Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Secondary mathematics preservice teachers’ perceptions of program (in)coherence

  • Published:
Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Teacher educators globally have argued that developing coherent programs can combat the fragmentation that often characterizes teacher education and better support teacher learning. Yet, there is little research on coherence in mathematics teacher education, especially from the perspectives of preservice teachers. To that end, in this article, we report how 13 secondary mathematics preservice teachers (PSTs) from one teacher education program perceived their program as coherent, specifically attending to the ideas and practices PSTs engaged with and the settings in which they engaged with those ideas/practices. Based on participatory diagramming interviews and network analysis, we found that PSTs experienced two main sources of incoherence. First, although PSTs had opportunities to learn about equity from multiple settings, they did not perceive that equity and other aspects of mathematics instruction together were coherently organized. Second, PSTs reported learning about two opposing instructional approaches—direct instruction and inquiry-based instruction. PSTs reported that opportunities to learn about inquiry-based instruction were primarily isolated to courses taught by the mathematics education program and were contradicted by learning and experiencing direct instruction in their special education courses, mathematics courses, and field and student teaching experiences. Findings highlight a need to attend to issues of equity, as well as connections among university coursework and between coursework and field. Based on our findings, we conclude with implications for how teacher education programs might respond to and engage with incoherence to support PST learning.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aguirre, J., Mayfield-Ingram, K., & Martin, D. (2013). The impact of identity in K-8 mathematics: Rethinking equity-based practices. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

  • Alsup, J. (2006). Teacher identity discourses: Negotiating personal and professional spaces. Erlbaum.

  • Annamma, S. A., Connor, D., & Ferri, B. (2013). Dis/ability critical race studies (DisCrit): Theorizing at the intersections of race and dis/ability. Race Ethnicity and Education, 16(1), 1–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Association of Mathematics Teacher Educators. (2017). Standards for Preparing Teachers of Mathematics. Retrieved from amte.net/standards.

  • Bagnoli, A. (2009). Beyond the standard interview: The use of graphic elicitation and arts-based methods. Qualitative Research, 9(5), 547–570.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bahr, D. L., Monroe, E. E., & Eggett, D. (2014). Structural and conceptual interweaving of mathematics methods coursework and field practica. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 17(3), 271–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bain, R. B., & Moje, E. B. (2012). Mapping the teacher education terrain for novices. Phi Delta Kappan, 93(5), 62–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bamfield, L. (Ed.). (2014). The role of research in teacher education: Reviewing the evidence: Interim report of the BERA-RSA inquiry. British Educational Research.

  • Barajas-López, F., & Larnell, G. V. (2019). Research commentary: Unpacking the links between equitable teaching practices and standards for mathematical practice: equity for whom and under what conditions? Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 50(4), 349–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bateman, D., Taylor, S., Janik, E., & Logan, A. (2008). Curriculum coherence and student success. Champlain Saint-Lambert Cégep.

  • Bernhard, S. (2018). Analyzing meaning-making in network ties—A qualitative approach. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 17(1).

  • Boaler, J. (2008). Bridging the gap between research and practice: International examples of success. In M. Menghini, F. Furinghetti, L. Giarcardi, & F. Arzarella (Eds.), The first century of the international commission on mathematics instruction (pp. 1908–2008). Reflecting and shaping the world of mathematics education. Instituto della Enciclopedia Italiana foundata da Giovanni Treccani.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boaler, J. (2002). Experiencing school mathematics: Traditional and reform approaches to teaching and their impact on student learning. Routledge.

  • Boyd, B., & Bagerhuff, M. E. (2009). Mathematics education and special education: Searching for common ground and the implications for teacher education. Mathematics Teacher Education and Development, 11, 54–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, D. J., Grossman, P. L., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2009). Teacher preparation and student achievement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 31(4), 416–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bravington, A., & King, N. (2019). Putting graphic elicitation into practice: Tools and typologies for the use of participant-led diagrams in qualitative research interviews. Qualitative Research, 19(5), 506–523.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, T., & Clarke, D. (2013). Institutional context for research in mathematics education. In M. A. Clements, A. J. Bishop, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick, & F. K. S. Leung (Eds.), Third international handbook of mathematics education (pp. 459–484). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brownell, W. A. (1956). Meaning and skill—Maintaining the balance. The Arithmetic Teacher, 3(4), 129–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buchmann, M., & Floden, R. E. (1991). Programme coherence in teacher education: A view from the USA. Oxford Review of Education, 17(1), 65–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Canrinus, E. T., Bergem, O. K., Klette, K., & Hammerness, K. (2017). Coherent teacher education programmes: Taking a student perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 49(3), 313–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Canrinus, E. T., Klette, K., & Hammerness, K. (2019). Diversity in coherence: Strengths and opportunities of three programs. Journal of Teacher Education, 70(3), 192–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carey, R. L. (2014). A cultural analysis of the achievement gap discourse: Challenging the language and labels used in the work of school reform. Urban Education, 49(4), 440–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clift, R. T., & Brady, P. (2009). Research on methods courses and field experiences. In M. Cochran-Smith & K. M. Zeichner (Eds.), Studying teacher education (pp. 309–424). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cobb, P., Wood, T., Yackel, E., & McNeal, B. (1992). Characteristics of classroom mathematics traditions: An interactional analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 29(3), 573–604.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Contandriopoulos, D., Larouche, C., Breton, M., & Brousselle, A. (2018). A sociogram is worth a thousand words: Proposing a method for the visual analysis of narrative data. Qualitative Research, 18(1), 70–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crilly, N., Blackwell, A. F., & Clarkson, P. J. (2006). Graphic elicitation: Using research diagrams as interview stimuli. Qualitative Research, 6(3), 341–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crossley, N. (2010). The social world of the network: Combining qualitative and quantitative elements in social network analysis. Sociologica, 4(1), 1–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Csardi, G., & Nepusz, T. (2006). The igraph software package for complex network research. InterJournal, Complex Systems, 1695(5), 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dack, H. (2019). The role of teacher preparation program coherence in supporting candidate appropriation of the pedagogical tools of differentiated instruction. Teaching and Teacher Education, 78, 125–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). How teacher education matters. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(3), 166–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Decuypere, M. (2020). Visual Network Analysis: A qualitative method for researching sociomaterial practice. Qualitative Research, 20(1), 73–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ernest, P. (2018). The ethics of mathematics: Is mathematics harmful?. In P. Ernest (Ed.) The Philosophy of Mathematics Education Today (Vol. I, pp. 187–216). Springer International.

  • Feiman-Nemser, S. (1990). Teacher preparation: Structural and conceptual analysis. In W. R. Houston, M. Haberman, & J. Sikula (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 212–233). Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feiman-Nemser, S., & Buchmann, M. (1985). Pitfalls of experience in teacher preparation. Teachers College Record, 87, 255–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferri, B., & Connor, D. (2005). Tools of exclusion: Race, disability, and (re)segregated education. Teachers College Record, 107(3), 453–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frankenstein, M. (1990). Incorporating race, gender, and class issues into a critical mathematics literacy curriculum. The Journal of Negro Education, 59(3), 336–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeburn, B., & Arbaugh, F. (2017). Supporting productive struggle with communication moves. The Mathematics Teacher, 111(3), 176–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Froehle, C. (2016). The evolution of an accidental meme. Medium. https://medium.com/@CRA1G/the-evolution-of-an-accidental-meme-ddc4e139e0e4

  • Froehlich, D. E., Van Waes, S., & Schäfer, H. (2020). Linking quantitative and qualitative network approaches: A review of mixed methods social network analysis in education research. Review of Research in Education, 44(1), 244–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fruchterman, T. M., & Reingold, E. M. (1991). Graph drawing by force‐directed placement. Software: Practice and experience, 21(11), 1129–1164.

  • Gagné, P., Dumont, L., Brunet, S., & Boucher, G. (2013). Curriculum alignment: Establishing coherence. Collected Essays on Learning and Teaching, 6, 7–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gates, P. (2006). Going beyond belief systems: Exploring a model for the social influence on mathematics teacher beliefs. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 63(3), 347–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gholson, M. L., & Martin, D. B. (2019). Blackgirl face: Racialized and gendered performativity in mathematical contexts. ZDM Mathematics Education, 51(3), 391–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilovich, T., Medvec, V. H., & Kahneman, D. (1998). Varieties of regret: A debate and partial resolution. Psychological Review, 105(3), 602–605.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graber, K. (1996). Influencing student beliefs: The design of a ‘“high-impact”’ teacher education program. Teaching and Teacher Education, 12, 451–466.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graneheim, U. H., & Lundman, B. (2004). Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: Concepts, procedures, and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Education Today, 24(2), 105–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, E. (2014). Why do Americans stink at math? The New York Times. Retrieved from: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/27/magazine/why-do-americans-stink-at-math.html?smid=tw- nytimes&_r=0

  • Grossman, P., Hammerness, K., McDonald, M., & Ronfeldt, M. (2008). Constructing coherence: Structural predictors of coherence in NYC teacher preparation programs. Journal of Teacher Education, 59(4), 274–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gutiérrez, R. (2012). Context matters: How should we conceptualize equity in mathematics education? In B. Herbel-Eisenmann, J. Choppin, D. Wagner, & D. Pimm (Eds.), Equity in discourse for mathematics education: Theories, practices, and policies. Springer.

  • Hammerness, K. (2006). From coherence in theory to coherence in practice. Teachers College Record, 108(7), 1241–1265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hebard, H. (2016). Finding possibility in pitfalls: The role of permeable methods pedagogy in preservice teacher learning. Teachers College Record, 118(7), 1–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hiebert, J. (2013). The constantly underestimated challenge of improving mathematics instruction. In K. R. Leatham (Ed.), Vital directions for mathematics education research (pp. 45–56). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hiebert, J., Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Fuson, K., Wearne, D., Murray, H., . . . Human, P. (1997). Making sense: Teaching and learning mathematics with understanding. Heinemann.

  • Hughes, E. M., Powell, S. R., Lembke, E. S., & Riley-Tillman, T. C. (2016). Taking the guesswork out of locating evidence-based mathematics practices for diverse learners. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 31(3), 130–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leinwand, G., & Burrill, G. (Eds.). (2001). Improving mathematics education: Resources for decision making. National Academy Press.

  • Jao, L. (2017). Shifting prospective teachers’ beliefs about mathematics teaching: The contextual situation of a mathematics methods course. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(5), 895–914.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koponen, M., Asikainen, M. A., Viholainen, A., & Hirvonen, P. E. (2019). Using network analysis methods to investigate how future teachers conceptualize the links between the domains of teacher knowledge. Teaching and Teacher Education, 79, 137–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ladson-Billings, G. (1997). It doesn’t add up: African American students’ mathematics achievement. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28(6), 697–708.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lamb, L. C., & Jacobs, V. R. (2009). Establishing and maintaining program coherence in a cohort-based graduate program. Teacher Educator, 44(2), 126–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lincoln, Y. S. & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. SAGE.

  • Lobato, J., Clarke, D., & Ellis, A. B. (2005). Initiating and eliciting in teaching: A reformulation of telling. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 36(2), 101–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lortie, D. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. University of Chicago Press.

  • Maaß, K., & Artigue, M. (2013). Implementation of inquiry-based learning in day-to-day teaching: A synthesis. ZDM Mathematics Education, 45(6), 779–795.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maaß, K., & Doorman, M. (2013). A model for a widespread implementation of inquiry-based learning. ZDM Mathematics Education, 45(6), 887–899.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, D. B. (2007). Beyond missionaries or cannibals: Who should teach mathematics to African American children? The High School Journal, 91(1), 6–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, D. B. (2009). Researching race in mathematics education. The Teachers College Record, 111(2), 295–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, D. B. (2015). The collective Black and Principles to Actions. Journal of Urban Mathematics Education, 8(1), 17–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matthews, W. (1983). Coloring the equation: Minorities and mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 14, 70–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mellers, B., Hertwig, R., & Kahneman, D. (2001). Do frequency representations eliminate conjunction effects? An exercise in adversarial collaboration. Psychological Science, 12(4), 269–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mintos, A., Hoffman, A. J., Kersey, E., Newton, J., & Smith, D. (2019). Learning about issues of equity in secondary mathematics teacher education programs. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 22(5), 433–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morris, A. K., & Hiebert, J. (2017). Effects of teacher preparation courses: Do graduates use what they learned to plan mathematics lessons? American Educational Research Journal, 54(3), 524–567.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munter, C. (2014). Developing visions of high-quality mathematics instruction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 45(5), 584–635.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munter, C., Stein, M. K., & Smith, M. (2015). Dialogic and direct instruction: Two distinct models of mathematics instruction and the debate (s) surrounding them. Teachers College Record, 117(11), 1–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nasir, N., Hand, V., & Taylor, E. V. (2008). Culture and mathematics in school: Boundaries between “cultural” and “domain” knowledge in the mathematics classroom and beyond. Review of Research in Education, 32(1), 187–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nasir, N., Cabana, C., Shreve, B., Woodbury, E., & Louie, N. (Eds.) (2014). Teaching mathematics for equity: A Framework for successful practice. Teacher’s College Press.

  • National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Author.

  • National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2014). Principles to actions: Ensuring mathematical success for all. Author.

  • Nicol, C. (1999). Learning to teach mathematics: Questioning, listening, and responding. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 37(1), 45–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peshkin, A. (1988). In search of subjectivity—One’s own. Educational Researcher, 17(7), 17–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richmond, G., Bartell, T., Carter Andrews, D. J., & Neville, M. L. (2019). Reexamining coherence in teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 70(3), 188–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez, A. J. (1998). Strategies for counterresistance: Toward sociotransformative constructivism and learning to teach science for diversity and for understanding. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(6), 589–622.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoenfeld, A. H. (2004). The math wars. Educational Policy, 18(1), 253–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shah, N., & Leonardo, Z. (2016). Learning discourses of race and mathematics in classroom interaction: A poststructural perspective. In I. Esmonde & A. Booker (Eds.), Power and privilege in the learning sciences: Critical and sociocultural theories of learning (pp. 50–69). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheppard, M. E., & Wieman, R. (2020). What do teachers need? Math and special education teacher educators’ perceptions of essential teacher knowledge and experience. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 59.

  • Sleeter, C. E. (2008). Preparing White teachers for diverse students. In M. Cochran-Smith, S. Feiman-Nemser, D. McIntyre, & K. Demers (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education: Enduring questions in changing contexts (pp. 559–582). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M. S., & Stein, M. K. (2018). Five practices for orchestrating productive mathematics discussions (2nd ed.). National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

  • Stein, M. K., Grover, B. W., & Henningsen, M. (1996). Building student capacity for mathematical thinking and reasoning: An analysis of mathematical tasks used in reform classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 33(2), 455–488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stein, M. K., Engle, R. A., Smith, M. S., & Hughes, E. K. (2008). Orchestrating productive mathematical discussions: Five practices for helping teachers move beyond show and tell. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 10(4), 313–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stoiber, K. C., & Gettinger, M. (2016). Multi-tiered systems of support and evidence-based practices. In Handbook of response to intervention (pp. 121–141). Springer, Boston, MA.

  • Tatto, M. T. (1996). Examining values and beliefs about teaching diverse students: Understanding the challenges for teacher education. Education Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 18(2), 155–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tatto, M. T., Rodriguez, M. C., & Reckase, M. (2020). Early career mathematics teachers: Concepts, methods, and strategies for comparative international research. Teaching and Teacher Education, 96, 103118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tatto, M. T., Schwille, J., Senk, S. L., Ingvarson, L., Rowley, G., Peck, R., Bankov, M., Rodríguez, M., & Reckase, M. (2012). Policy, practice, and readiness to teach primary and secondary mathematics: Findings from the IEA Teacher Education and Development Study in Mathematics (TEDS-M). International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement.

  • Thames, M.H., & Ball, D.L. (2013). Making progress in U.S. mathematics education: Lessons learned—Past, present, and future. In K. Leatham (Ed.), Vital directions for mathematics education research (pp. 15–44). Springer.

  • Vacc, N. N., & Bright, G. W. (1999). Elementary preservice teachers’ changing beliefs and instructional use of children’s mathematical thinking. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30(1), 89–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wager, A., & Stinson, D. W. (2012). Teaching mathematics for social justice: Conversations with educators. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

  • Wolf, R., Morrison, J., Inns, A., Slavin, R., & Risman, K. (2020). Average effect sizes in developer-commissioned and independent evaluations. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 13(2), 428–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, H. (1997). The mathematics education reform: Why you should be concerned and what you can do. The American Mathematical Monthly, 104(10), 946–954.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeichner, K. (2010). Rethinking the connections between campus courses and field experiences in college- and university-based teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(1–2), 89–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The research reported in this article has been supported by a grant from the University of Missouri Graduate School. Many thanks to the preservice teachers who participated in the study. The second author would also like to thank his STaR 2011 research interest group for inspiration, and some of the artists who sound tracked his work on this manuscript: SAULT (Nine), Darkside (Spiral), and Low (Hey What). A previous draft of this paper was presented at the 2022 meeting of the American Educational Research Association (San Diego, CA).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, 65211, USA

    Phi Nguyen & Charles Munter

Authors
  1. Phi Nguyen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Charles Munter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Phi Nguyen.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

Interview Protocol

Introductory Question

  1. 1.

    First, I’d like to ask you to share about your current status in the teacher education program. What is your major, year, and are you currently taking classes or student teaching?

    1. a.

      (If taking classes) What classes are you currently taking?

    2. b.

      (If student teaching) Where are you student teaching and what class(es)?

Vision of high-quality mathematics instruction

  1. 2.

    If you were asked to observe a teacher’s math classroom for one or more lessons, what would you look for to decide whether the math instruction is high quality?

    1. a.

      Why do you think ___ is important?

    2. b.

      What are some of the things you would expect to find the teacher actually doing in the classroom for instruction to be of high quality?

    3. c.

      Is there anything else you would look for? If so, what? Why?

    4. d.

      Have you talked about this in any of your courses or field experiences?

Ideas and Settings

  1. 3.

    Tell me some things about teaching you’ve talked about, and where you’ve talked about it. This could be from your coursework, instructors, peers, and field placements. I will be taking some notes on our shared Slides.

    1. a.

      (For any words/ideas that are not defined) Can you tell me what that means? Have you heard others using that term or was it specific to [source]?

    2. b.

      How is this related to your role as a math teacher?

    3. c.

      Have you had opportunities to apply these practices in the field? Have you had opportunities to discuss/connect this to other courses or field experiences?

  1. 4.

    Is there anything else about teaching you’ve talked about? Where did you talk about that?

Participatory Diagramming

  1. 5.

    For the remainder of the interview, I’m going to ask you to share your screen of our shared Slides. From what we’ve talked about, can you draw me a representation of how you see it related or connected, or not connected? The list I wrote based on what you talked about might be helpful. Feel free to add anything else that you think of.

    1. a.

      You can use pink ovals for ideas/concepts and yellow ovals for places.

    2. b.

      If you see things you’ve talked about as related, you can connect them. If you don’t see them as related, don’t connect them.

    3. c.

      You can use different lines for different types of relationships.

  2. 6.

    Can you walk me through your diagram?

  3. 7.

    (For connections) You connected these things together. Can you tell me more about that?

    1. a.

      Did all these courses talk about this idea/practice in similar ways, or differently?

  4. 8.

    (For misalignments/contradictions) You described ____. Can you tell me more about that?

    1. a.

      How do you see them as different or similar?

  5. 9.

    (For those lacking connections) You described ____. Can you tell me more about that?

    1. a.

      Why do you see this as not connected to the rest?

  6. 10.

    You’ve talked about these experiences and these courses, but not these other courses or field experiences. (Share list- note the sources PST have not talked about.) Can you talk to me about what you learned there?

    1. a.

      How do you see what you’ve learned as fitting or not fitting in this diagram?

Closing Question

  1. 11.

    Is there anything that I have not asked that would help me better understand your experiences here as a preservice teacher?

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nguyen, P., Munter, C. Secondary mathematics preservice teachers’ perceptions of program (in)coherence. J Math Teacher Educ (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-023-09575-6

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-023-09575-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation