Go to main content
Formats
Format
BibTeX
MARCXML
TextMARC
MARC
DataCite
DublinCore
EndNote
NLM
RefWorks
RIS

Files

Abstract

Collective mathematical argumentation is powerful for student learning of mathematics, and teachers’ questioning strategies are pivotal in orchestrating collective argumentation. Adapting Habermas’ (1998) construct of rational behavior, this study demonstrated how teachers’ questioning can be framed based on this construct as a teaching method to regulate argumentative discourse. The purpose of this study was to investigate how teachers use rational questioning to organize collective argumentation with respect to Habermas’ three components of rationality as a way to develop students’ awareness of the rationality requirements of argumentation. The participants in this study were two beginning secondary mathematics teachers who have learned about supporting collective argumentation during their teacher education program as well as during professional development for several years. Four video-recorded lessons (two sets of two consecutive days of lessons) within a school year for each participating teacher were chosen to serve as the main data source for this study.

In this dissertation, I developed a Rational Questioning Framework from Habermas’ theory of rationality and integrated it with Toulmin’s (1958/2003) model for argumentation as a more powerful analytic tool to investigate teacher questioning strategies concerning both rationality requirements of argumentation and fundamental components of argumentation. Considering little consensus existed about general acceptance criteria for classroom-based argumentation, this study explored levels of truth in argumentation according to several levels of correctness of final arguments that emerged from two teachers’ mathematics classrooms.

I identified various ways of using combinations of components of rational questioning to support ongoing interactions in argumentation with respect to prompting or responding to argument components, levels of truth in argumentation, and managing incorrect answers. This study suggests the necessity of using sequences of rational questions to prompt a satisfactory argument component from a teacher’s perspective. The use of a privileged rationality component in rational questioning was context-dependent. Further, this study proposed a set of criteria for valid argumentative practices by considering how argumentation was gradually scaffolded in a given classroom community. The findings have important implications for theory and professional development, including teaching practice and teacher education.

Details

PDF

Statistics

from
to
Export
Download Full History