# Promoting Writing in Mathematics: Prospective Teachersâ€™ Experiences and Perspectives on the Process of Writing When Doing Mathematics as Problem Solving

### Abstract

Despite a great deal of research on the benefits of writing in mathematics, writing plays a minimal role, if any, in secondary and tertiary mathematics education. In order for teachers to use writing in their classrooms, they themselves have to experience writing mathematics within the teacher education programme. The present paper reports on a study aimed at addressing this gap. In a problem-solving seminar, preservice teachers had an opportunity to experience writing in mathematics and report how this affected their problem-solving processes and shaped their attitudes towards incorporating writing in their classrooms. In order to provide a more detailed description of the phenomenon, four participants were chosen based on their beliefs about mathematics. All of the participants struggled with writing their explanations. Those who used writing as a method to support metacognitive processes while exploring mathematics tended to respond positively to the writing process. The others used writing merely as a method to produce a formal document to be evaluated by the instructor. Consequently, those who viewed writing and doing mathematics as an intertwined process expressed a positive attitude towards using writing in their mathematics classroom. This was, unfortunately, not the case when writing and doing mathematics were seen as two separate processes. Implications for teacher education programmes are presented at the end of the report.

### Downloads

### References

Brown, A. (1987). Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation and other more mysterious mechanisms. In F. Weinert & R. Klume (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation and understanding (pp. 65â€“116). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Bruder, R., & Collet, C. (2011). ProblemlÃ¶sen lernen im Mathematikunterricht. Berlin: Cornelsen.

Carlson, M. P. (1999). The mathematical behavior of six successful mathematics graduate students: Influences leading to mathematical success. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 40(3), 237â€“258.

College Entrance Examination Board. (1983). Academic preparation for college: What students need to know and be able to do. New York: Author.

Cooney, T. J. (1999). Conceptualizing teachersâ€™ ways of knowing. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 38, 163â€“187.

Countryman, J. (1992). Writing to learn mathematics. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Cross, D. I. (2009). Creating optimal mathematics learning environments: Combining argumentation and writing to enhance achievement. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7(5), 905â€“930.

deFreitas, E. (2008). Troubling teacher identity: Preparing mathematics teachers to teach for diversity. Teaching Education, 19(1), 43â€“55.

Ernest, P. (1989). Philosophy, mathematics and education: The state of the art. International Journal of Mathematics Education in Science and Technology, 20, 555â€“559.

Ernest, P. (1991). The philosophy of mathematics education. Abingdon, Oxon, UK: Routledge Farmer.

Flores, A., & Brittain, C. (2003). Writing to reflect in a mathematics methods course. Teaching Children Mathematics, 10, 112â€“118.

Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (2009). The cognition of discovery: Defining a rhetorical problem. In S. Miller (Ed.), The Norton book of composition studies (pp. 467â€“478). New York: W.W. Norton.

Geeslin, W. E. (1977). Using writing about mathematics as a teaching technique. Mathematics Teacher, 70, 112â€“115.

Halloun, I., & Hestenes, D. (1996). Views About Sciences Survey: VASS. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching, St. Louis, MO. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED394840).

Komorek, E. (2009). Mit Hausaufgaben ProblemlÃ¶sen und eigenverantwortliches Lernen in der Sekundarstufe I fÃ¶rdern. Entwicklung und Evaluation eines Ausbildungsprogramms fÃ¼r

MathematiklehrkrÃ¤fte. Berlin: Logos Verlag.

Kramarski, B., Mevarech, Z. R., & Arami, M. (2002). The effects of metacognitive instruction on solving mathematical authentic tasks. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 48, 225â€“250.

Kuzle, A. (2011). Preservice teachersâ€™ patters of metacognitive behavior during mathematics problem solving in a dynamic geometry environment. Doctoral dissertation. The University of Georgiaâ€“Athens.

Kuzle, A. (2013). Patterns of metacognitive behavior during mathematics problem-solving in a dynamic geometry environment. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 8(1), 20â€“40.

Lester, F. K. (1994). Musing about mathematical problem-solving research: 1970-1994. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 25(6), 660â€“675.

Liljedahl, P., Rolka, K., & RÃ¶sken, B. (2007b). Affecting affect: The reeducation of preservice teachersâ€™ beliefs about mathematics and mathematics teaching and learning. In W. G. Martin, M. E. Strutchens, & P. C. Elliott (Eds.), The learning of mathematics (pp. 319â€“330). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

Llinares, S. (2002). Participation and reification in learning to teach: The role of knowledge and beliefs. In G. C. Leder, E. Pehkonen, & G. TÃ¶rner (Eds.), Beliefs: A hidden variable in mathematics education? (pp. 195â€“209). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

Mayer, R. E. (1998). Cognitive, metacognitive, and motivational aspects of problem solving. Instructional Science, 26(1â€“2), 49â€“63.

Miller, L. D., & Hunt, N. P. (1994). Professional development through action research. In D. B. Aichele & A. F. Coxford (Eds.), Professional development for teachers of mathematics (pp. 296â€“303). Reston, Va: The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1980). An agenda for action: Recommendations for school mathematics of the 1980s. Reston, VA: Author.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.

Pajares, F. (1992). Teachersâ€™ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307-332.

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Philipp, R. A. (2007). Mathematics teachersâ€™ beliefs and affect. In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning, Vol. 2 (pp. 257â€“315). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.

Porter, M., & Masingila, J. (2001). Examining the effects of writing on conceptual and procedural knowledge in calculus. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 42(2), 165â€“177.

Pugalee, D. K. (2001). Writing, mathematics, and metacognition: Looking for connections through studentsâ€™ work in mathematical problem solving. School Science and Mathematics, 101(5), 236â€“245.

Schoenfeld, A. H. (1987). Whatâ€™s all the fuss about metacognition? In A. H. Schoenfeld (Ed.), Cognitive science and mathematics education (pp. 189â€“215). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Schoenfeld, A. H. (1992). Learning to think mathematically: Problem solving, metacognition, and sense-making in mathematics. In D. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 334â€“370). New York: Macmillan.

Sfard, A. (2001). Learning mathematics as developing a discourse. In R. Speiser, C. Maher, & C. Walter (Eds.), Proceedings of the Twenty-first Conference of PME-NA (pp. 23â€“44). Columbus, OH: ERIC Clearing House for Science, Mathematics, and Environmental Education.

Silver, E. A. (1987). Foundations of cognitive theory and research for mathematics problem-solving instruction. In A. Schoenfeld (Ed.), Cognitive science and mathematics education (pp. 33â€“60.) Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Thompson, A. (1992). Teacherâ€™s beliefs and conceptions: A synthesis of the research. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 127â€“146). New York: Macmillan.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Wilson, M., & Cooney, T. J. (2002). Mathematics teacher change and development. In G. C. Leder, E. Pehkonen, & G. Torner (Eds.), Beliefs: A hidden variable in mathematics education? (pp. 127â€“147). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

Yoo, S. (2008). Effects of traditional and problem-based instruction on conceptions of proof and pedagogy in undergraduates and prospective mathematics teachers. Doctoral dissertation. The University of Texas, Austin.

*Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal*,

*3*(4), 41-59. https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.222

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

- Authors are confirming that they are the authors of the submitted article, which will be published online in the
**Ce****nter for Educational Policy Studies****Journal (for short: CEPS Journal)**by University of Ljubljana Press (University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Education, Kardeljeva ploščad 16, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia). The Author’s/Authors’ name(s) will be evident in the article in the journal. All decisions regarding layout and distribution of the work are in the hands of the publisher. - The Authors guarantee that the work is their own original creation and does not infringe any statutory or common-law copyright or any proprietary right of any third party. In case of claims by third parties, authors commit themselves to defend the interests of the publisher, and shall cover any potential costs.
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.