TOPIC: HOW IMPORTANT IS PRE -SERVICE TEACHERS ' MATHEMATICAL CONTENT

KNOWLEDGE?

This paper will discuss the importance of mathematical content knowledge (MCK) for
pre-service teachers (PSTs).

Mathematical content knowledge can be defined as a sophisticated comprehension of

mathematics in terms of depth, connectedness between contents, thoroughness and breadth
(Hine, 2015). In relations to pedagogical content knowledge, MCK is considered the basis of
needing suitable pedagogical tools and strategies to be effectively carried out. Professional
placement is one of the many teacher education programs that are highly effective at targeting
the importance of MCK for PST. These programs expose PSTs to the intricacies of the inputs
required to facilitate a lesson; thus highlighting and putting heavy emphasis on their core
mathematical and numeracy abilities alongside the necessity of corresponding pedagogy
(Peace, et al., 2018).

Following the “Foundation Content Knowledge: What Do Pre-Service Teachers Need

To Know?” symposium (Linsell and Anakin, 2013) of the Mathematics Education Research
Group of Australasia’s annual conference, the MCK of PST have remained a topic of debate
due to the implications it has on the students’ achievement, the teacher’s education providers
and the future of the mathematics education community. There is an underlying issue whether
the PST’s professional standards are clearly defined and consistent with the conceptualisation
of the pre-service teacher’s mathematics content knowledge. From the cognitive standpoint,
the paper states how mathematics content knowledge must consist of more than rules and
laws memorisation, more than step-by-step procedures in solving equations or functions. This
aligns with contemporary’s maths that focuses on the students' comprehension and literacy
skills alongside numeracy skills. Whereas previously the traditional way of learning maths
would involve questions and functions without any inclusion of mathematical modelling or
real-world applications. These questions consist of either an equation or function and requires
the student to solve for an answer. However with the newer method for learning maths, when
provided a word problem, students will work through interpreting the words into
mathematical context (such as doubling, tripling to times two, times three); as a result, the
answer they have found will have to make sense within the problem’s context, such as
converting the answers to the corresponding time (seconds, minutes or hours). In a way, the
traditional way of maths represents the more procedural knowledge, consisting of limited
cognitive effort comprising of practising through repetitions, focusing on solving questions/
finding the answer and developing the basic “gist” of the question. Whereas with conceptual
knowledge, there is an emphasis on picking out notable information, perceiving the relations
between the factors and seeking the appropriate procedural knowledge (Daniel and Balatti,
2013). In essence, making sense of the problem helps develop the fundamental understanding
of mathematics, a primary criterion for prospective teachers to be most effective in teaching
maths with purpose. A possible issue when considering the teacher’s MCK remains the
learning difference due to the generational shift. Most teachers are brought up learning maths
employing the traditional methods of learning, as such their understanding are likely to be
limited to purely content consisting of rules memorisation and solving well-defined problems.
The knowledge is there for most math teachers, however translating what they have grasped
previously and linking with the more contemporary method of learning may prove
challenging.

Another point the symposium raised was that the mathematics content knowledge and
the pedagogical content knowledge are integrated into one process; how the MCK would be
activated within the integrated pedagogy based on situational and personal influence. On the
other hand, it can be disputed that without knowing the maths content knowledge, a teacher
would be unable to integrate their understanding through an effective pedagogic approach; in
this sense, the two content knowledge would follow a sequential order, mathematical content
first then comes pedagogy. If the objective is to present to the students an easier, more
comprehensible way of understanding the materials, it should be logical for the facilitator to
possess a thorough understanding of the content to deliver. A realistic situation in the
classroom where a student may question the teacher on certain parts that were not clear to
them; unless the teacher discerns precisely all the details within the lesson. This is where a
skilled teacher, especially in their respective field, can make use of their subject knowledge to
better organise and apply more effectively for the students to follow. When teachers display
significant levels of competency, students would consider their teachers as more reliable
sources concerning the content knowledge and that teachers have students’ best interest at
heart (Daniels and Arapostathis, 2005).

According to Hattie (2003), specialised teachers possess a more integrated knowledge

and being able to bridge the recent subject knowledge with prior knowledge. As a teacher in
the 21st century, this specialised content knowledge is required for teachers to engage
students in specific teaching tasks such as representing mathematical ideas using everyday
language, provide literacy integration for mathematical explanations of terms and definitions,
and incorporating technologies (such as graphing calculators, scientific calculators). As an
example, when teaching students about the properties of squares and square roots, the teacher
needs to be able to illustrate to the students how both a positive six and a negative six when
squared are equal to positive thirty-six; and vice versa, when finding the root of thirty-six,
students are able to conclude on two solutions. It is through this deeper representation that the
teachers can quickly capitalise on the information that may have significance to the students
overall comprehension; therefore, informing the teacher of the selective criteria, the students’
are responding to (based on syllabus outcomes, formative assessment outcomes…etc.). The
research also notes how as teachers are closer to their content, it is more straightforward for
these teachers to pinpoint key areas for success; and likewise, the teachers can highlight areas
of difficulty more accessible. The key differences between a skilled teacher and an
experienced one are in the way they represent their content within the classroom, the degree
they challenge the students (to work on literacy or critical thinking), and the depth of
processing the students achieve. Students under tutelage by skilled teachers show
comprehension of concepts instruction with more integrated, more coherent, and at a higher
abstraction level. In Daniel and Balatti’s (2013) research, mathematical content knowledge
and its inclusion suggested the potential and leverage for teachers to expand particular topic
and the context. Additionally, the research’s finding further solidifies the interconnectedness
of mathematical content knowledge with the corresponding teaching practice, as well as the
ability to assess pre-service teachers’ MCK quality and identify weakness in MCK area.

Foundation content knowledge can be defined as integrating both conceptual and

procedural knowledge (Linsell and Anakin, 2013). With how the questions in most tests such
as the High School Certificate (HSCs) are incorporating more literacy-based skills and
mathematically modelling of concrete problems, the notion of foundation content knowledge
is tied in with the need for integrated teaching and learning. Due to its practicality, teachers
with foundation content knowledge provide a balance between knowing the mathematical
content knowledge and integrating the device in conceptual, procedural and pedagogical
approaches. The symposium lists: reasoning and proving, utilising multiple representations,
generalising and these learning objectives are also skills required of pre-service teachers. In
order for the teacher to explain the numerical side of mathematics, they must, for example, be
able to derive answers from arithmetic operations problems based on logical arguments.
Overall, the premise of the conference paper surmises the need for pre-service teacher to
retain a firm grasp on the mathematical content knowledge; as part of the professional teacher
development, the teacher would utilise the integration of conceptual knowledge and
procedural knowledge, extending their knowledge through developing the foundation content
knowledge, illustrate the continuous development cycle consisting of recording, monitoring,
assessing and self-reflection.

Often times, it is considered a given that the assigned teachers of the learning area
would be specialised in that content area. Ideally, the impact of the teacher would produce a
noticeable difference in students’ performance. However, that is merely not the case. While
teachers with their prior content knowledge are constantly more prepared for teaching the
particular lesson, there is research which indicates it produces only minor impact on students’
academic achievements (or at least the lack of sizeable data to prove otherwise); more
specifically, it is problematic to accurately measure the teacher’s intellectual resources in
correlation with students’ learning (Hill, et al., 2005;). Teacher’s content knowledge fulfils a
role in the overall teaching and learning process, but this one factor alone cannot determine
the outcome of a student without accounting for various other factors.

However, the focus on purely mathematical content knowledge leaves out many
interrelated factors crucial in a students’ overall learning. With any effective learning, teacher
feedback and classroom management remain factors with indicative measurement of
students’ learning and understanding. While it is significant to realise that teachers do require
competent content knowledge, it is, moreover, not a dire issue that could severely hinder a
teacher’s pedagogy. As an example from Hattie’s (2003) research, it is inferred both experts
and experienced teachers share a similar amount of knowledge in terms of pedagogical
knowledge and subject content. Hence, someone with vaster knowledge in pedagogy but
generalises content knowledge can still deliver an equally adequate lesson of an expert in the
field of study. Since education as a whole is a complex process, the students’ learning
development requires a broad range of diverse skills, methodology, communications,
representation and relevancy to assist students in achieving the most significant outcomes.

Additionally, teachers from different education background influence their learning

and understanding of mathematical content knowledge. One concern for this scenario is
whether these teachers receive the equivalent of Australia’s Bachelor of Mathematics as a
prerequisite to their teaching eligibility. A larger indication of this is whether a teacher’s
certification plays a role other than for administrative and state purposes. According to
Goldhaber and Brewer’s research (2000), classes with a certified maths teacher achieve better
than the teachers without a state certification although not by a considerable margin (around
10% of the standard deviation). That being stated, this research still highlights the uncertainty
of the required prerequisite of a qualified teacher. On a separate note, International teachers
that have completed their Masters of Teaching abroad are able to transfer their credits for an
Australian Teaching Accreditation. As such, they may not develop the adequate conditions
expected of an Australian trained Maths teacher that went through their Bachelor in Maths.
Even now, University requires pre-service teachers to enrol into the secondary key learning
areas as part of the content knowledge requirements before proceeding with professional
placements. However, it is challenging for schools and educational bodies to regulate this
area as international teachers are assessed more on their education background and
credentials for visa purposes; therefore the teacher’s content knowledge is up to debate
whether they uphold to the school’s standards, the unit of work’s standards or even
Australian standards.

As a pre-service teacher, I get asked by friends and family whether I genuinely

identify my mathematical content. Very often it is in relations to whether I can translate my
understanding of the math topic into something the students are able to comprehend. It is an
area of intrigue whether teachers that know their content carefully can also demonstrate it
well. There is a distinct difference between mathematical content knowledge and pedagogic
strategies.

Although there are no explicit links between students’ achievements and the teacher’s
knowledge of the subject, I would argue a thorough, fully comprehensive understand of your
specialised subject grants the teacher the ability to be able to deliver the content with
confidence. This would lead to a number of practical implications such as the teacher would
recognize the interrelated knowledge of mathematics, how best to apply certain formulas or
theories, and the tricks in interpreting the literacy aspects of problems into solvable numeracy
problems. For instance, most students possess a fundamental understanding of the four
operations of arithmetic and are capable of interpreting that addition and subtractions
represent opposites, likewise with multiplications and divisions. By applying this relationship
and expanding it towards the advanced functions of squares and square roots, the teacher can
illustrate to the students that squaring represent the opposite of square roots and
fundamentally squaring is a multiplication operation.
REFERENCES
Daniel, L., & Balatti, J. (2013). Thoughts behind the Actions: Exploring Preservice Teachers'
Mathematical Content Knowledge. Mathematics Education Research Group of
Australasia.

Daniels, E., & Arapostathis, M. (2005). What do they really want? Student voices and
motivation research. Urban Education, 40(1), 34-59.

Goldhaber, D. D., & Brewer, D. J. (2000). Does teacher certification matter? High school
teacher certification status and student achievement. Educational evaluation and
policy analysis, 22(2), 129-145.

Hattie, J. (2003). Teachers Make a Difference, What is the research evidence?.

Hill, H. C., Rowan, B., & Ball, D. L. (2005). Effects of teachers’ mathematical knowledge for
teaching on student achievement. American educational research journal, 42(2), 371-
406.

Hine, G. S. (2015). Strengthening pre-service teachers’ mathematical content

knowledge. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 12(4), 5.

Linsell, C., & Anakin, M. (2013). Foundation Content Knowledge: What Do Pre-Service
Teachers Need to Know?. Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia.

Peace, H., Fuentes, S. Q., & Bloom, M. (2018). Preservice Teachers' Transforming
Perceptions of Science and Mathematics Teacher Knowledge. International Journal
of Educational Methodology, 4(4), 227-241.
FACT SHEET – TEACHERS NEED TO KNOW THEIR SUBJECTS WELL
 Teachers that do not know their subjects quite as well, are not suitable to be the most
capable person to teach child.
 Students should also have the rights to be taught by someone knowledgeable, experts
in their core subjects, and well suited for the job.
 As a parent, it is worrisome to leave your child in the hands of someone that might not
be able to make the best out of their abilities.
 More and more teachers are being asked to teach subjects they were never trained for
and the largest concern is the use of unqualified teachers to fill in the missing roles.
 Having a teacher that know their maths well enough to teach students will create a
strong foundation of reliability. The students can rely on the teacher to teach them the
necessary content and parents can trust that the teacher will be safely guiding their
kids to the best possible outcomes.
 Only specialised and maths-educated teachers are qualified to take students to deeper
levels of learning, critical and logical processes.
 There is a steep learning curve that for the other teachers they may not be able to
convey the same level of understanding for the students within the reasonable time
frame of a lesson. This leads to the lesson being about the teacher trying to learn the
content themselves while balancing with teaching the class whereas it should be
focused on the students’ learning.
 Teachers that know the subject well enough can spot whether a student might be
struggling with a specific area. This helps inform teachers to help students as fast as
possible and helps reduces the student’s frustration.
 Teacher make a difference in the classroom. They are the leading figures that guide
students to a positive learning environment and a positive effect on the learners.
Supporting factors such as quality instruction, positive reinforcement, critical
feedback, creative and critical thinking, influence on the students’ learning attitudes.
 The 21st centuries bring about new changes in learning and development. The
globalisation of the teaching industry hopes to bring new perspectives to every
student, learning with context and relevancy to your practical lives
 Mathematics is the future. Students learning from mathematicians, mathematical
specialised teachers are ensured reliability and development of their logical thinking,
critical thinking, and numeracy.