Teacher Learning Through Mathematics Studio: Opportunities to Consider Affordances and Constraints of Instructional Decisions

• In Event: Using Mathematics Studio Projects to Ground Considerations for Researching the Effectiveness of Adaptive Professional Development

Abstract

Objectives
This paper focuses on the work of one group of middle school teachers who engaged in 13 Mathematics Studios across a three-year period. Each Mathematics Studio centered on a local problem of practice identified by the group. Similar to lesson study (Hart et al., 2011), the centerpiece of Studio is the observation of a live classroom lesson, which provides a venue for teachers to collect authentic student data and collaboratively reflect on the lesson in relation to their research question(s). Motivated by participants’ comments that Studio was “the best professional learning experience” they had ever encountered, the research aim was to identify structures, facilitation practices, and norms of interaction that created opportunities for teacher learning.

Perspective
Decades of research highlight the power of teacher communities (Owen, 2014; Vangrieken et al., 2017) and the import of situating teacher learning in the practice of teaching (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 2001; Putnam & Borko, 2000) wherein teachers engage in critical debate about instructional practices. In such settings, learning opportunities are shaped (and often constrained) by the ways in which teachers collectively represent, explore, and work on instructional issues (Horn & Kane, 2015; Horn & Little, 2010).

Methods
Primary data consisted of video recordings and artifacts (e.g., agendas, lesson planning documents, student work) from a representative sample of 6 of the 13 Studio sessions. Qualitative video analysis focused on dialogic exchanges in which participants challenged ideas, engaged in evidence-based discussions, or made their pedagogical decisions explicit as such discussions open opportunities for participants to debate and consider ideas from a new perspective (Horn et al., 2017). Upon identifying these potential knowledge-building moments, we looked to what afforded those opportunities.

Results
Several interrelated features contributed to Studio’s success. These include the adoption of a research lens, a non-evaluative stance, and a focus on student thinking. Studio was positioned as a place to explore teachers’ genuine questions about instruction or student thinking (e.g., How can we increase student discourse? What are the affordances and constraints of different task launches? Why are fractions so difficult?). The resultant culture was one that embraced inquiry and risk-taking. Safety was critical to the Studio structure as teachers needed to be comfortable opening up their classrooms and willing to teach a lesson that was often tweaked minutes before implementation. Teachers’ non-evaluative stance opened learning opportunities wherein participants could challenge colleagues’ ideas and critique institutionalized teaching practices. Studio structures and routines emphasized that teaching was a complex endeavor involving reasoned decision-making and thus discussions focused on affordances and constraints of instructional moves rather than on a “right” way to teach.

Significance
Typical professional development often positions teachers as receivers of knowledge with goals that are external to teachers (Kennedy, 2016; Lindvall & Ryve, 2019). In contrast, Mathematics Studio is designed by and for teachers to experiment with different instructional approaches and critically analyze the effects of pedagogical decisions. We claim this more generative form of professional learning supports teacher agency and the development of pedagogical judgment.

Authors

• Kristin Lesseig, Washington State University - Vancouver

• Jessica Hoppe, Spokane Falls Community College