Aspects of Mathematics Teacher Education in Japan
Aspects of Mathematics Teacher Education in Japan
Aspects of Mathematics Teacher Education in Japan
net/publication/226616847
CITATIONS READS
80 4,284
1 author:
Yoshinori Shimizu
University of Tsukuba
43 PUBLICATIONS 756 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
All content following this page was uploaded by Yoshinori Shimizu on 26 February 2016.
Yoshinori Shimizu
INTRODUCTION
After he has presented the problem with a picture and a model that
represent the setting, Mr. Matsumaru asks his students to think about how
they could express the situation in mathematical terms. Based on the mean-
ing of division as dividing into equal parts, students share the expression
128 ÷ 16 as a mathematical expression for the setting. Consequently, the
task at hand is to find the answer to 128 ÷ 16. Mr. Matsumaru encourages
his students to explore many different ways of finding the answer. After
the students have worked on the problem individually, several solution
processes and solutions are shared and discussed.
between what the students had learned in the previous grade and what they
were faced with now.
Neriage. The term Neriage describes the dynamic and collaborative nature
of the whole-class discussion during the lesson. In Japanese, the term
Neriage means kneading up or polishing up. In the context of teaching,
the term works as a metaphor for the process of polishing students’ ideas
and of developing an integrated mathematical idea through the whole-class
discussion. Japanese teachers regard Neriage as critical for the success or
failure of the lesson.
Based on the teacher’s observations during Kikan-shido, he or she care-
fully calls on students to present their solution methods on the chalkboard,
selecting the students in a particular order. The order is quite important
both for encouraging those students who found naive methods and for
showing students’ ideas in relation to the mathematical connections among
them. In some cases, even an incorrect method or error may be presented
if the teacher thinks this would be beneficial to the class. Once students’
ideas are presented on the chalkboard, they are compared and contrasted
orally. The teacher’s role is not to point out the best solution but to guide
the discussion toward an integrated idea.
In the case of Mr. Matsumaru, he selected several students’ solutions for
the presentation and focused on the relationships among those solutions.
He used the figure of the planters in various arrays as representations.
He spent, in particular, a fair amount of the time discussing the idea that
ASPECTS OF MATHEMATICS TEACHER EDUCATION IN JAPAN 111
“We can divide both the dividend and divisor by 2 without changing the
result.” This idea had been proposed by a student and was then explained
by another student as he used the figure of planters. The idea was expanded
by other students who used the numbers 4 and 8 as common divisors of 128
(the dividend) and 16 (the divisor). The idea that “one can divide both the
dividend and divisor by the same number without changing the result” was
a main target of the whole-class discussion.
Matome. The Japanese term Matome means summing up. Japanese teach-
ers think that this stage is indispensable for a successful lesson. The
Matome stage is identified as a critical difference between the U.S.
and Japanese classroom activities (Fujii, Kumagi, Shimizu & Sugiyama,
1998). According to the U.S.-Japan comparative analysis, the Matome
stage Japanese teachers tend to make a final and careful comment on
students’ work in terms of mathematical sophistication.
In general, in the Matome stage the teacher reviews what students
have discussed in the whole-class discussion and summarizes what they
have learned during the lesson. Mr. Matsumaru summarized the regularity
of division students’ had found and discussed as follows: “The answer
remains the same when we divide both the divisor and dividend by the
same number.” Also, Mr. Matsumaru emphasized the usefulness of the
idea for reducing the problem with division by a two digit number into
ones involving only single-digit divisors.
• Students’ individual
problem solving
• Whole-class
discussion
• Summing up
(Exercise/Extension)
Figure 1. A Common Framework for Lesson Plans.
fractions (in fifth grade) and by a common fraction (sixth grade): 0.8 ÷ 0.2
= (0.8 ∗ 10) ÷ (0.2 ∗ 10) = 8 ÷ 2; 2/5 ÷ 3/4 = ((2/5) ∗ 20) ÷ ((3/4) ∗ 20)
= 8 ÷ 15.
It should also be noted that Mr. Matsumaru intentionally had selected
both the particular numbers 128 and 16 and the problem which required
a partitive division for introducing the topic. Consciously, he had chosen
not to use numbers like 120 ÷ 20 or a problem setting that required a
quotitive division. He thought that if he would have used 120 ÷ 20 for
introducing division by a two-digit number, students’ attention would be
confined to dividing the two numbers each by ten. Also, if he had used a
prime number like 17 for the divisor, no regularity of division would have
been noticed by his students.
For any given problem, prospective teachers in a teacher preparation
program will be expected to anticipate several student responses to the
problem. For the division problem, possible strategies included:
1. Guessing.
2. Repeated subtraction: “How many “16s” are there in 128?” (128 –
16 – 16 – 16 – . . . – 16 = 0).
3. Repeatedly substituting numbers into the expression 1 ∗ 16 = 128
(1 ∗ 16 = 16, 2 ∗ 16 = 32, 3 ∗ 16 = 48, . . . 8 ∗ 16 = 128).
4. “Dividing by 16” means “dividing by 8 first and then by 2” (128 ÷
16 = 128 ÷ (8 ∗ 2) = (128 ÷ 8) ÷ 2 = 16 ÷ 2 = 8).
5. Dividing both the dividend and divisor by the same numbers, e.g.,
128 ÷ 16 = (128 ÷ 2) ÷ (16 ÷ 2) = 64 ÷ 8 = 8, or 128 ÷ 16 = (128
÷ 4) ÷ (16 ÷ 4) = 32 ÷ 4 = 8.
6. When multiplying the divisor by 2, the quotient is halved (128 ÷ 4
= 32, 128 ÷ 2 = 64) so the answer of 128 ÷ 16 is half of 128 ÷ 8 =
16.
The success of a lesson depends heavily on the interpretation of the
topic. Thus, Kyozai-kenkyu is a crucial part of the lesson planning for
Japanese teachers. This kind of analysis is heavily emphasized in pre-
service teacher training courses at the university. Kyozai-kenkyu is also
emphasized as student teachers are supervised by experienced teachers
during their practice teaching. In summary, the educational value of a
careful content analysis is considered very important.
FINAL REMARKS
NOTE
1 An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 74th Annual Meeting of the National
Council of Teachers of Mathematics which was held in San Diego, CA, 25–28 April
1996. The author would like to thank Jerry P. Becker, Southern Illinois University, Cathy
Brown, Indiana University, and Toshiakira Fujii, Yamanashi University, for their thoughtful
comments on earlier drafts of the paper.
REFERENCES
Becker, J.P., Silver, E.A., Kantowski, M.G., Travers, K.J. & Wilson, J.W. (1990). Some
observations of mathematics teaching in Japanese elementary and junior high schools.
Arithmetic Teacher, 38(2), 12–21.
Fujii, T., Kumagai, K., Shimizu, Y. & Sugiyama, Y. (1998). A cross-cultural study of
classroom practices based on a common topic. Tsukuba Journal of Educational Study
in Mathematics, 17, 185–194.
Lee, S.Y., Graham, T. & Stevenson, H.W. (1996). Teachers and teaching: Elementary
schools in Japan and the United States. In T.P. Rohlen & G.K. Letendre (Eds.), Teaching
and learning in Japan (157–189). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Ministry of Education, Science, Sports and Culture, (1989). The national course of study.
Tokyo: Author.
Nagasaki, E. & Becker J.P. (1993). Classroom assessment in Japanese mathematics educa-
tion. In N. Webb (Ed.), Assessment in the mathematics classroom (40–53). Reston, VA:
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Shimizu, Y. (1996). Some pluses and minuses of “typical pattern” in mathematics lessons:
A Japanese perspective. Bulletin of the Center for Research and Guidance for Teaching
Practice, 20, 35–42. Tokyo Gakugei University.
Stevenson, H.W. & Stigler, J.W. (1992). The learning gap: Why our schools are failing
and what we can learn from Japanese and Chinese education. New York: Summit
Books.
116 YOSHINORI SHIMIZU