Abstract
This paper focuses on commonalities and differences of three approaches to large-scale professional development (PD) in mathematics education, based on two studies from Germany and one from the United States of America. All three initiatives break new ground in improving PD targeted at educating “multipliers,” and in all three cases specific design principles for successful PD are defined, implemented, and discussed. All three teams systematically investigate the success of their PD activity and thereby discuss their theoretical assumptions, research questions, methods, and results. Given the goal of scaling up, the initiatives are pilot projects due to the relatively small number of participants. The paper highlights the diversity of approaches, each including various specific strengths but also some limitations. This is done by analyzing the three studies regarding the features “large-scale PD and scientific knowledge on it”, “goals and design of PD”, “research design and methods”, and “research results and implications”. Overall, the studies help to understand the enormous challenges of the field when aiming at large-scale PD and systematically investigating and reflecting its impact. One prominent challenge is teacher educators’ double role of intervening and investigating. All three studies recommend a continued or even stronger focus on participants’ practice and its challenges. It makes sense to assume that the focus on participants’ practice and strengths is even more important when starting further cascades.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Adler, J., Ball, D., Krainer, K., Lin, F. L., & Novotna, J. (2005). Reflections on an emerging field: researching mathematics teacher education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 61(3), 359–381.
Altrichter, H., Feldman, A., Posch, P., & Somekh, B. (2008). Teachers investigate their work: an introduction to action research across the professions (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.
DZLM (2013). Theoretischer Rahmen des Deutschen Zentrums für Lehrerbildung Mathematik. http://www.dzlm.de/files/uploads/DZLM_Theorierahmen.pdf. Accessed 14 January 2015 (version from 24 May 2013).
Jackson, K., Cobb, P., Wilson, J., Webster, M., Dunlap, C., & Appelgate, M. (2015). Investigating the development of mathematics leaders’ capacity to support teachers’ learning on a large scale. ZDM Mathematics Education, 47(1). doi:10.1007/s11858-014-0644-5 (this issue).
Krainer, K. (2003). Teams, communities & networks. Editorial. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 6(2), 93–105.
Krainer, K. (2005). What is “good” mathematics teaching, and how can research inform practice and policy? Editorial. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 8(2), 75–81.
Krainer, K. (2006). How can schools put mathematics in their centre? Improvement = content + community + context. In J. Novotná, H. Moraová, M. Krátká, & N. Stehliková (Eds.), Proceedings of the 30th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (PME 30) (Vol. 1, pp. 84–89). Prague: Charles University.
Krainer, K. (2014). Teachers as stakeholders in mathematics education research. The Mathematics Enthusiast, 11(1), 49–59.
Krainer, K., & Zehetmeier, S. (2013). Inquiry-based learning for students, teachers, researchers, and representatives of educational administration and policy: reflections on a nation-wide initiative fostering educational innovations. ZDM–The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 45(6), 875–886.
Maaß, K., & Artigue, M. (2013). Implementation of inquiry-based learning in day-to-day teaching: a synthesis. ZDM–The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 45(6), 779–795.
Roesken-Winter, B., Schüler, S., Stahnke, R., & Blömeke, S. (2015). Effective CPD on a large scale: examining the development of multipliers. ZDM Mathematics Education, 47(1). doi:10.1007/s11858-014-0644-5 (this issue).
Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. London: Temple-Smith.
Teller, J., Barzel, B., & Leuders, T. (2015). Promoting secondary teachers’ diagnostic competence with respect to functions: development of a scalable unit in Continuous Professional Development. ZDM Mathematics Education, 47(1). doi:10.1007/s11858-014-0644-5 (this issue).
Willke, H. (1999). Systemtheorie II: Interventionstheorie (3rd ed.). Stuttgart: Lucius & Lucius UTB.
Wilson, P. S., Cooney, T. J., & Stinson, D. W. (2005). What constitutes good mathematics teaching and how it develops: nine high school teachers’ perspectives. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 8(2), 83–111.
Acknowledgments
I gratefully thank Peter Posch and Tanja Tscheinig for their very helpful comments on an earlier draft of this chapter.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Krainer, K. Reflections on the increasing relevance of large-scale professional development. ZDM Mathematics Education 47, 143–151 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-015-0674-7
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-015-0674-7