Preservice Elementary Teachers’ Beliefs toward Mathematics and Mathematics Teaching

As they began their one-year teacher education program 138 elementary school teacher candidates completed a questionnaire designed to measure their beliefs concerning the nature of mathematics, measured on a scale from absolutist to fallibilist, and their beliefs concerning effective mathematics instruction, measured on a scale from traditional to constructivist. Interviews were conducted with volunteer questionnaire participants, with selection based on the questionnaire results and using two sets of criteria. Study 1. involved 8 teacher candidates showing distinct absolutist or fallibilist views of mathematics and individual interviews explored participants' beliefs concerning the use of information and communication technology, particularly interactive whiteboards (IWB), in the teaching and learning of mathematics. Participants with absolutist beliefs about the nature of mathematics tended to focus on the IWB as a presentation tool, while those with fallibilist beliefs appreciated the use of the IWB to support student exploration. Study 2. involved 8 teacher candidates with apparently misaligning absolutist beliefs concerning the nature of mathematics and constructivist beliefs concerning teaching. Interviews exploring participants' favoured instructional approaches, particularly those involving the use of manipulatives, showed that constructivist views involved essentially surface beliefs and that in fact manipulatives would be employed to support traditional direct instruction.

Supporting Metacognitive Development in Early Science Education: Exploring Elementary Teachers' Beliefs and Practices in Metacognition

Metacognition is the understanding and control of cognitive processes. Students with high levels of metacognition achieve greater academic success. The purpose of this mixed-methods study was to examine elementary teachers’ beliefs about metacognition and integration of metacognitive practices in science. Forty-four teachers were recruited through professional networks to complete a questionnaire containing open-ended questions (n = 44) and Likert-type items (n = 41). Five respondents were selected to complete semi-structured interviews informed by the questionnaire. The selected interview participants had a minimum of three years teaching experience and demonstrated a conceptual understanding of metacognition. Statistical tests (Pearson correlation, t-tests, and multiple regression) on quantitative data and thematic analysis of qualitative data indicated that teachers largely understood metacognition but had some gaps in their understanding. Participants’ reported actions (teaching practices) and beliefs differed according to their years of experience but not gender. Hierarchical multiple regression demonstrated that the first block of gender and experience was not a significant predictor of teachers' metacognitive actions, although experience was a significant predictor by itself. Experience was not a significant predictor once teachers' beliefs were added. The majority of participants indicated that metacognition was indeed appropriate for elementary students. Participants consistently reiterated that students’ metacognition developed with practice, but required explicit instruction. A lack of consensus remained around the domain specificity of metacognition. More specifically, the majority of questionnaire respondents indicated that metacognitive strategies could not be used across subject domains, whereas all interviewees indicated that they used strategies across subjects. Metacognition was integrated frequently into Ontario elementary classrooms; however, metacognition was integrated less frequently in science lessons. Lastly, participants used a variety of techniques to integrate metacognition into their classrooms. Implications for practice include the need for more professional development aimed at integrating metacognition into science lessons at both the Primary and Junior levels. Further, teachers could benefit from additional clarification on the three main components of metacognition and the need to integrate all three to successfully develop students’ metacognition.