PurposeThe article presents the construction of a conceptual framework, which is rooted in mathematics education and in dialogic analysis. It aims to analyse how dialogic interactions contribute to constructing teachers' mathematical problem-solving knowledge. The article provides one example of this analysis.Design/methodology/approachThe networking between a content analysis framework (Mathematical Knowledge for Teaching Problem-Solving) and a dialogic analysis framework (Lesson Study Dialogue Analysis) is presented. This leads to the construction of indicators to quantitatively and qualitatively code our data: five meetings during one lesson study cycle of a group of eight Swiss primary teachers, working on the teaching of problem-solving.FindingsThis article does not present empirical findings. The developed conceptual framework is the result presented.Research limitations/implicationsThe presented framework allows modelling, on the one hand, the knowledge relating to the teaching and learning of problem-solving and, on the other hand, the analysis of interactions during a lesson study. The article does not contain the results of the research.Practical implicationsThe use of our framework can contribute to teacher educators' and facilitators' training by highlighting which types of intervention are favourable to the development of knowledge.Originality/valueOur analysis involves a “systematic coding” approach. It allows a fine-grained analysis of the interactions in relation to the evolution of knowledge. Such a systematic approach offers the possibility of questioning the coded data in various ways.
Dans ce texte nous présentons une recherche visant à analyser le rapport que des enseignants ou futurs enseignants ont à l'égard des mathématiques. Nous avons expérimenté avec 14 binômes (6 d'étudiants et 8 de professeurs plus confirmés) un dispositif consistant, dans un premier temps pour un enseignant généraliste du primaire et un enseignant de mathématiques du secondaire de Genève à répondre par écrit à un questionnaire de mathématiques, puis dans un deuxième temps à confronter leurs réponses en présence d'un expérimentateur. Nous analysons tout d'abord ce qui émerge dans chacun des 4 groupes de questions, puis nous faisons une analyse en termes de postures lors de l'entretien, avant de conclure sur l'intérêt, les limites et les perspectives de ce dispositif.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.