Abstract
The phrase ‘make it explicit’ is a common advice given to teachers. It is, however, not clear to us what this actually means when translated into classroom practice. Our review found that we are not alone: “explicit” is used in different ways in the education literature. This paper explores, through a case study of a teacher who stated “making things explicit” as an ostensible goal of his instructional practice, how the explicitation is realised in teaching mathematics. In particular, we examine how he used the instructional materials that he crafted to fulfil his goal of explicitation. We were able to uncover three strategies he used: explicit-from, explicit-within, and explicit-to.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
As of 20 Dec 2016, this article is cited by 189 publications, according to Google Scholar.
References
Arop, B. A., Umanah, F. I., & Effiong, O. E. (2015). Effect of instructional materials on the teaching and learning of basic science in junior secondary schools in Cross River state, Nigeria. Global Journal of Educational Research, 14(2015), 67–73.
Authors. (2015).
Ball, D. L., & Bass, H. (2003). Towards a practice-based theory of mathematical knowledge for teaching. In B. Davis & E. Simmt (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2002 annual meeting of the Canadian Mathematics Education Study Group (pp. 3–14). Edmonton: CMESG/GCEDM.
Ball, D. L., Thames, M. H., & Phelps, G. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special? Journal of Teacher Education, 59(5), 389–407.
Brophy, J. (1988). Research linking teacher behavior to student achievement: Potential implications for instruction of Chapter 1 students. Educational Psychologist, 23(3).
Brophy, J., & Good, T. L. (1986). Teacher behavior and student achievement. In M. L. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 328–375). New York: Macmillan.
Brown, R. M. (2000). Curriculum and teaching in introduction to method of teaching. Ibadan: Macmillan Press.
Brown, M. W. (2009). The teacher-tool relationship: Theorizing the design and use of curriculum materials. In J. T. Remillard, B. A. Herbel-Eisenmann, & G. M. Lloyd (Eds.), Mathematics teachers at work: Connecting curriculum materials and classroom instruction (pp. 17–36). New York: Routledge.
Chow, W. K., Lui, A. Y. L., & Ling, S. (2016). Discovering mathematics. Singapore: Star Publishing Pte Ltd.
Christenson, S. L., Ysseldyke, J. E., & Thurlow, M. L. (1989). Critical instructional factors for students with mild handicaps: An integrative review. Remedial and Special Education, 10(5), 21–31.
Clark-Wilson, A., Aldon, G., Cusi, A., Goss, M., Haspekian, M., Robutti, O., & Thomas, M. (2014). The challenges of teaching mathematics with digital technologies—the evolving role of the teacher. In P. Liljedahl, C. Nicol, S. Oesterle, & D. Allan (Eds.), Proceedings of the joint meeting of PME 38 and PME-NA 36 (Vol. 1, pp. 87–116). Vancouver: PME.
Doabler, C. T., Baker, S. K., Kosty, D. B., Smolkowski, K., Clarke, B., Miller, S. J., & Fien, H. (2015). Examining the association between explicit mathematics instruction and student mathematics achievement. The Elementary School Journal, 115(3), 303–333.
Gersten, R., & Carnine, D. (1984). Direct instruction mathematics: A longitudinal evaluation of low-income elementary school students. Elementary School Journal, 84(4), 395–407.
Gersten, R., Schiller, E. P., & Vaughn, S. R. (2000). Contemporary special education research: Syntheses of the knowledge base on critical instructional issues. Abingdon: Routledge.
Goeke, J. L. (2009). Explicit instruction: A framework for meaningful direct teaching (V. Lanigan Ed.). Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education, Inc.
Grossman, P., & Thompson, C. (2008). Learning from curriculum materials: Scaffolds for new teachers? Teacher and Teacher Education, 24(2008), 2014–2026.
Gueudet, G., Pepin, B., & Trouche, L. (2013). Collective work with resources: An essential dimension for teacher documentation. ZDM Mathematics Education, 45(7), 1003–1016.
Gueudet, G., & Trouche, L. (2009). Towards new documentation systems for mathematics teachers? Educational Studies in Mathematics, 71(3), 199–218.
Hill, H. C., Blunk, M. L., Charalambous, C. Y., Lewis, J. M., Phelps, G. C., Sleep, L., & Ball, D. L. (2008). Mathematical knowledge for teaching and the mathematical quality of instruction: An exploratory study. Cognition and Instruction, 26(4), 430–511.
Kroesbergen, E. H., & Van Luit, J. E. H. (2003). Mathematics interventions for children with special needs: A meta-analysis. Remedial and Special Education, 24, 97–114.
Leong, Y.H., Ho, W.K., Cheng, L.P. (2015). Concrete-Pictorial-Abstract: Surveying its origins and charting its future. The Mathematics Educator, 16(1), 1–18.
Marchand-Martella, N., Slocum, T. A., & Martella, R. (2004). Introduction to direct instruction. Boston: Allyn-Bacon.
Marton, F., & Booth, S. (1997). Learning and awareness. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Ministry of Education. (2012). Mathematics syllabus: Secondary one to four. Express course. Normal (Academic) Course. Singapore.
Moyer-Packenham, P. S. (2016). International perspectives on teaching and learning mathematics with virtual manipulatives. Switzerland: Springer.
Remillard, J. T. (2000). Can curriculum materials support teachers’ learning? Two fourth-grade teachers’ use of a new mathematics text. The Elementary School Journal, 100(4), 331–350.
Remillard, J. T. (2005). Examining key concepts in research on teachers’ use of mathematics curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75(2), 211–246.
Rosenshine, B. (1997). The case for explicit, teacher-led, cognitive strategy instruction. MF Graves (Chair), What sort of comprehension strategy instruction should schools provide.
Rosenshine, B., & Stevens, R. (1986). Teaching functions. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 376–391). New York: Macmillan.
Selling, S. K. (2016). Making mathematics practices explicit in urban middle and high school mathematics classrooms. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 47(5), 505–551.
Simmons, D. C., Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Mathes, P., & Hodge, J. P. (1995). Effects of explicit teaching and peer tutoring on the reading achievement of learning-disabled and low-performing students in regular classrooms. The Elementary School Journal, 95(5), 387–408.
Swanson, H. L. (2001). Searching for the best model for instructing students with learning disabilities. Focus on Exceptional Children, 34(2), 1–15.
Watson, A., & Mason, J. (2006). Seeing an exercise as a single mathematical object: Using variation to structure sense-making. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 8(2), 91–111.
White, B. Y., & Frederiksen, J. R. (1998). Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: Making science accessible to all students. Cognition and Instruction, 16(1), 3–118.
Zohar, A., & Peled, B. (2008). The effects of explicit teaching of metastrategic knowledge on low-and high-achieving students. Learning and Instruction, 18(4), 337–335.
Acknowledgements
The investigation reported in this paper is part of a larger research project known as “A study of the enacted school mathematics curriculum (secondary).” (Grant number: OER 31/15 BK) funded by the Office of Education Research, National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Leong, Y.H., Cheng, L.P., Toh, W.Y.K. et al. Making things explicit using instructional materials: a case study of a Singapore teacher’s practice. Math Ed Res J 31, 47–66 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-018-0240-z
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-018-0240-z