Teachers, tasks, and tensions: lessons from a research–practice partnership

Raymond, Johnson; Severance, Samuel; Penuel, William R.; Leary, Heather

doi:10.1007/s10857-015-9338-3

Cited by 39 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Group (1) contains the articles by Coles and Brown (2015), Thanheiser et al (2015), and Johnson et al (2015). Whilst all three articles discuss mathematical task design in collectives (albeit different ones), each author team uses a different tool/theme for their argumentation, and consequently each points to different results and recommendations.…”

Section: Recent Research On Tasks Design and Partnership In Mathemamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Coles and Brown (2015), working in a teacher-researcher partnership, recommend particular design principles (devised around 'the making of distinctions') and an explicit language of mathematical thinking in task design, in order to address the 'tension/s' between teacher intentions and student activity. 'Tensions' are also the theme of the article by Johnson et al (2015). These can be tensions between designers and participants in terms of diverging goals in terms of implementing new standards.…”

Section: Recent Research On Tasks Design and Partnership In Mathemamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Research on mathematics teachers as partners in task design

Jones

Pepin

2016

J Math Teacher Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mathematical tasks and tools, including tasks in the form of digital tools, are key resources in mathematics teaching and in mathematics teacher education. Even so, the 'design' of mathematical tasks is perceived in different ways: sometimes seen as something distinct from the teaching and learning process, and sometimes as integral to it. Whilst task design has often been carried out by designers or mathematicians (perhaps as textbook authors), the focus for this review article is research that has involved mathematics teachers as partners in the design of tasks. The article provides a state-of-the-art review of relevant literature and is presented under three headings that consider, in turn, the role of mathematical 'tasks'; the nature of 'task design'; and the notion of 'partnerships for task design' in mathematics education. Subsequently, we present current research that is providing new insights into tasks, task design, and task design partnership. Based on this, we argue that 'task design' needs to pay particular attention to what to design, which tools are necessary or beneficial, and under what conditions; digital tools and task resources offer particular affordances that traditional resources cannot provide; and not only do teachers benefit from being partners in task design (in terms of their professional learning) but without their involvement some aspects of task design would most likely be neglected.

show abstract

Section: Recent Research On Tasks Design and Partnership In Mathemamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Recent Research On Tasks Design and Partnership In Mathemamentioning

confidence: 99%

Research on mathematics teachers as partners in task design

Jones

Pepin

2016

J Math Teacher Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This involvement of a wide variety of perspectives supported the design team in ensuring local validity of the specified vision of principal practice that they were developing. The value of including a range of perspectives also reflects research on collaborative design (e.g., Johnson et al, 2016 ; Penuel et al, 2013 ). It’s important to note that this principle also comes with significant challenges, including navigating different (and often conflicting) time scales, forms of accountability, languages, and cultures (e.g., Coburn et al, 2013 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We retrospectively analyze one RPP’s process to understand (a) how it might look for an RPP to engage in decomposition of practice and (b) what the benefits of engaging in the activity might be for an RPP. In doing so, we aim to contribute to a deeper understanding of how RPPs can effectively engage in particular activities that support educational improvement (e.g., Johnson, Severance, Penuel, & Leary, 2016 ; Penuel, Coburn, & Gallagher, 2013 ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Decomposition of Practice as an Activity for Research-Practice Partnerships

Resnick

Kazemi

2019

AERA Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This analysis examines the process of one research-practice partnership (RPP) engaged in the activity of decomposing elementary principal practice in the context of an instructional improvement initiative in mathematics. Decomposing, or breaking apart, complex practice has been used primarily by researchers to inform the design of pre-service teacher education. We argue that decomposition is a rich activity for researchers and practitioners to collaboratively engage in to support improvement efforts where practitioners are expected to transform their day-to-day practice. We examine what can be learned from the process by which one RPP engaged in decomposing practice that might be useful for other RPPs. Our retrospective, qualitative analysis supports understanding of how RPPs might engage in decomposition and the role decomposition might play in supporting RPPs to foster educational transformation in local contexts.

show abstract

“…Some of the processes that bring these different components into being and into relation to one another are leaders' "sensegiving" (Gioia & Chittipeddi, 1991) activities meant to help teachers navigate the multitude of conflicting messages that teachers face every day about what and how to teach (Coburn & Woulfin, 2012), routines such as grade-level and department meetings (Coburn, 2001;Spillane et al, 2011), professional development activities intended to help teachers make a working infrastructure of district-led or external initiatives (Johnson, Severance, Penuel, & Leary, 2016). Schools and districts sometimes even convene groups and re-organize systems that are focused specifically on increasing the coherence of the existing infrastructure (Elmore & Burney, 1997;Kirp, 2013).…”

Section: Co-design As Infrastructuring With Attention To Powermentioning

confidence: 99%

Co-design as Infrastructuring with Attention to Power: Building Collective Capacity for Equitable Teaching and Learning Through Design-Based Implementation Research

Penuel

2019

Collaborative Curriculum Design for Sustainable Innovation and Teacher Learning

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The chapters in this volume explore different ways that co-design of curriculum can make learning more relevant to teachers and students, support teacher learning, and promote the sustainability of particular innovations. Many of the chapters conclude that in fact, there is great potential for co-design to support each of these aims. Co-design, for example, can promote teacher ownership over the curriculum, including when reform goals that guide development are set by policy makers who are far from the classroom (Westbroek, de Vries, Walraven, Handelzalts, & McKenney, this volume). Co-design can facilitate "curriculum renewal" among inservice teachers-that is, a transformation in teachers' goals for students and pedagogical approaches. For pre-service teachers, co-design can support integration of technology into teaching (Agyei & Kafyulilo, this volume; Alayyar & Fisser, this volume). Further, teachers can continue to learn from the implementation process (Huizinga, Nieveen, & Handelzalts, this volume). Finally, there is some evidence presented in this volume that co-design facilitates sustainability by creating processes for ongoing curriculum renewal. But the chapters in this volume also explore limitations or boundary conditions under which co-design can produce these positive outcomes. For one, the organizational conditions matter. Teachers need time not just to develop curriculum, but also to learn the skills of curriculum design and to implement and evaluate it using a cycle of iterative testing and revision (Albashiry, this volume; Handelzalts, Nieveen, & Van den Akker, this volume). And since most curriculum design projects require coordination among actors at different levels of systems and within organization, systems of formal and informal communication to ensure coherence are needed

show abstract

Teachers, tasks, and tensions: lessons from a research–practice partnership

Cited by 39 publications

References 35 publications

Research on mathematics teachers as partners in task design

Research on mathematics teachers as partners in task design

Decomposition of Practice as an Activity for Research-Practice Partnerships

Co-design as Infrastructuring with Attention to Power: Building Collective Capacity for Equitable Teaching and Learning Through Design-Based Implementation Research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About