mehr Pädagogik-Kurse ==> schlechtere Mathe-Lehrer
Geograffitico hatte schon berichtet
über die unter dem Titel “Breaking the Cycle” (pdf, 10 MB) veröffentlichte 57-seitige Studie, die die Lehrerbildung in den USA mit der in anderen Ländern vergleicht.
Bemerkenswert ist die Erklärung, mit der in der Zusammenfassung (auf Seite 2) die bescheidenen Ergebnisse der US-Mittelschullehrer erklärt werden:
For middle school teachers
the top achieving
countries on average allocated half of the course taking related specifically to teacher preparation to the study of formal mathematics. The other half was allocated to either mathematics pedagogy (30%) – which focuses on such things as how students learn
mathematics and how it is best taught – or general pedagogy (20%) which includes
instructional design, classroom management as well as the foundation courses related to
By contrast the average for the 81 U.S. institutions was 40% for the study of
mathematics and 60% for the two pedagogy areas evenly split.
This difference is best illustrated by the pattern of course taking associated with two fundamental mathematics courses which are the gateway to the study of formal mathematics – linear algebra and a basic two-course sequence in calculus. Such differences in course taking were found to be related to the knowledge of the future teacher as they left their teacher preparation institution.
While those countries achieving at the top level had on average 90% of their future teachers taking these courses, in the United States about two-thirds of the future middle school mathematics teachers took linear algebra and only slightly more than half took the basic two-course sequence in calculus.
Also: mehr Pädagogik-Kurse ==> schlechtere Mathe-Lehrer, so jedenfalls das Ergebnis der Studie.
Aufgabe aus dem Test. Quelle: NYT