Chapter 25

A Commognitive Perspective on Pre-service

Secondary Teachers’ Content Knowledge
in Mathematical Modelling

Joo Young Park

Abstract This exploratory study examined three pre-service secondary mathemat-

ics teachers’ content knowledge and views associated with mathematical modelling
revealed through engaging in mathematical modelling activities. Using a commog-
nitive approach on mathematical modelling, pre-service teachers’ written tasks and
discourses were analysed. Data sources were audiotaped discourses among the par-
ticipants, observation field notes, written tasks, open-ended questionnaires, and
reflective journals. Findings suggested that pre-service teachers’ content knowledge
in the modelling allowed them to fully engage in modelling discourses in verifying
a model mathematically as well as critically reflecting on solutions. These pre-­
service teachers’ view on modelling was consistent with a pragmatic perspective.

Keywords Commognition • Pre-service teachers • Subject content knowledge •

Modelling competencies • Views on mathematical modelling • Modelling process

25.1 Introduction

The Common Core State Standards for Mathematics (CCSSM) in the USA
(NGACBP and CCSSO 2010) calls for emphasis on mathematical modelling. The
modelling standard appears in each of the other five high school standards of math-
ematical content and is one of the eight standards for mathematical practice.
Although curricula can provide students with opportunities to learn mathematical
modelling, it is indisputable that how students acquire modelling skills relies on the
quality of classroom instruction. Studies have suggested that teachers require,

J.Y. Park (*)

Department of Education and Interdisciplinary Science, College of Science, Florida Institute
of Technology, 150 W. University Blvd., Melbourne, FL 32901, USA
e-mail: [email protected]

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017 289

G.A. Stillman et al. (eds.), Mathematical Modelling and Applications,
International Perspectives on the Teaching and Learning of Mathematical
Modelling, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62968-1_25
290 J.Y. Park

besides other aspects, knowledge about several steps of the modelling process; oth-
erwise the criteria of quality teaching of modelling cannot be fulfilled (Blum 2011;
Borromeo Ferri 2014). Hence, mathematics teacher educators are challenged with
preparing teachers to understand the intricacies of mathematical modelling.
Within CCSSM, modelling is defined as “the process of choosing and using
appropriate mathematics and statistics to analyse empirical situations, to understand
them better, and to improve decisions” (NGACBP and CCSSO 2010, p. 72). Among
studies on teachers’ conception of mathematical modelling, Kaiser and Maaβ (2007)
found that some teachers viewed mathematical modelling as the process of creating
opportunities for developing solutions, while others focused on the establishment of
formulas. These different conceptions can lead to a particular emphasis on how mod-
elling is taught in classrooms (Kaiser and Maaβ 2007).
As curriculum reform has also called for fostering collaborative learning envi-
ronments to support students’ learning mathematics, modelling can be used as a
way to facilitate this type of learning environment (Escalante 2010; NCTM 2000).
A commognition framework (Sfard 2008) has been shown to provide a lens for ana-
lysing inter-intrapersonal communication in both social and cognitive dimensions
of modelling (Ärlebäck and Frejd 2013).
This exploratory case study is an attempt to understand the nature of future
teachers’ knowledge in the domain of mathematical modelling as well as their views
on modelling by providing them with opportunities for experiencing mathematical
modelling activities within a collaborative group. The underlying questions for this
study are:
1. How is the pre-service mathematics teachers’ content knowledge on mathemati-
cal modelling manifested while engaging in modelling activities within a group?
2. How do pre-service mathematics teachers describe mathematical modelling and
the role of modelling from a pedagogical perspective?

25.2 Theoretical Framework

25.2.1 Mathematical Modelling and Modelling Process

A framework developed by Galbraith and Stillman (2006) was designed to assess

the modelling process, implementation and assessment of mathematical modelling
tasks in the secondary classroom. This framework comprises elements of modelling
activities that correspond to the respective stages of the modelling process for guid-
ing teachers, researchers, and curriculum designers to anticipate possible student
blockages as they transit between the stages of the modelling process (Galbraith and
Stillman 2006; Stillman et al. 2007).
The following is the framework for identifying potential sites for student block-
ages in transitions in the modelling process (Galbraith and Stillman 2006, p. 147):
25 A Commognitive Perspective on Pre-service Secondary Teachers’ Content… 291

1. Messy Real-World Situation → Real-World Problem Statement

1.1 Clarifying context of problem
1.2 Making simplifying assumptions
1.3 Identifying strategic entities
1.4 Specifying the correct elements of strategic entities
2. Real-World Problem Statement → Mathematical Model
2.1 Identifying dependent and independent variables for inclusion in an alge-
braic model.
2.2 Realizing independent variable must be uniquely defined.
2.3 Representing elements mathematically so formulae can be applied.
2.4 Making relevant assumptions.
2.5 Choosing technology/mathematical tables to enable calculation.
2.6 Choosing technology to automate application of formulae to multiple cases.
2.7 Choosing technology to produce graphical representation of model.
2.8 Choosing to use technology to verify algebraic equation
2.9 Perceiving a graph can be used on function graphers but not data plotters to
verify an algebraic equation.
3. Mathematical Model → Mathematical Solution
3.1. Applying appropriate symbolic formulae
3.2. Applying algebraic simplification processes to formulae to produce more
sophisticated functions
3.3. Using technology/mathematical tables to perform calculation
3.4. Using technology to automate extension of formulae application to multiple
cases
3.5. Using technology to produce graphical representations
3.6. Using correctly the rules of notational syntax (whether mathematical or
technological)
3.7. Verifying of algebraic model using technology
3.8. Obtaining additional results to enable interpretation of solutions
4. Mathematical Solution → Real-World Meaning of Solution
4.1. Identifying mathematical results with their real-world counterparts
4.2. Contextualizing interim and final mathematical results in terms of RW situ-
ation (routine complex versions)
4.3. Integrating arguments to justify interpretations
4.4. Relaxing of prior constraints to produce results needed to support a new
interpretation
4.5. Realizing the need to involve mathematics before addressing an interpretive
question
5. Real-World Meaning of Solution → Revise Model or Accept Solution
5.1. Reconciling unexpected interim results with real situation
292 J.Y. Park

5.2. Considering real-world implications of mathematical results

5.3. Reconciling mathematical and real-world aspects of the problem
5.4. Realizing there is a limit to the relaxation of constraints that is acceptable
for a valid solution
5.5. Considering real-world adequacy of model output globally
This framework was used for unpacking pre-service teachers’ content knowledge in
mathematical modelling while engaging in the modelling process.

25.2.2  orms of Teachers’ Knowledge in Modelling

F
Competencies

According to Shulman (1986), teachers’ knowledge areas are content knowledge,

pedagogical content knowledge, general pedagogical knowledge, and knowledge of
educational contexts, values and philosophies. This chapter focuses on content
knowledge pertaining to mathematical modelling. The mathematical content knowl-
edge of pre-service mathematics teachers, elaborated by Bromme (1992) and
Weinert (2001) based on Shulman’s (1986) framework, includes the required cogni-
tive activities such as modelling and mathematical content areas such as algebra or
statistics (Kaiser et al. 2010). For each phase of the modelling process, the follow-
ing kinds of modelling competencies are distinguished (Kaiser et al. 2010): sub-­
competencies for carrying out a single phase of a modelling process like structuring
a real-world situation including developing a mathematical model, or validation of
a solution, and competence to reflect critically about already executed modelling.
Groshong and Park (2016) suggest that teachers’ content knowledge in mathemati-
cal modelling consists of components of mathematical knowledge such as the
breadth of mathematical content and skills as well as the application of necessary
mathematics needed to solve mathematical modelling tasks and modelling knowl-
edge such as the scope of extra-mathematical knowledge required to solve mathe-
matical modelling tasks, knowledge of monitoring progression through the various
modelling subprocesses and awareness of various mathematical modelling
approaches.

25.2.3 The Commognitive Approach to Studying Learning

The commognition framework (Sfard 2008) provides a socio-cognitive lens to

examine the learning processes. Within the framework, learning is viewed as a
change in one’s mathematical discourse, and participants’ discourses are character-
ized by word use, visual mediators, routines, and endorsed narratives (Sfard 2008).
Word use refers to participants’ use of mathematical vocabulary in their discourses.
Visual mediators are “visual objects that are operated upon as a part of the process
25 A Commognitive Perspective on Pre-service Secondary Teachers’ Content… 293

of communication” (p. 133). The visual objects in mathematical discourse include

graphs, symbols and diagrams. Routines are “a set of meta-rules that describe a
repetitive discursive action” (p. 208). Narratives refer to any sequences of spoken or
written utterances about mathematical objects and relations between objects that
participants consider as true or false. Endorsed narratives are narratives that partici-
pants consider as true, which include definitions, axioms and theorems. With the
commognitive approach, teachers’ content knowledge in mathematical modelling
was examined through analysis of the participants’ discourses in each phase of the
modelling process identified in the Galbraith and Stillman (2006) framework.

25.3 Methods

25.3.1 Procedure

Using the commognition framework, participants’ written tasks and discourses

were examined during the modelling process. The participants for this study were
pre-service secondary mathematics teachers (Jesse, Steve, and Mary) who enrolled
in a required junior-level mathematics course in the undergraduate STEM (science,
technology, engineering, and mathematics) education programme. As a new pro-
gramme, only three students enrolled in the course. Mary and Steve are mathemat-
ics majors, whereas Jesse is an interdisciplinary science major. Participants were
juniors in the programme. The content course focused on functions and mathemati-
cal modelling. The class met twice a week for 75 min. Students worked on eight
mathematical modelling tasks on functions during the course. The tasks were
selected from Gould et al. (2012). This handbook was designed for teachers’ math-
ematical modelling instruction aligned with CCSSM (NGACBP and CCSSO 2010).
The pre-service teachers engaged in mathematical modelling activities as a group
and created modelling tasks for lesson plans as a final project. The lesson plans are
not part of the analysis for this study.
Data sources for this study were audiotaped discourses among the participants,
observation field notes, written tasks, open-ended questionnaires, and reflective
journals. Participants’ written reports on modelling tasks also served as artefacts to
be examined in detail for aspects of the modelling process discussed in class. All
audiotaped data were transcribed for analysing discourses to examine the partici-
pants’ content knowledge in modelling as they passed through each modelling
phase. After completing the modelling tasks, the pre-service teachers completed
open-ended questionnaires and reflective journals about their modelling experi-
ences and views on teaching and learning mathematical modelling at the end of the
semester. The following are some of the questions on the open-ended questionnaires
and the reflective journal prompts: How do you define mathematical modelling?
What is the purpose of teaching mathematical modelling? What is the goal of your
mathematical modelling lesson? Describe the characteristics of the modelling tasks
you designed.
294 J.Y. Park

25.3.2 Modelling Task

The data comes from analysis of students’ work on a modelling task Bending Steel
(Gould et al. 2012). The task consists of a leading question and a sequence of ques-
tions. Students worked on the Bending Steel task after having the mathematical
modelling introduced and working on two exemplary modelling tasks at the begin-
ning of the semester.

Bending Steel
Railroads are a common source of transportation around the world. Because
the tracks are made of metals (often steel), they expand and contract due to
change in temperature and various problems arise. Suppose a section of track
is fastened down at both ends. The natural process of heating and cooling
causes the track to expand and contract. If the track length increases, but is
nailed down at both ends, then the tracks should rise off the ground. The
tracks may also expand outward along the ground, but this lesson focuses on
the case where they expand upward. How can railroad designers design tracks
that stay safely on the ground in all types of weather?

Bending Steel Sample Questions

The world’s longest railroad sections are about 120 m in length, or about
400 ft, with the typical length in the USA less than 100 ft. Suppose in your
city that temperature changes on average about 45 °F (25 °C) from a cold,
winter day to a warm, summer day. If the track is 120 m in the winter, the
climbing temperature and heat during the summer cause the tracks to swell
and increase in length. The linear expansion coefficient, α, for steel is approx-
imately 0.000002 m per degree change in temperature (°C). Use this informa-
tion to determine how much the track expands in length between winter and
summer. Convert your answer to feet and then to inches.
(B) Draw a model of how you think the 400 ft track would look if its length
expanded by the amount you found in question 1. Label all the known
lengths.
(C) What mathematical shape does your model most closely replicate? Use
the properties of that shape to determine how high off of the ground the
tracks rise in the summer. Is the result surprising or what you expected?
(D) Based on real-life, physical models, it seems reasonable to model track
expansion as the arc of a circle. Draw an arced model below, labelling the
original straight length (a chord) and the new curved length. Extend the
arc to draw the circle that contains it. Label the unknown radius, r, and
central angle, θ, of the circle.
(E) Using the identified values for the radius, r, and central angle, θ, that are
required for an arced model of this situation, how high off the ground
would the tracks rise? Is the result surprising or what you expected?
25 A Commognitive Perspective on Pre-service Secondary Teachers’ Content… 295

25.4 Analysis and Results

25.4.1  re-service Teachers’ Content Knowledge

P
in Mathematical Modelling

The following are excerpts from the transcripts of pre-service teachers’ conversa-
tion during modelling. With the commognition framework (Sfard 2008), pre-service
teachers’ modelling process was analysed based on their use of words, visual medi-
ators, routines and endorsed narratives in mathematical and modelling discourse.
The narratives were those discussed or endorsed during the modelling process. Each
transition from one modelling phase to another was identified based on Galbraith
and Stillman’s (2006) framework as seen in Tables 25.1, 25.2, 25.3, and 25.4.
In each transition during the modelling process, the mathematical routines were
closed (Sfard 2008) by Mary’s endorsed narrative. Jesse and Steve’s narratives
mainly reaffirmed or repeated routines. Jesse and Steve had difficulties in identify-
ing variables and finding an appropriate mathematical model related to trigonomet-
ric functions and the arc length during the transition from real-world problem
situation to mathematical model. Mary’s endorsed narratives were based on her
mathematical reasoning, and she was more flexible than the others in her use of
mathematics in verifying solutions mathematically and critically reflecting on found
solutions and models. Mary revised her model or equation through the instructor’s
prompting question (e.g. arcsine function in Table 25.2), but she was able to prog-
ress through the various modelling subprocesses. Galbraith and Stillman’s (2006)
framework was applied to identify teachers’ content knowledge displayed in each
phase of the modelling process; however, the participants did not go through all
subprocesses of each modelling phase for the Bending Steel task nor should they as
which are relevant depends on the task and its implementation (Stillman et al. 2007).

Table 25.1 Real-world problem statement → mathematical model

Endorsed
Modelling process Words and visual mediators Routines narratives
2.3 Representing Steve: “curve”, “the height” Steve: Measured Instructor: Great
elements will be “measured” on the “a somewhere on the half
mathematically so half of the arc” of the ground
formulae can be Jesse: “triangle”, <visual Mary: Like a rubber Jesse: A half of
applied mediator> ruler, bend it in the the arc, divide
middle by 2
Mary: “in the middle”, Instructor: Does your Mary: In the
“isosceles” model look like a middle, isosceles
<Visual mediator> familiar mathematical
shape?
296 J.Y. Park

Table 25.2 Mathematical model → mathematical solution

Words and visual Endorsed
Modelling process mediator Routines narratives
3.1 apply appropriate Mary: I do not know Instructor: What do you
symbolic formulae about “y”, “formula” know about each
variable?
<Visual mediator> Mary: that’s why we
need one more equation

Mary [revised the Instructor: Do you want

formula] to try to use a different
function?
Steve: The height goes up Mary: The height
by 1.768 ft is about 1.8 ft

Table 25.3 Mathematical solution → real-world meaning of solution

Words and
Modelling process visual mediator Routines Endorsed narratives
4.1 Identifying Mary: “a huge Mary: It is not Since “x” is being squared and
mathematical results number”. Since that far off added 800x, for even a little
with their real-world “x” is being expansion, it causes a great
counterpart squared and increase in height [from Mary’s
added 800x written task].
4.2 Contextualizing Mary: The Mary: The arc will look a lot
interim and final length closer to the axis than what we
mathematical results in increases by have drawn. The smaller the arc
terms of RW situation 1,000 but then is the more like a triangle it
4.3 Integrating the height looks [sic]. Versus, if the arc is
arguments to justify increases a half bigger, and there is a triangle,
interpretations of foot that’s where the missing space
is.

25.4.2  re-service Teachers’ Conception of Mathematical

P
Modelling

From the participants’ completed open-ended questionnaires and reflective jour-

nals, the themes of narratives were revealed in terms of their conceptions of math-
ematical modelling, views on modelling tasks and role of mathematical modelling
from a pedagogical perspective. Excerpts from the participants’ completed ques-
tionnaire and journals are displayed in Table 25.5.
All three participants’ conception of mathematical modelling involved a real-­
world situation/problem. The pre-service teachers’ views on modelling were consis-
tent with a pragmatic perspective (Pollak 1969), which focuses on the developing
25 A Commognitive Perspective on Pre-service Secondary Teachers’ Content… 297

Table 25.4 Real-world meaning of solution → revise model or accept solution

Words and visual
Modelling process mediators Routines Endorsed narratives
5.2 Considering “The arc”, Instructor: Steve: More accurate.
real-world “triangle”, Which of the
implications of “triangular models do you
mathematical results model”, “the arc think works
model” better and why?
5.3 Reconciling “Curvature” of the Steve: Easier. Mary: It is not rising up like a
mathematical and circle, “straight” triangle, that is not how nature
real-world aspects of works, nature works like round
the problem figures. The triangle will go
above the circle. It would not
be inside the circle. Because
the curvature of the circle
makes up a lot more feet than
the line. Line is more direct.

Table 25.5 Pre-service teachers’ views on modelling

Questions Excerpts from participants’ responses to journals and a questionnaire
Conception of Real-world situation that can be described using mathematical
modelling languages. (Jesse)
Representing graphical or numerical equation that can assist you to
solve real-life problem. (Steve)
Mathematical representation of data or situation that simplifies
real-world problem. (Mary)
Views on mathematical Modelling tasks required high-ordered thinking and outside box.
modelling tasks (Jesse)
Good modelling problems give freedom for students to make their
own assumptions like real-life problems instead of giving all
information or mathematical equations. (Steve)
It has to be realistic. (Steve)
Open-ended and challenging. (Mary)
Requires deep understanding of mathematics and go through
modelling process. (Mary)
The goal of teaching Learn how to do mathematical modelling, they see how mathematics
mathematical modelling fits into their daily lives, how you can solve problems quickly and
efficiently through mathematical angle. (Jesse)
Use their knowledge in a different situation to solve a real-world
problem. The goal is for students to find mathematics in order to
solve a real-world problem and discover relations as well as come up
with a model to represent the problem. (Steve)
Help people to solve real-world problems since you have to make
your assumptions and decisions in life, not like mathematics
textbooks. (Mary)
298 J.Y. Park

ability of learners to apply mathematics to solve practical real-life problems (Kaiser

and Sriraman 2006). The participants’ common goal of teaching modelling was
helping students to learn how to do mathematical modelling and solve real-world
problems, which is a similar approach to the modelling as content approach where
modelling is content in its own right (Galbraith and Stillman 2006). The purposes of
the approach are to develop students’ abilities to apply mathematics to problems in
their world taking mathematics beyond the classroom and to use the real-world
context as a key component (Galbraith and Stillman 2006).
As the participants started with a structured series of questions before encounter-
ing the messy real-world situation with the leading question of the Bending Steel
task, the analysis for this study did not capture how pre-service teachers use contex-
tual knowledge to simplify from the messy real-world situation to real-world prob-
lem statement. The commognitive perspective highlights how cognitive and social
aspects are manifested in modelling activities. Participants’ word use and endorsed
narratives indicate their lack of modelling experience when simplifying a model
from the real-world situation and verifying a model mathematically. Generalization
of the results from this study is neither intended nor possible; however, the study
gives insights into the nature of pre-service teachers’ mathematical modelling
knowledge and conceptions of mathematical modelling and demonstrates a new
linking of analytical tools. Further study will examine how pre-service teachers’
pedagogical content knowledge of content and students and its relationship with
other areas of teachers’ knowledge of mathematical modelling are manifested dur-
ing their modelling instruction.

References

Ärlebäck, J. B., & Frejd, P. (2013). Modelling from the perspective of commognition-an emerging
framework. In G. A. Stillman, G. Kaiser, W. Blum, & J. P. Brown (Eds.), Teaching mathemati-
cal modelling: Connecting to research and practice (pp. 47–56). Dordrecht: Springer.
Blum, W. (2011). Can modelling be taught and learnt? Some answers from empirical research. In
G. Kaiser, W. Blum, R. Borromeo Ferri, & G. Stillman (Eds.), Trends in teaching and learning
of mathematical modelling (pp. 15–30). Dordrecht: Springer.
Borromeo Ferri, R. (2014). Mathematical modelling—the teacher’s responsibility. In A. Sanfratello
& B. Dickmann (Eds.), Proceedings of conference on mathematical modelling (pp. 26–31).
New York City: Teachers College of Columbia University.
Bromme, R. (1992). Der Lehrer als Experte. Zur Psychologie des professionellen Lehrerwissens.
Göttingen: Hans Huber.
Escalante, C. (2010). Secondary teachers learn and refine their knowledge during modeling
activities in a learning community environment. In R. Lesh, P. L. Galbraith, C. R. Haines, &
A. Hurford (Eds.), Modeling students’ mathematical modeling competencies (pp. 459–469).
New York: Springer.
Galbraith, P., & Stillman, G. (2006). A framework for identifying student blockages during transi-
tions in the modelling process. ZDM Mathematics Education, 38(2), 143–162.
Gould, H., Murray, D. R., Sanfratello, A., & Columbia University, & Consortium for Mathematics
and Its Applications (U.S.). (2012). Mathematical modeling handbook (pp. 115–122). Bedford:
COMAP.
25 A Commognitive Perspective on Pre-service Secondary Teachers’ Content… 299

Groshong, K., & Park, J. (2016). Examining secondary mathematics teachers’ mathematical mod-
eling content knowledge. In M. B. Wood, E. E. Turner, M. Civil, & J. A. Eli (Eds.), Proceedings
of the 38th annual meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the
Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 1682–1688). Tucson: University of Arizona.
Kaiser, G., & Maaß, K. (2007). Modelling in lower secondary mathematics classrooms – problems
and opportunities. In W. Blum, P. L. Galbraith, H.-W. Henn, & M. Niss (Eds.), Modelling
and applications in mathematics education: The 14th ICMI study (pp. 99–108). New York:
Springer.
Kaiser, G., & Sriraman, B. (2006). A global survey of international perspectives on modelling.
ZDM Mathematics Education, 38(3), 302–210.
Kaiser, G., Schwarz, B., & Tiedemann, S. (2010). Future teachers’ professional knowledge on
modelling. In R. Lesh, P. L. Galbraith, C. R. Haines, & A. Hurford (Eds.), Modeling students’
mathematical modeling competencies (pp. 433–444). New York: Springer.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school math-
ematics. Reston: NCTM.
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers
[NGACBP & CCSSO]. (2010). Common core state standards for mathematics. Washington,
DC: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School
Officers.
Pollak, H. (1969). How can we teach applications of mathematics? Educational Studies in
Mathematics, 2, 393–404.
Sfard, A. (2008). Thinking as communicating: Human development, the growth of discourses, and
mathematizing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational
Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.
Stillman, G., Galbraith, P., Brown, J., & Edwards, I. (2007). A framework for success in imple-
menting mathematical modelling in the secondary classroom. In J. Watson & K. Beswick
(Eds.), Proceedings of 30th annual conference of Mathematics Education Research Group of
Australasia (pp. 688–707). Adelaide: MERGA.
Weinert, F. E. (2001). Concept of competence: A conceptual clarification. In D. S. Rychen & L. H.
Salganik (Eds.), Defining and selecting key competencies (pp. 45–66). Göttingen: Hogrefe.