Edge Hill University<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Using instructional materials to teach mathematics has a long, prominent history (Fan et al., 2013; Howson, 2013; Ulusoy & Incikabi, 2021). Prior to 2013, the use of schemes waned in popularity in favour of other curriculum frameworks. Since 2014, in line with the introduction of the National Curriculum (DfE, 2013) and \u2018teaching for mastery\u2019 (NCETM, 2017), there has been a resurgence of published mathematics schemes. A plethora of mathematics schemes are available for schools to utilise (Marks et al., 2023). The shift demonstrated change on a cultural, organisational and pedagogical level for educational stakeholders (Barclay et al., 2022). Therefore, this small-scale research attempted to triangulate key perspectives of school mentors (SMs), trainee teachers (TTs) and Initial Teacher Education (ITE) tutors (ITETs) to review the impact of mathematics schemes on TTs\u2019 professional knowledge and practice. A key aim was to add to the field of study in ITE by completing a study grounded within an interpretivist paradigm, following a qualitative approach. Mixed-method data collection was employed using questionnaires and semi-structured interviews that were collated via thematic analysis. The findings indicated that mathematics schemes positively impacted TTs\u2019 overall development as they progressed through their training. This was acknowledged by TTs and SMs and, to a lesser extent, ITETs. Key themes emerged around workload, self-efficacy, subject and curriculum knowledge, developing pedagogy and adaptive teaching. Identifiable benefits and limitations arose, themes overlapped and the importance of ongoing support and mentorship from ITETs and SMs was highlighted. Katie Smith’s page on Edge Hill University’s website<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n
References:
Barclay, N., Barnes, A., & Marks, R. (2022). Choosing and using curriculum resources in primary mathematics. Proceedings of the British Society for Research into Learning Mathematics, 42(1) 1-6<\/a>.
Department for Education. (2013). National curriculum in England: primary curriculum<\/a>.
Fan, L., Zhu, Y., & Miao, Z. (2013). Textbook research in mathematics education: development status and directions. ZDM: The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 45(5), 633\u2013646. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11858-013-0539-x<\/a>
Howson, G. (2013). The development of mathematics textbooks: historical reflections from a personal perspective. ZDM: The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 45(5), 647\u2013658. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11858-013-0511-9<\/a>
Marks, R., Barclay, N. & Barnes, A. (2023). The Prevalence and Use of Textbooks and Curriculum Resources in Primary Mathematics. University of Brighton.<\/a>
National Centre for Excellence in the Teaching of Mathematics (NCETM). (2017). Five Big Ideas in Teaching for Mastery<\/a>.
Ulusoy, F., & \u0130ncikabi, L. (2021). Preservice mathematics teachers\u2019 selection of curriculum resources in individual and group lesson planning processes. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 54(4), 557\u2013578. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1080\/0020739X.2021.1958944<\/a>
<\/p>\n\n\n\n