 19(5), 433-456. doi:10.1007/s10857-015-9304-0
• Thompson, P. W. (2000). Radical constructivism: Reflections and directions. L. P. Steffe ve P.W. Thompson (Ed.), Radical constructivism in action: Building on the pioneering work of Ernst von Glaserfeld (s. 412-448) içinde. London: Falmer Press.
• Thompson, P. W. (2013). In the absence of meaning. K. Leatham (Ed.), Vital directions for research in mathematics education (s. 57-93) içinde. New York, NY: Springer.
• van Es, E. A. (2011). A framework for learning to notice student thinking. M. G. Sherin, V. R. Jacobs ve R. A. Philipp (Ed.), Mathematics teacher noticing: Seeing through teachers’ eyes (s. 134-151) içinde. New York: Routledge.
• van Es, E. A. ve Sherin, M. G. (2002). Learning to notice: Scaffolding new teachers’ interpretations of classroom interactions. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 10(4), 571-596. Erişim adresi: https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/9171/
• van Es, E. A. ve Sherin, M. G. (2008). Mathematics teachers’ “learning to notice” in the context of a video club. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(2), 244-276. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2006.11.005
• Wallach, T. ve Even, R. (2005). Hearing students: The complexity of understanding what they are saying, showing, and doing. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 8(5), 393-417. doi:10.1007/s10857-005-3849-2
• Walshaw, M. ve Anthony, G. (2008). The teachers’ role in classroom discourse: A review of recent research into mathematics classrooms. Review of Educational Research, 78(3), 516-551. doi:10.3102/0034654308320292
• Wertsch, J. V. ve Toma, C. (1995). Discourse and learning in the classroom: A sociocultural approach. L. P. Steffe ve J. Gale (Ed.), Constructivism in education (s. 159-174) içinde. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Williams, S. R. ve Baxter, J. A. (1996). Dilemmas of discourse-oriented teaching in one middle school mathematics classroom. The Elementary School Journal, 97(1), 21-38. doi: 10.1086/461847
• Wood, T. (1998). Alternative patterns of communication in mathematics classes: Funneling or Focussing? H. Steinbring, M. G. B. Bartolini-Bussi ve A. Sierpinska (Ed.), Language and communication in the mathematics classroom (s. 167-178) içinde. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.