Abstract
Pedagogical content knowledge is made up of several components. In this paper we concentrate on one of these: teachers' planned presentations of the subject-matter. We deal with two main sources of this component of pedagogical content knowledge: knowledge about the subject-matter and knowledge about students. Illustrations are given in two mathematical domains: functions and undefined mathematical operations. The paper concludes with a discussion of the nature of teachers' knowledge and the interconnections between the three constructs: subject-matter knowledge, knowledge about students, and knowledge about ways of presenting the subject-matter.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Ball, D.L.: 1988,Knowledge and reasoning in mathematical pedagogy: Examining what prospective teachers bring with them to teacher education, unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI.
Ball, D.L.: 1990, ‘Examining the subject-matter knowledge of prospective mathematics teachers’,Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 21(2), 132–143.
Ball, D.L.: 1991, ‘Research on teaching mathematics: Making subject matter knowledge part of the equation’, in J. Brophy (ed.),Advances in research on teaching, Vol. 2, JAI Press Inc., Greenwich, CT, pp. 1–48.
Begle, E.G.: 1979,Critical Variables in Mathematics Education, Mathematics Association of America and the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, WA.
Brophy, J. and Good, T.: 1986, ‘Teacher behavior and student achievement’, in M.C. Wittrock (ed.),Handbook of Research on Teaching (3rd ed.), Macmillan, NY, pp. 328–375.
Even, R.: 1989, ‘Prospective secondary teachers' knowledge and understanding about mathematical functions (Doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, 1989)’,Dissertation Abstracts International 50, 642A.
Even, R.: 1990, ‘Subject matter knowledge for teaching and the case of functions’,Educational Studies in Mathematics 21, 521–544.
Even, R.: 1993, ‘Subject-matter knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge: prospective secondary teachers and the function concept’,Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 24(2), 94–116.
Even, R. and Markovits, Z.: 1993, ‘Teachers' pedagogical content knowledge of functions: characterization and applications’,Journal of Structural Learning 12(1), 35–51.
Freudenthal, H.: 1983,Didactical Phenomenology of Mathematical Structures, Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company.
Gage, N.: 1978,The Scientific Basis of the Art of Teaching, Teachers College Press, Columbia University, NY.
Hershkowitz, R., Bruckheimer, M. and Vinner, S.: 1987, ‘Activities for teachers based on cognitive research’, in M.M. Lindquist and A.P. Shulte (eds.),Learning and Teaching Geometry, K-12, 1987 Yearbook, National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Reston, VA, pp. 222–235.
Hiebert, J. (Ed.): 1986,Conceptual and Procedural Knowledge: The Case of Mathematics, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., NJ.
Kieran, C.: 1992, ‘The learning and teaching of school algebra’, in D.A. Grouws (ed.),Handbook of Research in the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics, Macmillan, NY, pp. 390–419.
Leinhardt, G.: 1988, ‘Expertise in instructional lessons: An example from fractions’, in D.A. Grouws, T.J. Cooney, and D. Jones (eds.),Effective Mathematics Teaching, National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Reston, VA, pp. 47–66.
Leinhardt, G., Putnam, R.T., Stein, M.K., and Baxter, J.: 1991, ‘Where subject knowledge matters’, in J.E. Brophy (ed.),Advances in Research on Teaching, Vol. 2, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 87–113.
Leinhardt, G. and Smith, D.A.: 1985, ‘Expertise in mathematics instruction: Subject matter knowledge’,Journal of Educational Psychology 77, 247–271.
Maher, C.A. and Davis, R.B.: 1990, ‘Teachers' learning: Building representations of children's meanings’, in R.B. Davis, C.A. Maher, and N. Noddings (eds.),Constructivist Views on the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics (Journal for Research in Mathematics Education: Monograph Number 4, pp. 7–18), National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Reston, VA.
Nesher, P.: 1986, ‘Are mathematical understanding and algorithmic performance related?,For the Learning of Mathematics 6(3), 2–9.
Peterson, P.L., Fennema, E., and Carpenter, T.P.: 1991, ‘Teachers' knowledge of students' mathematics problem solving knowledge’, in J.E. Brophy (ed.),Advances in Research on Teaching: Vol. 2. Teachers' Subject Matter Knowledge, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 87–113.
Schoenfeld, A., Smith, J., and Arcavi, A.: 1993, ‘Learning — The microgenetic analysis of one student's evolving understanding of a complex subject-matter domain’, in R. Glaser (ed.),Advances in Instructional Psychology (Vol. 4), Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 55–175.
Shulman, L.S.: 1986, ‘Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching’,Educational Researcher 15(2), 4–14.
Skemp, R.R.: 1976, ‘Relational understanding and instrumental understanding’,Mathematics Teaching 77.
Strauss, S. and Shilony, T.: (in press), ‘Teachers' models of children's minds and learning’, in I. Hirschfeld and S.A. Gelman (eds.),Mapping in Mind: Domain Specificity in Cognition and Culture, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Tamir, P.: 1987,Subject Matter and Related Pedagogical Knowledge in Teacher Education. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Association for Educational Research, Washington, DC.
Tirosh, D.: 1993, ‘Teachers' understanding of undefined mathematical expressions’,Substratum: Temas Fundamentales en Psicologia Education 1, 61–86.
Tirosh, D. and Graeber, A.: 1990, ‘Inconsistencies in preservice teachers' beliefs about multiplication and division’,Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics 12, 65–74.
Wilson, S.M., Shulman, L.S., and Richert, A.: 1987, ‘“150 ways of knowing”: Representations of knowledge in teaching’, in J. Calderhead (ed.),Exploring Teacher Thinking, Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, Sussex, pp. 104–124.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Even, R., Tirosh, D. Subject-matter knowledge and knowledge about students as sources of teacher presentations of the subject-matter. Educ Stud Math 29, 1–20 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01273897
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01273897