Teaching Routines in Mathematics Studio Adaptive Professional Development: Data Routines in Response to Sociopolitical Events

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

Abstract

Objective
This paper examines the 2020-21 Mathematics Studio (Studio) in a high school during the global pandemic designed to address state-level policy changes elevating data reasoning. We examine how tools developed and embedded in Studio in response to these socio-political events mediated actions. Our paper highlights teachers’ and leaders’ roles and actions that both supported and constrained instructional improvement.

Perspective
Using a sociocultural perspective to examine tool-mediated action, we consider how individuals are shaped by and in turn shape Studio events (Wertsch, 1994). Tools central to Studio were leader and teacher-designed routines for data literacy. We posit that discursive and materials tools, such as instructional routines, can be critical levers for instructional improvement when embedded within teaching contexts, attuned to teaching goals, and connected to supports for instructional improvement (Authors, 2019a; Hiebert & Morris, 2012; Leinhardt & Steele, 2005; Parker & Humphreys, 2018). Our driving question is, What is the impact of teachers’ and leaders’ roles and actions on instructional improvement in Studio?

Methods
Teachers in this study had participated in Studio for over a decade, with two teachers serving as facilitators. The primary data sources for the study were video records, artifacts (PD planning/handouts, student responses, and classroom tech-based activities), and fieldnotes from two Studio cycles (n=12). Using inductive analysis (Strauss & Corbin, 1998), we examined discursive and material tool-mediated pedagogical reasoning (Horn & Kane, 2015). From this analysis, we identified themes in teachers’ and leaders’ roles and actions as they elaborated claims and discursively framed pedagogical reasoning (Goffman, 1974).

Results
A key insight gained from our analysis was the membership role of each participant. Teachers displayed high levels of commitment to engage in every Studio event. In the first cycle, leaders played the role of innovator, designing a new data routine for teachers to co-plan, rehearse, enact in a classroom, analyze, and generalize to their practice. The data routine advanced mathematical practices, an ongoing department goal, and supported teachers to navigate shifts in teaching schedules due to the pandemic. In the second Studio, teachers reported using the routine, discussed how they had adapted it, and commented on their limited understanding of data literacy.

The collegiality of the group did not curb discussion that included counterpoints, open disagreements, and negotiations to make progress on stated goals. The data routines developed in the second Studio cycle played an important mediating role as an object for examining and critiquing mathematical ideas and considering student learning. The routine also pressed leaders and teachers on their understanding of data literacy and how students might understand these ideas. As a result, the goals for the data routine were often vaguely stated and appeared elusive to teachers.

Significance
This study reveals emerging tensions in adaptive PD models attuned to socio-political events and the demands on teachers’ and leaders’ roles and capacities. We conjecture that the community’s resilience for participation in Studio allowed for innovation and vulnerability, which were both affordance and constraints on instructional improvement.

Authors

• Rebekah Elliott, Oregon State University

• Megan E Brunner, AERDF

• Elyssa Stoddard, Oregon State University