Lin. Wang; Chang-huan. Feng

Educational Background and High School Maths Teachers’ Specialism

Full Text (PDF, 135KB), PP.28-34

Views: 0 Downloads: 0

Author(s)

Lin. Wang ^1,* Chang-huan. Feng ¹

1. Department of Mathematic and Information, China West Normal University, Nanchong, P. R. China

* Corresponding author.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5815/ijmecs.2009.01.04

Received: 15 Jun. 2009 / Revised: 21 Jul. 2009 / Accepted: 26 Aug. 2009 / Published: 8 Oct. 2009

Index Terms

The latest curriculum reform, educational background, maths teachers’ specialism, statistical analysis

Abstract

Teachers’ Specialism is a world development trend and fashion, but also the needs and the direction of teacher education reform. After the latest curriculum reform, the educational reform and development of math,teachers have become universally concentrated and thoughtful in the field of mathematical education. The study adopting questionnaires and telephone interviews carried out a sample survey to 59 common high school math teachers from 3 provinces, and analyzed the connection between math teachers’ specialism and educational background by the statistical analysis tool SPSS quantitatively and qualitatively. The study shows that both mathematical science knowledge and mathematical educational skills have an obvious connection with the educational background, while there’s little connection between mathematical educational knowledge and the educational background. The study points out a relevant strategy which high school math teachers should attach the same important to pre-job training and post-job training.

Cite This Paper

Lin Wang, Chang-huan Feng, "Educational Background and High School Maths Teachers’ Specialism", International Journal of Modern Education and Computer Science(IJMECS), vol.1, no.1, pp.28-34, 2009. DOI:10.5815/ijmecs.2009.01.04

Reference

[1]Shulman.L.S. “Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of the New Reform,” Educational Review of Harvard. 1987, Vo1. 22..
[2]L. Y. Zhang, “Investigation of the Status and Research about the Expertise of High School Mathematics Teachers in Poverty-Stricken Area,” unpublished.
[3]Grossman.P.L. “Teachers' Knowledge. In T.Husen & T.N.Postlethwaite (Eds),” The International Encydopedia of Education, New York, 1994, pp. 56.
[4]C. X. Ming, “Practical Knowledge: The Basic Knowledge of Teachers’ Specialization Development,” Educational Review of Peking University. Peking, January 2003, pp. 105.
[5]Y.L. Jun, “Concept and Implementation of Mathematics New Curriculum,” Zhejiang University Press. Hangzhou, July 2005, pp. 87.
[6]M. Q. Guo, “Managements and Statistics,” Science Press. Peking, 2007, pp. 79-83.
[7]L. Zhou, “Investigation and Analyze about the Conditions of Primary and Middle Schools’ Teachers in Beijing,” Ji Nan, Adult Education, September 2007, pp.21.
[8]Butlre,J. (1992). Teacher professional development: An Anstralian case study. Journal of Education for Teaching, 18(3).
[9]Butt, Richard L., & Raymond. (1989) Studying the Nature and DeveloPment of Teachers’ Knowledge Using Collaboretive Autobiography. International Journal of Educational researeh.Vol.13.
[10]Darling-Hammound,L.(ed).(1994).Professional development schools: Schools for developing a profession. NewYork: Teachers College Press.
[11]Flinders,D.J.(1988).Teaeher isolation and the new reform. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision,14(1).
[12]Goodson,Ivor.(1994).Studying the Teacher’s Life and Work. Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol 10.No.1
[13]Hensen,K.T.(1996). Teachers as Researchers. In J.Sikula.T.J.Buttery, &E.Guyton (Eds) Handbook of Research on Teacher Education (2nd ed.，pp.53-64) New York: Simon & Schuster.
[14]Berliner D.C. Expert knowledge in the pedagogical domain. Paper presented at the meeting of the American educational psychological association [M]. New Orleans, LA. August 12,1989.
[15]Borko，H.&Putnam,R.T. Leaning to teach，In David C.Berliner & Robert C. （alfee Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology [M]. New York: Macmillan，1996.
[16]L Leavitt, Howard b. Issues and Problem in Teacher Education: an international handbook. New York: Greenwood Press,1992.
[17]Joseph W.Newnar. America's Teacher: an introduction to education, New York: Long-man, 1990.
[18]Evans,K. School Based Inservice Education: Case Studies and Guidelines for Implemention, 1993.
[19]Wilson J.C.(1926).Statement and Infexence (vol.1). Oxford,England: Oxford University Press.Prichard H.A.(1950).Knowledge and Perception: Essays and Lectures Oxford>England:Oxford University Press.
[20]Fred Nickols(2000).Industry Analysis a la Michael Porter. Retrieved March 21，2003，from http://home.att.neblnickols/fivewe forces.htm.
[21]Karl Mannheim. Man and Soeiety in an Age of Reeonstruction. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.1951.
[22]Joseph Ftideman，Jona than Silberman. University Technology Transfer: Do Incentives, Management, and Location Matter. Journal of Technology Transfer, 2003.
[23]Bergqulst.W.H.&Phillips.S.R. A Handbook for Faculty Development(Volume3). Washington D.C: The Council of Independent Colleges,1981.
[24]Lee.Shulman. From Minsk to Pinsk: Why A Scholship of Teaching and Learning. Journal of scholship of Teaching And Learning,2000.(l).
[25]Fleteher.J.&Patrick,S.K. Not Just Workshops Anymore: Theory of Faculty Development in Reframing Academic Priorities. IJAD3,1997.(1).

International Journal of Modern Education and Computer Science (IJMECS)