Borko Putman and Teacher Professional Learning

What Do New Views of Knowledge and Thinking Have to Say about Research on Teacher Learning? Author(s): Ralph T.Putnam and Hilda Borko Reviewed work(s): Source: Educational Researcher, Vol. 29, No. 1 (Jan. - Feb., 2000), pp. 4-15 Published by: American Educational Research Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1176586 . Accessed: 06/03/2012 16:47 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. American Educational Research Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Educational Researcher. http://www.jstor.org Brown and colTeachers of Mathematics. Most discussions of these ideas and their implications for educational practice have importance of authenticactivitiesin classrooms. Greeno & The Middle with new (or at least re-discovered) ideas about the School Through Applications ProjectGroup. and the sitworld view that these discussions represent are even more uation in which a person learns. Lave & nature of cognition and learning.whereas traditional cognitive to cognitive views of learning (Shuell." "distributed cognition. EducationalResearcher. and sometimes fueling. we explore new issues about teacher learning RALPH T.. typically fail to support discourse about important ideas (e. Collins. 1.Greeno. 1996). Educational University.His areasofspeMI that are central to the situative perspective-that cognicializationinclude cognitive studies of teachingand learning. National Council of transfer to these out-of-school settings. how to help students "ordinarypractices of a culture" (p.situate stusimilar to what actual practitioners do. & Duguid. then activities are authentic if they serve that teaching. 1998. we use these ideas about the nature of learning and knowing as lenses for understanding recent research on teacher learning.and educational technology. 1986).Department Counseling. perspectives focus on the individual as the basic unit of These new ideas about the nature of knowledge. 1989. How a person (Anderson. Some have argued that the shifts in learns a particular set of knowledge and skills. 1996. (b) social in nature. No. research at Her addresses teacher versityof cogCognitionas Situated nitionand theprocessof learningto teach.What and Do New Have Views to of Knowledge Research Thinking on Teacher Say About Learning? RALPHT. Greeno. 34)-activities that are of subjectmatter. 1993). tion is (a) situated in particular physical and social conmathematics and teaching learning. EastLansing. S. PUTNAM is an associateprofessor Michigan State at and teacher education that this perspective brings to light. Collins. & Resnick.Her currentworkexand Early cognitive theories typically treated knowing as the ploresteachers' practices. Brown been cast primarilyin terms of students. for example. 1997) typifies this discussion. 1997).Vol. pp. and (c) distributed across the individual. 1996)-are interactingwith.g. and that the activity is an integral part practice"fill the air. and create learning "school activities. theteacher learning reform-based of of symbols inside the mind of the individual. They claimed that develop deep understandings dents' learning in meaningful contexts. situative perspectives focus on interactive systems and learning--which are becoming known as the "situative that include individuals as participants. 1991. other persons. & Simon. Further." which do not share contextual features communities in which teachers and students engage in rich with related out-of-school tasks.1991). thinking. analysis. Scholarsand policyand colleagues (1989) defined authentic activities as the makers have considered.National ResearchCouncil. 48824. J. PUTNAM HILDA BORKO thought to be useful in a wide variety of settings (Greeno et al. education professional and that manipulation development experiences support and learning as the acquisition of knowledge and skills such learning. We begin with a brief overview of three conceptual themes and SpecialEducation. texts. 4-15 The 4 EDUCATIONAL RESEARCHER . that the physical and social contexts in which an activity takes place are an integral cognition. First. and tools. 1999. 29. In this article we focus on the latter." and "communities of Researcher part of the activity. Reder. current A focus on the situated nature of cognition suggests the reform movements in education. HILDA BORKOis a professor theSchool Education theUniin at of Colorado Boulder. 1997. become a fundamental part fundamental than the now-historical shift from behaviorist of what is learned. interacting with each other as well as materials and representational sysperspective" (Greeno.They posit. Authentic activities foster the kinds of thinking and in considering teachers' learning is twofold. If we consider the goal of eduroles in creating learning experiences consistent with the recation to be preparing students to be lifelong intentional form agenda or to how they themselves learn new ways of learners. Termslike "situated Wenger. 1997.. Second. of Psychology.Greeno. National Education Goals leagues (1993) offered a different definition of authentic classroom activities-derived from the role of formal eduPanel. instead. tems (Cobb & Bowers. A. Less attention has been paid to teachers-either to their cation in children's lives.Recentdialogue in Educational of the learning that takes place within it. 1989.Our purpose goal. Situative theorists challenge this assumption of a cognitive core independent of context and intention education and researchcommunitiesare abuzz (Brown. Others argue that-rather than preparing students to participate in the professional cultures of mathematicians and historians-"schools should be communities where students learn to learn"(A. 1993. historians. 1993a). on tool-free performance. Six people with three different job descriptions and using several sophisticated cognitive tools were involved in piloting the ship out of the harbor. 18).Michaels & O'Connor. 1980. 1994. & Scott. 1988). and (c) the importance of tools in teachers' work. Dewey. educating people to be good learners in school settings alone may not be sufficient to help them become strong out-of-school learners" (p.and tools. too. that to prepare students for successful participation in society.. is social.. 1991) described the navigation of a U. and various artifacts such as physical and symbolic tools (Salomon.) Where Should Teachers' Learning Be Situated? Teachereducators have long struggled with how to create learning experiences powerful enough to transform teach5 JANUARY-FEBRUARY2000 . 190). and so on (J. 1934/1962). see Putnam & Borko.1990. Michaels & O'Connor. But.focusing instead on the importance of individual competencies. Rather. Greenoand colleagues (1996)wove these themes together in characterizingthe situative perspective: Successin cognitive functionssuch as reasoning. we consider the kinds of thinking and problem-solving skills fostered by an activity to be the key criterion for authenticity. 1991). 1988. Resnick. We focus on three issues: (a) where to situate teachers' learning experiences. Brown et al. social partners. Hutchins (1990. it seems clear. some scholars argue that classroom communities should be modeled after disciplinary communities of mathematicians. Mortimer. changes through the ideas and ways of thinking its new members bring to the discourse. although they have roots in the thinking of educators and psychologists as early as the late 19th century (e. psychologists and educators are recognizing that the role of others in the learning process goes beyond providing stimulation and encouragement for individual construction of knowledge (Resnick. For example.and perceivingis understoodas an achievementof a system.S. 1896. Cognitionas Social Dissatisfied with overly individualistic accounts of learning and knowing. learning is as much a matter of enculturation into a community's ways of thinking and dispositions as it is a result of explicit instruction in specific concepts. These three themes-learning and knowing as situated.g. theories.. 1990). skills. Brown et al. Cobb. some scholars have conceptualized learning as coming to know how to participate in the discourse and practices of a particular community (e. Indeed. Pea (1993) made a similar point: "Socially scaffolded and externally mediated. we consider these implications. The process of learning. From this perspective. the community. and distributed-are fairly recent arrivals on the educational research scene in North America. Navy ship. 1989). other persons. whether or not the activities themselves mirror what practitionersdo. social. the situative approach has important implications for research on the learning of preservice and inservice teachers. 1991). In parallel to their position on authentic activities.Theirassumption is that by participating in activities designed to question and extend their own knowledge in various domains. that is. (p. It is important to note that this learning is not a unidirectional phenomenon. In the remainder of this article. This perspective leads to the question of what kinds of discourse communities to establish in classrooms. and procedures (Driver.p.1990. Our discussion of authentic activities for teacher learning adopts a position similar to that of A. schools must achieve a better balance between activities that incorporateideas of distributed cognition and those that stress only individual competence. In either case. the discourse communities being envisioned are significantly different from those traditionally found in public school classrooms. students will become enculturated into ways of learning that will continue for the rest of their lives. Cognitionas Distributed Rather than considering cognition solely as a property of individuals. with contributionsof the individuals who participate. Schoenfeld. School learning environments typically do not emphasize such sharing of learning and cognitive performance. Admittedly there are disadvantages to incorporatingtool-aided cognition and socially shared cognitive activities in classrooms.Asoko.Resnick. interactions with the people in one's environment are major determinants of both what is learned and how learning takes view (Soltis. and on decontextualized skills. One important idea emerging from a social perspective is that a central goal of schooling is to enculturate students into various discourse communities. Leach. This sociocentric learning holds that what we take as knowledge and how we think and express ideas are the products of the interactions of groups of people over time. to groups of people sharing a common interest.remembering. 75).S.Vygotsky. situative theorists posit that it is distributed or "stretched over" (Lave. 20) As well as providing new perspectives on teaching and learning in K-12 classrooms. too. 1997.ranging from scholarly disciplines such as science or history. equipping them with competence in using the concepts and the forms of reasoning and argument that characterize those communities (Lampert.. and concepts-that individuals appropriate as their own through their personal efforts to make sense of experiences. Brown and colleagues. as Resnick (1987)wrote. 1992). (For a more comprehensive discussion of the three themes and their implications for classroom practices and teacher education. however. 1981) of knowledge and place. (b) the nature of discourse communities for teaching and teacher learning. along with tools and artifacts. where the knowledge for successfully piloting the ship was distributed throughout the entire navigational system.g.problem-solving skills that are important in out-of-school settings. "as long as school focuses mainly on individual forms of competence. These discourse communities provide the cognitive tools-ideas.The distribution of cognition across people and tools made it possible for the crew to accomplish cognitive tasks beyond the capabilities of any individual member (Hutchins.This means that thinking is situated in a particularcontext of intentions. 1990. Individuals participate in numerous discourse communities(Fish. Lave & Wenger.Resnick. 1988) the individual. scientists. 1991). 1994. to particular classrooms. artifact-supported cognition is so predominant in out-of-school settings that its disavowal in the classroom is detrimental to the transfer of learning beyond the classroom" (p. Teachers reported that these conversations helped them to understand what to look for when observing students and to incorporate classroom-based observations of student performances into their assessment practices (Borko et al. For example. for example through ongoing workshops focused on instructional practices. for example. The classroom is a powerful environment for shaping and constraining how practicing teachers think and act. Some professional development projectshave addressed this concern by providing intensive learning experiences through summer workshops housed in sites other than school buildings. included a 2-week summer institute. The question is not whether knowledge and learning are situated. The University of Colorado Assessment Project (Borko. For some purposes. The learning of teachers is intertwined with their ongoing practice. there are arguments for not always doing so. it may be important to have them experience learning in differentsettings. 1991). during which teacherslearned mathematicsby participating in activities designed according to constructivist principles. We examine here some of the approaches that researchers and teacher educators have taken to help teachers learn and change in powerful ways. for teachers to experiencethese disciplines in new ways in the context of their own classrooms-the pull of the existing classroom environment and cultureis simply too strong. Mayfield. The SummerMathfor Teachersprogram (Schifter& Fosnot. 1989) also included a summer institute. These researchers structured discussions with participating elementary teachers to examine their practical arguments-the rationales. and other subject matters are limited-that they overemphasize routine. & Loef.ers' classroom practice. If the goal is to help teachers think in new ways. with a large component taking place in individual teachers' classrooms. one particularlyeffective approach to situating learning occurred when members of the staff development/research team introduced materials and activities in a workshop session. A key goal of the institute was for teachers to experience the learning of mathematics in new ways. 1997. even if it were possible in a practical sense to ground much of teachers' learning in their ongoing classroom practice. for example.Shepard et al. Thus we must consider whether and under what conditions teachers' out-of-classroom learning-however powerful- EDUCATIONAL RESEARCHER . 1997). need opportunities to think of mathematics or science or writing in new ways. empirical support. We begin by considering professional development experiences for practicing teachers. often complain that learning experiences outside the classroom are too removed from the day-to-day work of teaching to have a meaningful impact. In both projects. but in what contexts they are situated. Learning Experiences PracticingTeachers for One approach to staff development is to ground teachers' learning experiences in their own practice by conducting activities at school sites. Although settings away from the classroom can provide valuable opportunities for teachers to learn to think in new ways. and situational contexts that served as the basis for their instructional actions-often using videotapes of the teachers' classrooms as springboards for discussion.. It may be difficult. But the situative perspective holds that all knowledge is (by definition) situated. a member of the research/staff development team worked with children in the classrooms of some participating teachers. Engaging in learning experiences away from this setting may be necessary to help teachers "breakset"-to experience things in new ways. At first glance. observed their mathematical activities. in fact. But thereare also some problems. participants' beliefs and knowledge about teaching and learning mathematics shifted toward a perspective grounded in children's mathematical thinking. the idea that teachers' knowledge is situated in classroom practice lends support to this complaint. literature. Many of their patterns of thought and action have become automatic-resistant to reflection or change. rote aspects of the subject over the more powerful and generative aspects of the discipline. Flexer.. One is the issue of scalability:Having researchers or staff developers spend significant amounts of time working alongside teachers is not practicalon a widespread basis-at least not given the current social and economic structure of our schools.. Chiang. The situative perspective helps us see that much of what we do and think is intertwined with the particular contexts in which we act. and then shared her insights about their mathematical understandings with the teachers. pervading many currenteducational reform documents is the argument that "school"versions of mathematics. Another approach is to have teachers bring experiences from their classrooms to staff development activities. focusing on the kinds of knowing each approach addresses. the teachers attempted to enact these ideas in their classrooms. Fennema. seeming to imply that most or all learning experiences for teachers should take place in actual classrooms. Such workshops free teachers from the constraints of their own classroom situations and afford them the luxury of exploring ideas without worrying about what they are going to do tomorrow. 1997). science.Simon & Schifter. during which teachers were introduced to researchbased ideas about children's learning of addition and subtraction through a variety of experiences situated primarily in children's mathematics activities. Students and teachers. the process of integrating ideas and practices learned outside the classroom into one's ongoing instructional program is rarely simple or straightforward. and the group discussed their experiences in a subsequent workshop session. 1996)provides an example of this approach. reformers argue. however. Peterson. making it 6 likely that what they learnwill indeed influence and support their teachingpracticein meaningful ways. Teachers. The project's purpose was to help teachers design and implement classroom-based performance assessments compatible with their instructional goals in mathematics and literacy. The situative perspective thus focuses researchers'attention on how various settings for teachers' learning give rise to different kinds of knowing. These approaches offer some obvious strengths when viewed from a situative perspective. The Cognitively Guided Instruction (CGI) project (Carpenter. A second problem is that. Marion. Teachersmay need the opportunity to experience these and other content domains in a new and differentcontext. both experienced and novice. In the UC Assessment Project(Borkoet al. 1993.& Cumbo. situating learning experiences for teachers outside of the classroom may be important-indeed essential-for powerful learning. As one component. Richardson and Anders's (1994) practical argument approach to staff development provides another example. examples must be balancedwith authentic. This combination of experiences helped the teachers to develop different conceptions of mathematicsand deeper understandings of mathematical learning and teaching. The CGI project provided a similar combination of experiences for some of its participants (Fennema et al. preservice teachers do not have their own classrooms in which to situate learning activities and have limited teaching experiences from which to draw in discussions of pedagogical issues..Wolf and colleagues concluded that situating the preservice teachers' learning simultaneously in university and fieldbased experiences was crucial to the success of the course. and opportunities for reflection during weekly visits to the teachers'classrooms. and wrote a final paper on the child's response to literatureand her or his own growth as a teacher of children's literature. and assessing children together. The intensive 2-week summer institute in the SummerMathprogram..To arriveat a more complete understanding of children's literary response.will be incorporated into their classroom practice. these classroom experiences are carefully combined with university course experiences to provide coordinated opportunities for preservice teachers to learn new ideas and practices. the recommendation is to situate experiences in both the university and K-12 classrooms. Muchof the necessarywork to guide and supportpreservice teachers' growing understandings of literary response can be accomplishedin university class settings thatemphasizesubjectmatterknowledge. preservice teachersmust be involved with children-moving from the more distancedstudy of childrenin articlesand books to the here and now of working with real children . and teaching. Teachers Learning Experiences Prospective for The argumentfor providing inservice teacherswith multiple learning settings in and out of classroomshas its counterpart in preservice teacher education. required preservice teachers enrolled in her children's literature course to conduct a "reader response case study" with a young child (Wolf. Mieras. it may be that a combination of approaches. holds the best promise for fostering powerful. as well as to reflect and receive feedbackon theirteaching. Research on these projects suggests that the most appropriate staff development site depends on the specific goals for teachers' learning.. Carey. Thus. a university course infusion of new researchideas with multiple. 1996).for example. 1996. A concern. staff members provided feedback. These two projects thus used a series of settings to introduce teachers to new ideas and practices and to support the integration of these learnings into classroom practice. At the end of a 4-year period. learning. these participants received support during the school year from a CGI staff member and a mentor teacher that included observing in the teacher's classroom and discussing the children's mathematical thinking. on an assumption of apprenticeship in an existing environmentthat important learning to teach takes place as novices experience actual classrooms alongside experienced teachers. in addition to providing opportunities for teachers to participate in mathematics learning activities. to summer workshops focused on the teachers' own learning of subject matter. And.. The preservice teachers' conceptions of literary response shifted toward an increased emphasis on interpretation over comprehension. engaged them in creating similar instructional sequences for their own students.. at least implicitly. and to incorporatestrategies such as group problem solving. multidimensional changes in teachers' thinking and practices. demonstration teaching. to teachers bringing problems. Traditionally.subject matterknowledge is only a part of the necessarytraining for preserviceteachers.. Experiences situated in the teachers' own classrooms may be better suited to facilitating teachers' enactment of specific instructional practices. & Behrend. These approaches draw. (Wolfet al.however. issues. and examples from their classrooms to group discussions. For example.p. however. Carpenter. most teachers had shifted from a view of teaching as demonstrating procedures and telling children how to think to one that stresses helping children develop their mathematical knowledge through creating learning environments. posing problems. thoughtfully combining university. As they explained.literaryinteraction with children. Without such classrooms.and field-based experiences can lead to learning that can be difficult to accomplish in either setting alone. as well as workshops for furtherexploring issues related to mathematics. Wolf.though sometimes hypothetical. 134) Thus.if we expectto see preserviceteachersshift from limited comprehension-based expectationsto broaderinterpretivepossibilitiesfor literarydiscussion. summer workshops appear to be particularlypowerful settings for teachers to develop new relationships to subject matter and new insights about individual students' learning. They also came to hold higher expectations for children's capacity to interpret text and richer understandings of their roles as teachers of literature. kept detailed field notes of the reading sessions. In this case. 1996. planning lessons together. situated in a variety of contexts. Throughout the following school year. and using children's thinking to guide instructional decisions. 1996. Unlike experienced teachers.. & Mieras. 1998). We have described in this section a variety of ways to situate experienced teachers' learning. In some situations. One promising model for the use of multiple contexts combines summer workshops that introduce theoretical and research-basedideas with ongoing support during the year as teachers attempt to integrate these ideas into their instructional programs. ranging from staff developers working alongside teachers in their own classrooms. Further research is needed to better understand the complex dynamics of these multifaceted approaches to teacher learning. and nonroutine problems into their mathematics instruction. the apprenticeship model breaks down. In addition to the summer workshops. questioning children about their problem solutions. Still..teacher educators have relied upon student teaching and field experiences in K-12 classrooms as sites for learning. 7 JANUARY-FEBRUARY2000 . There is some evidence that staff development programs can successfully address this issue by systematically incorporating multiple contexts for teacher learning. & Carey. Each teacher read with a child on a weekly basis. As Sykes and Bird (1992) cautioned. Ansell. Fennema. is that K-12 classrooms embodying the kinds of teaching advocated by university teacher education programs may not be available.Wolf. Franke. use of manipulatives. the extensiveness of the databases and ease of searching them enable teachers to define and explore problems of their own choosing (Merseth & Lacey.Spiro et al. the situated cognition perspective draws on the image of apprenticeshipin a guild or a professionalcommunity as a powerful formof learning. and constructing arguments. Discourse Communities for Teachers Just as a situative perspective shifts our attention to establishing and participatingin discourse communities in K-12 classrooms. and the ability to build and store flexible and multiple links among 8 various pieces of information.Leinhardt. To address this question. & Coulson. Teachers'knowledge is situated. Commenting on this "imbalancebetween promise and empirical data. we will need to understand better the influence of school-based experiences on prospective teachers' ideas and practices. in part because schools have served as powerful discourse communities that enculturate participants (students. patterns of classroom teaching and learning have historicallybeen resistant to fundamental change. They also afford the teacher educator more control over the situations and issues that teachersencounter. they vary in the richness or complexity of classroom life portrayed. Lampert and Ball (1998). 1990). complex open-ended case materials may be important. to mirroringthe complexity of the problem space in which teachers work.and the opportunity to preparein advance for discussion and other activities in which the case materialsare used (Sykes & Bird. 1988). do not value or support criticaland reflectiveexamination of teaching practice.1992). 1992). ing practice"(McLaughlin& Talbert. Rather than putting teachers in particular classroom settings. Interactive multimedia cases and hypermedia environments have the potential to provide even richer sets of materials documenting classroom teaching and learning. community members can draw upon and incorporate each other's expertise to create rich conversations and new insights into teaching and learning. these multimedia and hypermedia materials provide a shared context for the exploration of pedagogical problems.Finally. For preserviceprograms. Some proponents suggest that cases have several advantages over other activities used in preservice and inservice teacher education. developed a hypermedia learning environment that combines videotapes of classroom mathematics lessons. as well as comparisons of cases and case methods with other instructional materials and approaches. Sarason. however. they allow teachers to explore the richness and complexity of genuine pedagogical problems. administrators)into traditional school activities and ways of thinking (Cohen. teacher journals.But this image requires a stable. 1989. "the myriad claims for the use of cases and case methods far exceed the volume and quality of research specific to cases and case methods in teacher education" (p. Further. annotating. Despite vocal advocates and an increased use of cases in recent years there is much to learn about their effectiveness as instructional tools. They can come much closer. 15). cases provide vicarious encounters with those settings. student notebooks. 1990. Throughwhat activitiesand situationsdo teachers learn new practicesthat may not be routinelyreinforced in the work setting?(p. DiscourseCommunities Experienced Teachers for A number of educational reformers have argued that for teachersto be successful in constructingnew roles they need opportunities to participate "in a professional community that discusses new teachermaterials and strategies and that supports the risk taking and struggle entailed in transformthe 1993.&Anderson. instructional materials. Some media. we explore existing research and unresolved issues concerning the role of discourse communities in supporting teachers learning to teach in new ways. Indeed. provide shared experiences for teachers to examine together. Case-based teaching provides another approach for creating meaningful settings for teacher learning (Doyle.Spiro. for example. In this section.then the basicimageryof apprenticeshipseems to break down. We may learn. The nonlinearity of such hypermedia systems. 1996. notion of distributed cognition suggests that when diverse groups of teacherswith differenttypes of knowledge and expertise come together in discourse communities. Case-Based Learning Experiences Teachers for Teachers'learning experiences in university classrooms typically entail reading about and discussing ideas." Merseth (1996) noted. In addressing these questions. using multiple perspectives and frameworks (Feltovich.Merseth. such as reflecting the confluence of the many constraints on a teachers'problem solving. As with actual classroom experiences. and teacher and student interviews.Like traditional cases. can convey more of the complexity of classroom events than written cases. so too it draws attention to the discourse communities in which teacherswork and learn. that considerablelimiting of complexity is desirablefor some purposes. Although all cases limit the information provided. 501) An important question facing researchersand teacher educators is whether experiences can be designed that maintain the situatedness of practica and student teaching while avoiding the "pull" of the traditional school culture.p. EDUCATIONALRESEARCHER . however.cases avoid the problem of placing prospective teachersin settings that do not embody the kinds of teaching advocated by university teachereducators. Cases. for example.Further. such as illustrating particular teaching concepts or strategies. however. their learning experiences in K-12 classrooms usually involve actually engaging in the activities of teaching. satisfactorypractice that the novice can join.and if there is no reinforcing cultureto supportsuch practice. These discourse communities play central roles in shaping the way teachers view their world and go about their work. it will be important to understand and take into account the variety of purposes and uses of case-based pedagogy.. Questions for research include differences in what is learned from the rich and open-ended experiences provided by hypermedia cases versus more structuredand focused written and videotaped cases. allow users to consider multiple perspectives on an event simultaneously (Feltovich et al. For other purposes.. If the aim of teachereducationis a reformedpractice that is not readily available. Feltovich. teachers. 738). 1997.Coulson. such as videotape. 1997. Sykes & Bird.1993). as well as tools for browsing. Spiro.1990. students' work. 1988). This experience of the setting may afford reflection and critical analysis that is not possible when acting in the setting. the ability to visit and revisit various sources of information quickly and easily. but this truism creates a puzzle for reform. The existing cultures and discourse communities in many schools. In the case of staff development. 1992) worked with a group of teachers to elaboratethe concept of instructional conversation---amode of instruction that emphasizes active student involvement in goal and meaningoriented discussions.As a result. Maskingdisagreements vidual strugglesto practicewisely. This dilemma is analogous to one faced by the classroom teacherwho wants to empower children to build upon their own thinking while simultaneously ensuring that they learn expected subject-mattercontent.in turn. also may introduce new tensions into the professional development experience. are the "learners" teachersand the "content"is typically new teaching practices and forms of pedagogical thinking. including "conceptual inventions.and critiques" (Shulman. 1992). Researchers. also makesit hides the indidifficultto disagree.Thislackimpedes the capacityto grow.This individualismnot only makes it difficult it to develop any sense of commonstandards. as well as teachers. Together. Members of the university team gained new insights about the time. they all illustratethe bringing together of teachersand universitybased researchers or staff developers into new forms of discourse communities focused on teaching and learning. The university teams in all three projects addressed these issues of balance by avoiding the extremes of either viewing teachers as merely implementing someone else's pedagogical approach or attempting to empower them without introducing new pedagogical ideas. basis for real and helpful debate. participants developed principlesof instructionalconversationsfor elementaryclassrooms as they engaged in instructionalconversations themselves.(Thomaset al. came away with new insights about teaching and learning. and the cultural and instructionalcontexts of their classrooms. the ideas that emerged in the discourse communities created within the projects were "jointproductions" that furthered the understanding of all participants. and so removesan opfromcritiqueand portunityforlearning.the collectiveunderstandingof the group is thus advanced.whereasothersbringspecialized knowledge of students. Richardson and Anders's (1994) practical argument approach to staff development (see previous discussion) also used new forms of discourse among teachers as a professional development tool. like teachers.. the particular settings in which they taught. collegiality among faculty within and across departments was enhanced. and trust required to reform the professional culture of teaching (Thomas et al. Teachers DiscourseCommunities Preservice for Traditionally. seeking an appropriate balance between presenting information and facilitating teachers' construction of new practices. New kinds of discourse communities for teachers. In considering these issues of balance. In anotherproject. Together. Staffdevelopers. Teachers provided knowledge about their students. 1998) high-school teachers of English and history gathered with university-based educators to read books. which represent these different degrees of pedagogical and disciplinaryexpertise..p. .including linguisticminoritystudents and students enrolled in special education programs.1998.must negotiate theirway between the learners'current thinking and the subjectmatter or content to be learned.. Although these three projectsdiffered in their goals. and design an interdisciplinary humanities curriculum. Their staff development team brought research-based ideas about learning and instructional practices to the task of developing and examining practical arguments. some are extremely knowledgeable aboutthe subjectmatter.while the teachersbrought intimate knowledge of their own classrooms and teaching practicesto the conversations(Saunderset al. In addition. By drawing on each individual's private understandings.Ball (1994) characterized the discussions in many staff development sessions as "style shows" that provide few opportunities for meaningful reflection and growth: The commonview that "eachteacherhas to find his or her own style"is a directresultof workingwithin a discourse of practicethat maintainsthe individualismand isolation of teaching.teachershave no forum for debating and imTo proving their understandings. while potentially powerful tools for improving pedagogical practice.. reflective discourse community envisioned by Ball (1994) and by McLaughlinand Talbert(1993).1991. But the view of knowledge as socially constructed makes it clear that an importantpart of learning to teach is becoming enculturated into the teaching commu9 JANUARY-FEBRUARY2000 .preservice teacher education programs have focused more on the development of individual knowledge and competencies thought to be important for teaching than on the establishment of discourse communities for prospective teachers. (p. they bring research-basedknowledge. Goldenberg played a criticalrole in guiding instructionalconversationswith teachers.p.Goldenberg. 27) that can contributeto the improvement of teaching. can bring to such discourse communities craft knowledge about pedagogical practices. effort. Instead.& Hamann.Thomas. Teachers. Central to this work was the idea that each participant brings unique knowledge and beliefs to a professional learning community: Theindividualteachers.. and their own teaching practice. 1986. For example. 1998). Myhre.bring with themvery different areas of expertise.Saunders. the extent that teaching with no realsense of of remainsa smorgasbord alternatives there is no basis for comparingor choosing community. clarifications. Grossman. 1998.Politelyrefraining challenge. the university teams in all three projects struggled with the question of how much guidance and structureto bring to the conversations.Wineburg. their own students.In the Community of Learners project(Wineburg& Grossman.Goldenbergand colleagues (Goldenberg & Gallimore. Teachersalso bring differentpedagogical understandings and expertise to the group discussions. 16) Several recent professional development programs provide existence proofs for the kind of critical. and the curriculum of the school was affected. & Woolworth. discuss teaching and learning. they drew upon the unique sets of knowledge and skills offered by researchersand teachers. no from among alternatives. 23) Preliminary findings indicate that an intellectual community for teachers developed within the high school. we are reminded of what Richardson(1992)labeled the agenda-setting dilemma: staff developer wants to see teachers' practice The change in particular directions while empowering the teachers themselves to be meaningfully involved in determining the changes.these two groups of participants can learn new ways of thinking about their practices and simultaneously createnew forms of discourse about teaching. University participants can bring to these communities the criticaland reflective stance and modes of discourse that are important norms within the academic community. Another important feature of prospective teachers' learning during field-based experiences is the mentoring they receive from more knowledgeable others-the teacher educators and experienced teachers with whom they work. student investigations. Marx and colleagues have revised PIViTbased on studies of how teachers use it and the supports they need. talk. Means. and act as a teacher. The situative perspective provides lenses for examining more thoughtfully the potential of new technologies for supporting and transforming teachers' work and learning. Peck & Dorricot. 1998. 1993. however. frequency of use. Future research EDUCATIONAL RESEARCHER . critique. concepts. how professional development schools support and constrain mentoring relationships like the one Beasley created with her teacher intern. Another important issue is how novices can work effectively with multiple mentors who hold varied conceptions of teaching and learning-some from the university and some from the school. and attitudes toward computers. presentation tools that can replace overhead projectors. teacher activities. a calculator or a word processor). Such tools can support teachers in doing what they already do. One example is the ProjectIntegration Visualization Tool (PIViT. 1992).Office of Technology Assessment..importanttasks facing teachereducation researchers include identifying key characteristicsof field-based experiences that can foster new ways of teaching. Teachers who used PIViT to develop and adapt curriculum for their classrooms were able to create multiple representationsof their projectdesigns that would not have been possible had they used linear planning. 1994). 1998). elaborate. While the teachers together learned about the new content to be taught.g. and database management systems have fundamentally changed many tasks of the business world. Beasley's scaffolding played a critical role in guiding the intern's pedagogical thinking. for example. Although this distinction oversimplifies the complex interweaving of performance and pedagogical functions. 1990. and determining whether and how these experiences can be created within existing school cultures. spreadsheets. distributing cognition across persons and tools expands a system's capacity for innovation and invention. Feiman-Nemser and Beasley (1997) explored mentoring in their case study of a cooperating teacher (Beasley) working with a teacher intern to plan a lesson for the second/third-grade class they taught. the actual use of computers in schools has been rather limited (Becker. and artifacts..g. however. In discussing the use of computers in education. and reflection are the norms. Professional development schools may offer one possibility for creating such experiences (Holmes Group. Thus.Additional research is needed to determine what adjustmentsare requiredto ensure its applicability to other subject areas. risk taking. 1995). We know little.. Using PIViT.. and revise "project designs"graphical representations of projects that include central questions. The Importance of Tools In the world outside of school. they transformit. we should simultaneously investigate the relationship between these mini discourse communities and the larger communities within which mentoring takes place. while helping them think about curriculum and instruction in new ways. intelligent activities often depend upon resources beyond the individuals themselves such as physical tools and notational systems (Pea. Blumenfeld. The most widely adopted tools are those that fit easily within the existing conceptual and social organization of classrooms-drill and practice programs that can be used by individual students without interfering with wholeclass activity. enhance. beliefs. And we know even less about whether and how professional development schools can be organized to meet the learning needs of both experienced and novice teachers. about the impact of these communities on experienced teachers' knowledge. 1993). researchers and teacher educators have developed computer-based technologies with considerable potential for supporting and transforming teachers' work. however.1993). Krajcik. As we pointed out earlier. such enculturation can be problematicwhen existing professional communities do not represent the kinds of reformed teaching advocated by university teacher education programs (Sykes & Bird. and tools for keeping attendance and grades. 1998). Although the view of the cooperating teacher as a mentor or coach to the novice is a common one. a simulation designed to change a learner's understanding of a mathematical concept).& Soloway. Stallings & Kowalski. We first consider tools that can support. Numerous writers have argued that computers and other new 10 technologies have the potential to transform teaching and learning in schools as well (Means. curricular objectives. 1990). Many of these tools do not merely enhance cognition. As we continue to explore various approaches to the mentoring of preservice teachers and seek to identify characteristics of successful mentoring. teachers should be able to use computer-based planning tools such as PIViTto design projectsfor any grade level or subject area. Salomon tools.or when they embody norms and expectations that do not support the experimentation. which focus primarily on changing the user's competencies (e. and pedagogical tools. Most professional development schools have as a central component the establishment of new learning communities where inquiry. 1994. but have little potential for transforming the work of teachers or the nature of teaching and learning in classrooms (Marx. It would be useful to know. These people form a type of "mini discourse community" within which the preservice teacher is enculturated into the teaching profession. productivity tools such as word processors. or transform teachers' work and then focus on those explicitly designed to support teachers' learning. In theory.Marx et al. Toolsto Enhance Transform and Performance the Work Teaching of Despite claims about the power of new technologies to transformeducation. and have shown it to be applicable to multiple areas of science (Marxet al. More recently. and reflection required to transformpractice (McLaughlin& Talbert. it is useful for organizing our discussion.teachers can create. a productivity tool designed to aid teacher planning. Most research on the use of technology by teachers. For example. and practices. word-processing tools for preparing instructional materials.which (1993b)made a distinction between performance enhance or change how a task is accomplished (e. has focused on availability of new technologies.nity-learning to think. This tool was developed to be consistent with how teachers actually plan. 1994). however. little systematic inquiry has been conducted on the nature of this mentoring role. and colleagues also created a technology-based tool that can support teacherlearning and professional development efforts (Krajcik. it is not surprising that teachers need guidance and support to engage in productive technology-based discourse about teaching and learning (Ruopp. situated. CaPPs can be used by teachers to explore new visions of teaching. As we discussed earlier. new computer technologies can support the learning of novice and experienced teachers in ways that build on assumptions about the social. Further complexity is added to the picture because conversations over e-mail and listserve forums typically take place over time. after carefully examining the empirical evidence.g.Marx et al. 1996). CaPPs. Given these features of communication technologies. work spaces for writing. Given our understanding of discourse communities.These assumptions framed the students' inquiry and were rarely challenged by doing the investigations. classroom management.Blumenfeld.Electronicmail. For example. Such asynchronous communication may afford a different sort of reflection and analysis than face-to-facediscourse. with their new and flexible ways of representing and connecting information. The Student LearningEnvironment(SLE. unlikely to change the nature or form of teachers' professional interactions. Gal. McMahon. As Cuban (1986)observed.. Lampert& Ball. informed in part by the situative perspective. there is some evidence that teachers' network-based communication may not be particularly substantive (DiMarco& Muscella. Marx. they will shape and limit teachers' electronic interactions. Rather. or whether students were understanding fractions. Watts & Castle. 1983). & Starr. Like the SLE. The researchteams that developed SLEand CaPPs identified a number of unanswered questions about what and how users learn from these realisticand complex depictions of innovative classroom practice. Further. Computers and new communication technologies also have the potential to transform teaching and learning in classrooms and the work of teachers by providing new avenues to access distributed expertise. 1998).1993. that planning tools such as PIViTcan be used to create communities of practice in which teachers learn from each other by sharing common templates and models of instructional innovations.. provides one image of the possible (Shulman. described briefly in our discussion of case-based teacher education. whereas the SLE presents teachers with a large corpus of information from which they develop and explore their own questions.Urdan. Blumenfeld. workshops. some students changed their minds about particular features of classroom life. and distributed nature of knowledge and learning. At the same time. Based on teachers' experiences with CaPPs.g. But just as the existing norms and practices of teachers' discourse communities shape their face-to-face interactions. teachers' access to the expertise of others has traditionally been limited primarily to printed materials and face-to-face interactions (e. The students' investigations in this multimedia environment sometimes pushed their thinking beyond where it was when they started.we need to better understand the impact of virtual communities of practice and on-line conversations on teachers' relationships with their colleagues. however. 1992). these new communication opportunities raise a number of questions and concerns. visual. such as whether boys were being called on more than girls.. Drayton. Information systems such as the World-WideWebprovide access to digital librariesand vast amounts of information in print. users groups. but also requiresthe establishment of new norms and strategies for interacting. presents teachers with an organized set of selected video clips depicting particular teaching issues. instructional strategies. to maximize its potential for fostering educationally worthwhile conversations among teachers.1993. For example. each of which tells a story about how a particularteacher resolved a challenge associated with enacting Project Based Science. the investigations sometimes reinforcedbeliefs that the students brought with them into the teacher education program.might also explore the possibility. In contrast. Krajcik. and video form. For example. with participants reading what has come before and adding their contributions. through inservice activities. 1995.the collection and interpretation of records of practice simply reinforced the students' entering assumptions. exploring features of the classrooms such as teacher-student relationships. & Pfister. written commentary 11 JANUARY-FEBRUARY2000 . As Marx and colleagues (1998) noted. it is tempting to assume that simply introducing new technologies into schools will transform educational practice. CaPPs (Casebook of Project Practices) is a collection of multimedia cases. Marx and colleagues (1998) called for researchto determine the structures and scaffolds that are necessary to support teacher learning (e. Do virtual professional communities detract from school-based communities? Do teachers shift to participating in on-line conversations at the expense of face-to-face conversations with other teachers in their buildings? Toolsto SupportTeachers' Pedagogical Learning In addition to transforming the tasks of teaching. this should come as no surprise. rather than mathematical content or curriculum. Soloway. Additional research is needed to determine how such guidance should be designed and made available. 1998. Marx and colleagues suggested that multimedia cases are good vehicles for presenting teachers with visions of what innovative teaching might look like. simultaneously becoming familiar with new technological tools and exploring new ideas about teaching and learning.multimedia systems. however. can enable teachers to explore unfamiliar pedagogical practices and various problems of pedagogy. & Brade. in itself. Lampert and Ball examined 68 investigations conducted by teacher education students and identified several patterns. suggested by Marx and colleagues. Most students saw teaching and learning through pedagogical and psychological lenses. open up myriad possibilities for interacting with colleagues and experts in various fields. Simply providing new media and access to communication with a much wider circle of colleagues and experts is.Blumenfeld. and conferences). just as Ball (1994) noted the lack of critical reflection in many teacher discourse communities. 1992). and other on-line forums. Within this environment teachers investigate pedagogical problems that arise as they view and read about Ball's teaching of mathematics in a third-grade classroom and Lampert'sin a fifth-grade classroom. and student participation. The initial questions these teacher education students posed when conducting their investigations were typically based on strong normative assumptions such as their notions about a "good" classroomenvironment or "helpful"teacher. g. and curriculum in ways that connect to and inform their work in classrooms. whose hallmark is replicable. ideas about the social and distributed nature of cognition help us think in new ways about the role of technological tools in creating new types of discourse communities for teachers. and distributed across persons and tool-might offer those of us seeking to understand and improve teacher learning.senior educationalresearchers likely to find that they are still working on the same questions that confrontedthem at the beginning. and "what conclusions or questions really found their way into their thinking" (p. By starting with the assumption that all knowledge is situated in contexts. Thorndike and Dewey debated the nature of transfer and the connections between what people learn in school and their lives outside of school.g. These issues. including unresolved issues regarding the guidance and support needed to ensure that conversations within these communities areeducationally meaningful and worthwhile. 1991) and to createenvironments that support meaningful teacher learning (e.At the end of long and distinare guished careers.by other teachers). 1994). 160). in various forms. 1996. agreed-upon knowledge. successfully introducing a concept such as negative numbers to one's peers in a micro-teaching situation. When a person demonstrates some knowledge or skill in one setting but not another (e.g. Only by pushing beyond this general idea.. As a result. Given the enduring nature of these questions and the debates surrounding them. First. but an attempt to recast the relationship between what people know and the settings in which they know-between the knower and the known (Greeno. 1997). Teachereducators have long struggled to define what teachers should know (e. Rosenshine & Stevens.. and then teaching students to applythat knowledge in multiple settings. and distributed cognition provide powerful lenses for examining teaching. however.his field would be education. Similarly. reconstructingthe very foundations of the field over which theirmentorslaboredduring their entirecareers. the quest for knowledge about education and learning leaves scholars feeling as though they areperpetuallystrugglingto move aheadbut gettingnowhere.If Sisyphuswere a scholar.. They have resulted in solutions as varied as teaching carefully specified behavioral competenciesbelieved to be centralto effective teaching (e.. The educational community (and our society at large) has typically considered knowledge to be something that persons haveand can take from one setting to another.Stallings & Kowalski. National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. and settings emphasizing teachers' learning of subject matter. were we able to identify specific advantages and limitations of the various contexts within which teachers' learning might be meaningfully situated: their own classrooms. Unlike the hardsciences. in contrast. 9) Questions about the nature of knowing and the processes of learning have not been matters only for academic debate. group settings where participants' teaching is the focus of discussion. The situative perspective is not an argument againsttransfer.it is important to recognize that the situative perspective entails a fundamental redefinition of learning and knowing. what is to be gained by considering teacher knowledge and teacher learning from a situative perspective? Can this perspective help us think about teaching and teacher learning more productively? We believe it can-that the language and conceptual tools of social.g.Sykes & Bird. Almost a century ago... Holmes Group. 1986) to building teacher education 12 programs around immersion in public school classrooms (e. 1996. these ideas about cognition have helped us.however. "carefulanalysis of how teachers learn from multimedia and how they incorporate their learning into their daily practices will enable designers to create systems tailored to different teacher learning needs" (p. 41). For example. The fundamental issues about what it means to know and learn addressed by the situative perspective have engaged scholars for a long time. Howey & Zimpher. Labaree(1998) argued in a recent ER article that this sort of continual revisiting of fundamental issues is endemic to the field of education. 1996). 1986. Conclusion In this article we set out to consider what the situative perspective on cognition-that knowing and learning are situated in physical and social contexts. 1990. Holmes Group. 1992). to examine more closely the question of where to situate teachers' learning.. these ideas are not entirely new. Anderson et al. But this clarity comes only when we look closely at these concepts and their nuances. This view is consistent with the educational approach-prevalent in teachereducation as well as K-12 classrooms-of teaching general knowledge. but having difficulty teaching the same concept to children in a classroom mathematics lesson) a common view is that the person has the appropriate knowledge but is not able to accessthat knowledge in the new setting. to see more clearly the strengths and limitations of various practices and settings for teacher learning.. As Marx and colleagues suggested. we were able to provide support for the general argument that teachers' learning should be grounded in some aspect of their teaching practice. has written about the impossibility of teachers determining what their students really know (and the imperative to try in spite of EDUCATIONALRESEARCHER . Carter.And the new generationof researchers they have trainedwill be takingup these questions as well. Ball (1997). in our own work. It is easy to misinterpret scholars in the situative camp as arguing that transferis impossible-that meaningful learning takes place only in the very contexts in which the new ideas will be used (e.g.(p.Reder & Klatzky.g. Determining the answers to questions such as these is an important challenge for ongoing research on teacher learning and teacher education. teacher learning. 1990). These struggles have played out in ongoing attempts to teach preservice teachers important principles of learning. 1990. education and other soft knowledge fields deal with the inherent unpredictability of human action and values. We close with two issues that warrant further consideration. situated. As we pointed out earlier. teaching. and the practices of teacher education (both preservice and inservice) in new ways.They wondered whether and when teacher education students learned from one another. Lampert and Ball (1998) noted the need for further examination of prospective teachers' reasoning as they explore teaching and learning within the SLE. social in nature. often in abstract forms. have continued to occupy the attention of psychologists and educational psychologists ever since (Greeno et al. EducationalResearcher. (1993). H. 1988). Salomon(Ed. Good. & Cumbo. and implications for professional development. L. 1989. Arlington. and accessed for use in similar situations. She argued that teachers' sincere desire to help students and to believe that students have learned may lead them to "ask leading questions. and teachers of teachers. R. Note Contributions of the two authors to this article were equal. Brown. Gordon.. 18(1). Ball (1997)found it was impossible to determine how.. In other words. P. In B. F. T. H.). D. organized around the tasks that teachers accomplish in classroom settings. Woolfolk (Ed. Developing mathematicsreform:Whatdon't ses? Paper presented at Conference on Teacher Enhancement in Mathematics K-6. & Duguid.. and hear more than what is being said because they so hope for student learning" (p. Ball suggested that this unavoidable influence means we must recast the question of what children "really know. These ideas about the relationships among knowing. though often more subtle.Distributed and cognitions: Psychological educational Research 26. learning. for projects in which researchersassume a nonparticipatoryrole. Handbookof researchon teachereducation(pp. the settings in which we study teachers' learning. Journal. teachers. those who hold a situ- ative perspective. the understandings and insights expressed by children during interactions with her were supported by her implicit (unconscious) guiding and structuring. Distributed expertise in the classroom.. and then how to help them apply this knowledge in the classroom. J. As researchers we inherently become a part of.as researcherstrying to understand what teachers know and how they learn. But for now. we must be particularly attentive to the support and guidance that we provide. Rather than negating the idea of transfer. Teachers' knowledge and learning to teach. Carpenter. 18-21. K. now you don't" pattern. Teachers' developing ideas and practices about mathematics performance assessment: Successes. what appear to be general principles are actually intertwined collections of more specific patterns that hold across a variety of situations. learning and knowing are situated. teachers must consider how their interactions affect their assessments of what students know. Cobb. 499-532. Carter. Houston..). (1989)." asking instead what they can do and how they think in particular contexts. 20(1)..Researchersworking within the interpretive tradition and. American Educational and education. Carter. Rather than pretending to be objective observers. Collins. 23(7). R. With the shift to cognitive perspectives. Like Sisyphus. in addressing these questions. 13-19. L. and desire in trying to hear children. M. & J. M. we must be careful to consider our role in influencing and shaping the phenomena we study. Fennema. 32-42. November). A parallel argument can be made for teacher learning.). JANUARY-FEBRUARY2000 . 769-818).. Ball. Leinhardt. Borko. J. 6-7.Englewood of (pp. (1989). and for taking them into consideration as we design. C.. D. It is this sort of thinking in new ways about what and how teachers know that the situative perspective affords. TheComputingTeacher. & Doyle. of teachers' knowledge is situated within the contexts of classrooms and teaching (Carter. VA. remind us that we are inevitably part of the contexts in which we seek to understand teachers' knowing and learning. What do students know? Facing challenges of distance. L. P.Educational Researcher. In the heyday of behaviorist perspectives. W. (1994). In examining her own work with children. Peterson. Internationalhandbook teachers of and teaching(Vol. stored together with characteristicfeatures of the classrooms and activities. (1989). J. 13. H. for example. we will not resolve these issues concerning the relationships between knowing and context and between researcherand research context once and for all. M. & Campione.5-11. (1997). J. Chiang. Haberman. Goodson (Eds. R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. cognitive perspectives: Form versus substance.this impossibility).). In A.. S. 800). enact. L. S. some scholars have argued that some. Reder. & Simon. Flexer. & Simon. Instructional computer use: Findings from a national survey of school and teacher practices.the situative perspective helps us redefine it. Rutherford. (1993). context. (1994. A. A. Further. From the situative perspective. Becker. many of the efforts to study teachers' thinking and decision making maintained this goal of detached objectivity.This professional knowledge is developed in context. EducationalResearcher. Marion.. (1996). II. A student "demonstrates mastery" of odd and even numbers on a standardized test yet is unable to give a convincing explanation of the difference between even and odd. the situative perspective can provide important conceptual tools for exploring these complex relationships. A. H. Mayfield. Based on this "now you see it. (1997). C. L. (1990). and the extent to which.. Ash. As teacher educators we have tended to think about how to facilitate teachers' learning of general principles." recording what transpired but not influencing it.. more recently. Educational 26(1). if not most. L. We rotate order of authorship in our writing. and settings lead to the second issue-the role that researchersplay in the process of learning to teach. K. and study programs to facilitate teacher learning. Situated cognition and the culture of learning. In considerations (pp. Biddle. Ball argued that the contexts in which students learn and in which we assess what they know are inextricable aspects of their knowledge.. Silkula (Eds. An insight demonstrated by a student during a small-group discussion "disappears"when the student tries to explain it to the whole class. M. Using knowledge of children's mathematical thinking in classroom teaching: An experimental study. K.. E. Carterand Doyle. This issue is obvious when individuals take on multiple roles of researchers. Teaching and Teacher Education. A. we will push these boulders up the hill again and again. Reder. fill in where students leave space. (1997). Where is the mind? Constructivist and sociocultural perspectives on mathematical development. P.. P. R. we know aboutteacher learning-butwouldmake goodworking hypothe- G. it is equally important. As Labaree suggested.. In this vein. M. 188-228). Dordrecht: Kluwer. process-product researchers worked hard to avoid this issue by making their observations of teachers' behaviors as objective as possible. Classroom research as a resource for the graduate preparation of teachers. Nakagawa. Researchper- Cliffs. A. 1990. D.. 13 on spectives thegraduate preparation teachers 51-68). In W. References Anderson. 25(4). and help to shape. Carter & Doyle. Similarly. Brown. J. V. & Loef. 291-310). New York: Macmillan. J. T. pp. Ball. & I. Situated learning Anderson. 259-278. the goal of the observer was to be a "fly on the wall. Situative versus Researcher... K. stumbling blocks.. NJ: Prentice Hall. suggested that much of expert teachers' knowledge is event-structured or episodic. E. Weaving stronger fabric: The pedagogical promise of hypermedia and case methods in teacher education. pp. (1996). Jackson (Ed.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Cobb. 159-180). R.Washington. (Ed.). Transfer: Training for performance. Distributedcognitions:Psychologicaland educationalconsiderations(pp.. DC: National Academy Press. Marx. (1991).). Talkingabout science: The case of an electronic conversation.). (1991). 7-15. Educational Development Center. (1993). Calfee (Eds.27. Carpenter. DC: American Psychological Association. J. Resnick. NJ: Erlbaum. C. New York: Teachers College Press. 1223-1296). In F. In M. V.).. LabNet: Towarda communityof practice. & S. K. October). on of New York: Macmillan. (1991). W. (1980).. Murray (Ed. S. Merseth. B. Indianapolis.. Salomon (Ed.). J. Learning in school and out.. Reder.). Teacher Quarterly.). J. & Resnick. (1989). II.). National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. M. (1995. Washington. 4-15. S. P. Educational researchers: Living with a lesser form of knowledge. P. Teachers and technology:Making the connection. Carpenter. Greeno. Fennema. M. MI: Author. E. 108-126). 16(9). Washington. V. The reflex arc concept in psychology. Case methods in teacher education. E. G. 191-220).). Indiana University. Expertisein context: Human and machine (pp. M. B. P. A. M. In P. S. 32-60). J. C. J. Lave. Blumenfeld. 53. (1998). & Zimpher. J. & Wenger. J. MA. R. (1993). M. Teachers' professionallearning (pp. Jacobs. E.. Handbook research teaching(3rd ed. H.. (1993). K. McMahon. 3. 465-505). (1996). B. & Stevens. National Research Council. Berkeley: McCutchan. (1996). Understanding teachers' self-sustaining.. DC: American Psychological Association. Teaching. T. In G. VA: Author. A theoryof teacherchange and the practiceof staff development:A case in reading instruction (pp. Bjork(Eds. & R. learning. Technologyand education reform:The reality behind the promise. R.). 403-434. A. Stanford University. Intellectual teamwork:Social and technologicalfoundations of cooperativework (pp. 5-12. MI: Author. (1988). Handbook of research on teacher education (2nd ed. Goldenberg. In P. Peck.). M. EducationalResearcher. Hutchins. spectives in theory and practice. G.. In P. 18-25. L. National Education Goals Panel. New York: Teachers College Press. (1997).. K. 5-26. 722-744) New York: Macmillan.. Charles & E. 283-299.. 287-300. Educational Researcher. J. (1990). Silver (Eds. L. G. L. Teaching& TeacherEducation. Holmes Group. Levi. DiMarco. Cambridge.multimedia. D. R. A longitudinal study of learning to use children's thinking in mathematics instruction. Egido (Eds. T. (1994). R. B. A working paper of the National Committee on Science Education Standards and Assessment. Theteachingand assessing of mathematical problem solving (pp. Washington.. 125-146). & Beasley. Ruopp. 11-14. believing: Enhancing team and individual performance(pp. R. 356-370. Pea. Franke. (1998). J. In J. EDUCATIONAL RESEARCHER . E. Campbell. Leadership. Excellencein educating teachersof science (pp. K. Means. R. Teachingand TeacherEducation.. B.. A. & Gallimore. K. Teachersand machines:The classroomuse of technology since 1920. B.East Lansing. V.. A. The social organization of distributed cognition. Learning. 13-20. D. The situativity of knowing. Cuban. M. In B. Teachingand TeacherEducation. (1987). (1994).. Washington. A. Cambridge. S. Teasley (Eds.Washington. & Talbert. L. Mentoring as assisted performance: A case of co-planning. 283-307). Dana (Eds. K. (1991). I. Wittrock (Ed. & Behrend. Feltovich.. Lampert. G. Krajcik. Perspectiveson socially shared cognition (pp. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Collins. Dewey. (1990). L. Rosenshine. W. In R. Education Doyle. London: Falmer. (1986). generative change in the context of professional development. DC: Author. (1997). L.). Cognition and learning. (Eds. Merseth. (1998)..).14. Constructivist teachereducation(pp. Tomorrow's schools:Principles the design of profor fessional development. 3. Educational Researcher.and mathematics: Investigationsof real practice. (1994). DC: for Author. (1998). C. Resnick.. (1996). OH: ERIC Clearinghouse. P.Hillsdale. In V.Paper prefor sented at the Council of Chief State School Officers 1990 Summer Institute: "Restructuring Learning.. Asoko. Sikula (Ed. L. Paper presented at the Computer Supported Collaborative Learning '95 conference. & T.17(1). Practices of distributed intelligence and designs for education. L. In J. L. T. F. Handbook educationalpsyof chology (pp. E. (1993).. S. (1994). Michaels. (1988). 47-87). Richardson. pp. L.J.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Franke. Spiro. 33-52. & Muscella.9.). National science education standards: An enhanced sampler. (1991). DC: Author. L. mathematicsand culture in everydaylife. Integrating knowledge bases: An upper elementary teacher preparation program emphasizing the teaching of science. & C. J.8.. Hillsdale. Richardson (Ed. M. 67-80. The national educationgoals report: Building a nation of learners. D. ConResearcher.. structing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Fennema. N. Toward high and rigorousstandards the teachingprofession. M. Resnick. T. Fish. New technologies for teacher professional development. Why we use technology? Educational 51(7). Richardson. Is therea text in this class? Theauthorityof interpretivecommunities. The agenda-setting dilemma in a constructivist staff development process.. R.). C. F. (1999). New York: Macmillan. Contexts that matter teaching for and learning:Strategicopportunities meeting the nation's educational for goals. W. NJ: Erlbaum. Lave. Berliner & R.. Blumenfeld. & Klatzky. In L. S. C. P. & Ball. Situated knowledge and expertise in teaching. E. Feiman-Nemser. In L. 27-84). Cases and case methods in teacher education.. The study of teacher change. B. (1991). & Soloway. & Scott.. Cognition in practice:Mind. M. (1990). Krajcik. 1-20). 4-12. (1986). D..). L. DC: Author. (1990). PsychologicalReview. J. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Levine. E. Capturing craft knowledge in teaching. MA: Harvard University Press. R. & Borko.. Howey. Teaching practice: Plus qa change . and research.). Fromisolation to interaction?Computer-mediated communications and teacher professional development. R. (1994). Resnick. (1990). London: Falmer Press.Reston. Contributing to educational change: Perspectives on researchand practice(pp.27. EducationalLeadership.. Calderhead (Ed. D. Stanford.remembering. E. 146-168). & Dorricot.. Feltovich. D. M. 15-46). Literacyas reasoningwithin multiple discourses: Implications policy and educationalreform. M. (1988). R.. In J. Educational 23(7). Leinhardt. Treating mathematics as an ill-structured discipline. In D. 5-17. Tomorrow'steachers. 37-54). B. Hoffman (Eds. H." Literacies Institute. Drayton.. On claims that answer the wrong questions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.New York: Teachers College Press. (1996). Rubba. & S. R. (1989). (1997). Good. NJ: Erlbaum. S. 49(3). Colombus. In D. L. & Empson. When the problem is not the question and the solution is not the answer: Mathematical knowing and teaching. Changing teaching takes more than a one-shot workshop. J. 27(8). L. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. J. B.. L. M. (1993). (1992). Office of Technology Assessment. Teasley (Eds. (1993). CA: Center for Research on the Context of Secondary School Teaching. K. Labaree. S.19(2).. New York: Cambridge University Press. Cognitive and situated learning per28(2). (1896). & Coulson. Hutchins.. & Starr. K. 376-391). & Anders. (1995). Greeno. Resnick. 14 Leinhardt. pp.. (1997). & the Middle School Through Applications Project Group. M. The technology of team navigation. (1998). 29-63. Levine. Ansell. Richardson (Ed. Kraut. Ford. Teacher learning: Implications of new views of cognition. J. R. Lampert.. IN. Issues of expert flexibility in contexts characterized by complexity and change. Druckman & R.. J. P.. The teachereducator'shandbook: Building a knowledgebasefor the preparation of teachers(pp. Holmes Group. & Lacey. Educational Researcher. P. 14.. & Pfister. Teaching and TeacherEducation.Washington. J. Goodson (Eds. 69-72. (1986).. B. EducationalResearcher. E. MA: AAAI/ MIT Press. T. Putnam. B. Internationalhandbookof teachers& teaching (Vol.).).. Shared cognition: Thinking as social practice. Journalfor Researchin MathematicsEducation. & I. Cohen. In V. Galegher. Newton.East Lansing. Teaching functions. Leach. American EducationalResearchJournal. V. Perspectiveson socially sharedcognition (pp. Biddle. Situatedlearning:Legitimateperipheral participation. J. C. Hillsdale. American Psychologist. D. K. R. G. Curriculumand evaluationstandardsfor school mathematics. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Researchagendafor mathematics education:Vol. M. Driver.. A. 25-56). & Bowers. L. 26(1). McLaughlin. (1990). Mortimer. Greeno. Gal. Patterns in prospective teachers: Guides for designing preservice programs. & O'Connor. !!!i•i•:iIii ~ I~!!!•i!~i•iii•::•!•i!i~~~!•~~iiii!! i~ ~~~• ~ g into high gear.i. Research on professional development schools.. Computersas cognitive tools (pp. J. NJ: Springer-Verlag. & Trans. In S. & Brade.andstudents institutions of subscribResearcher. (1992). Chicago: National Society for the Study of Education.•ii!. Philosophyand education (pp.org JANUARY-FEBRUARY2000 15 .79. . Sykes.31(2). (1983). A. S. viewof Research Education. J. EducationalMeasurement:Issues and Urdan. J. S.. C. and sense making in mathematics. 20036 or faxingthe request to forpermission (202) 775-1824. G. 1230 17thSt... Creating a community of learners among high school teachers. Beginning with the January-February EducationalResearcherwill be availableon-lineat . i:O paersnii::i~a '~: ?. F. . Krammer. Derry (Eds. filescanbedownloaded andtextfileswillbeavailable part a searchable as of database. individuals The electronicversionmaynot be used for interlibrary loan. New York: Macmillan. 1999 . Soloway. structureddomains.tcrecord. Salomon. iii:• !!!!!iii~~i!!i!ii:•ii. Silkula (Eds. L. L.staff. & Woolworth.. Ed. Review of Educa- tionalResearch. T. in 18. of Literacy Soltis. In the company of colleagues: An interim report on the development of a community of teacher learners. H.. '::'''''''r'::':: i ????????????i: ~ iiii is i•i•~!ii•• --?. NJ: Erlbaum. & J.net. Sykes (Eds. 457-521. Haberman. M... J. A.. 684-689. els in computer learning (pp.). E. Manuscript received January 10... Thought and Language (Eugenia Hanfmann & Gertrude Vakar. andall contentsareprotected U. G. copies of articlesmaybe downloaded. 484-504).. Shulman. Shepard. A. Towards a constructivist perspective: An intervention study of mathematics teacher development. R..(1993a)...??? : e ???R::::::::j::::::::: r ?'?e c h g ?. (1992). (1998). Handbookof researchon teaching (pp. 179-196).. Marion.. Stallings. & Fosnot. (1990).. P. R.Handbook research mathematics on and for teaching learning (pp. Cambridge. S. copyright law. M.). Carey. (1992). H. 309-331.. A.. Flexer.. M. S. Myhre. Research... (1998). J. (Ed. S. NJ: Erlbaum. Electronic networking and the construction of professional knowledge. Wineburg. 21-32. Simon. G. Re- Handbook research teacher on education of (pp. Instructional conversations beget instructional conversations. & Kowalski.?::::'::::'''': Pa. A. D. R. In S. (1981). A.. no dissemination to who arenot members the institution of shouldtakeplace. . (1996). C.. J. S..7-18. 334-370). Coulson. Cognitive flexibility theory: Advanced knowledge acquisition in illence Society (pp.andthe compilation compositeproducts (suchas the coursepacksor editedworks)by contacting Permissions at Manager DC AERA..:?. Use of the electronicversionof thejournalshouldbe for the purposes of or gain. Phi Delta Kappan. i?ii~ O n:. & Carey.). J. A... Reconstructingmathematics College Press. 56. Effects of introducing classroom performance assessments on student learning. In J. Shulman & G. D.faculty... A. G. shouldbe soughtfor uses beyondthatallowedby the Permission Act or Use"). Houston.aera. S.). What's after "what's that?": Preservice teachers learning to ask literary questions. L.. Single privateresearch studyandnot forresaleor commercial storedon a PC. . K. (1991). What is this literachurch stuff anyway? Preservice teachers' growth in understanding children's literary response. In W. ReadingResearchQuarterly.. & Bird. 375-383). (1990). Wittrock (Ed. Phi Delta Kappan.i~:-??:?:::.N W W LI NE PDF http://www. Soltis (Ed..and Salomon. E. J. Teachingand Teacher Education. T. & Weston. :.?. Hillsdale. S. 22. (1993). 199-218... S.. . D. Lajoie & S... IbyD: Computer support for developing unit plans: A first study... F.Distributed cognitions: Psychological educational considerations. Blumenfeld. Grouws (Ed. Schoenfeld. Teacher education and the case idea. Saunders. H.). (1993b). T. (1992). :':::. 95-113).....S. 1999 AcceptedJuly13. Wolf. Goldenberg. Washington.. S. TIAn CeS NeW 0Un :Ni a Call BD~'Ol! Newconfigurations K-12Education in TheChanging for Higher Education Landscape Distance and Technology. Shuell. G. In Stories teachers the New York:Teachers of meeting challenges reform. Handbook teachingand of policy (pp. Wo e Ordlog "for. Journal in Educational Studies Mathematics.. . Shulman. New York: Longman. W. R.. Beyond andStudentDiscipline SchoolViolence in Trends the UsesandConsequences Assessment of Details Online at Complete http://www... ucation. Vygotsky. A.G. education: Schifter. T. T. 28.Articlesmay be ing to the printversionof Educational to of but forwarded othermembers the institution. I:. Feltovich.. S. Cognitive conceptions of learning.. 1999 Revision received August 26. (1996). New York: Macmillan. L. Wineburg. Teaching& TeacherEd- Can Sarason. P. v. & J. E. V. P. metacognition. . Spiro. C.. ? : ~i: 2000 issue. 411-436. 14. & Mieras. E.)...In Tenth AnnualConference theCognitive Sciof change course beforeit's too late? San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. P. J.?. Practice. Instructionalmod- based environments 323-348). or printed out. Merriinboer (Eds. & Hamann. on Copyright all printandelectronicversionsof issuesof Educational Researcher held by the American is Educational Research Association.). 3-36). J.. MA: MIT Press. F. 130-157.). In L.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. of Thomas. & Castle. L.i~~~i. 350-353. Hiebert. (1996). In M. (1986). (1986).:::: iiiijijij .. of andthe employees. & Anderson. & Grossman. Grossman.. 251-263). Autonomy and obligation: The remote control of teaching. by Access to the electronicversionis availableto all members AERA... On the nature of pedagogic computer tools: The case of the Writing Partner.. (1992). P.such as the systematic multiple Copyright of 1978("Fair of use of articles. Wolf.?:::. D. (Original work published in Russian in 1934) Watts. (1988). K. Education and the concept of knowledge. Learning to think mathematically: Problem solving. Educational Researcher Available On-Line! INg .l:?:::. NW. Mieras.). 15(3).. P.. T. L.. A. Hillsdale. Mayfield.73.. O. 459-497. L.New York: 8.Thepredictable failureof educational reform: we Macmillan. (1962). Paradigms and research programs in the study of teaching: A contemporary perspective. D.Secaucus. & Schifter.. Dijkstra. Learning.S.