This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
It has very serious implications for the learner, the teacher, the immediate social group with which the individual learner relates and the entire school system. The poor performance of students in mathematics tests has become a thing of great concern to all stakeholders such as: parents, teachers, and government. This study investigated relative impact of teachers’ behaviour to Nursery school performance in Mathematics. A questionnaire was designed to carry out this research. Data collected were analysed and three hypotheses were tested.
CHAPTER ONE 1.0 1.1 INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND Behaviour as a concept is concerned with an individual way of thinking and acting. It has very serious implications for the learner, the teacher, the immediate social group with which the individual learner relates and the entire school system. Behaviours are formed as a result of some kind of learning experiences. They may also be learned simply by following the example or opinion of parent, teacher or friend. This is mimicry or imitation, which also has a part to play in the teaching and learning situation. In this respect, the learner draws from his teachers’ disposition to form his own behaviour, which may likely affect his learning outcomes. In his observational theory, Bandura (1971) demonstrated that behaviours are acquired by watching another (the model, teacher, parent, mentor, friend) that performs the behaviour. The model displays it and the learner observes and tries to imitate it. Teachers are, invariably, role models whose behaviours are easily copied by students. What teachers like or dislike, appreciate and how they feel about their learning or studies could have a significant effect on their students. Unfortunately, however, many teachers seldom realize that how they teach, how they behave and how they interact with students can be more paramount than what they teach. In a nutshell, teachers’ behaviours directly affect students’ behaviours. Teachers’ behaviours are in turn, influenced by their culture and belief system. Teachers’ behaviour towards their students in school must be favourable enough to carry students along. 1.2 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY The purpose of this study is to find out the relative impact of teachers behaviour to Nursery School performance in Maths. The study also hopes to
3 . students and parents. The suggestions and recommendations of this research would also be useful for all stakeholders in the educational system: the government. teachers.3 HYPOTHESIS The following hypothesis would be raised and tested during the course of this study. Objectively utilizing the recommendations of this research would go a long way in improving the performance of pupils and students in Common Entrance Examination. Pupils performance in Mathematic can be attributed to other factors asides teachers behaviour 3. This would invariably give students a strong background if they decide to study course in the field of science and Engineering. 1. The findings and recommendations of this would go a long way in improving performance of students in mathematics.4 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY The significance of this study is in its attempt to find solution to the problem of failure in mathematics. Mathematic as a course is the backbone of science and technology studies. school owners. school policy makers. Teachers behaviour has no significant impact on students performance 2. school administrators. 1.offer suggestions and recommendations that are considered necessary to improve the performance of pupils in Mathematics. This study will shed light on how teachers’ behaviour affects performance of students in mathematics. Teachers behaviour has no significant impact on Nursery pupils performance in mathematics 1.
The time constraint for this research and the cost implications has necessitated the limiting of this study to only five schools.1.6 SCOPE AND THE LIMITATION OF THE STUDY This research would be conducted in Lagos State.5 RESEARCH QUESTIONS In the course of investigating the relative impact of teachers’ behaviour to Nursery school performance in Mathematics the following questions would be treated. Does teachers behaviour have unique impact on pupils performance in mathematics 1. 1. which includes the other organisms or systems around as well as the physical environment 4 . 1. The five schools would be chosen randomly from Nursery schools in Epe Local Government. What are the behaviours of teachers that have impact on students’ performance? 3. usually in relation to its environment. What are the behaviours teachers are expected to exhibit? 2. Nursery schools only would be the focus and for this study only five schools would be sampled. How does the teachers’ behaviour affect pupils’ performance? 4.7 DEFINITION OF TERMS Behaviour: refers to the actions of somebody.
Ogunniyi (1982) found that students’ positive attitude towards science could be enhanced by the following teacher-related factors: • Teachers’ enthusiasm. Several research findings have confirmed the hypothesis that teachers’ attitude either towards Mathematics or towards science teaching affect their students’ achievement in and attitudes towards the subjects. Also. (1985) found that the effect of teachers’ attitude towards assessment practices on students’ achievement and their attitude towards Physics was positive. read and regurgitate. Also Igwe (1985) showed that the effect of teachers’ attitudes to mathematics was stronger on the students’ mathematical achievement than on their attitudes. In the same vein Odubunmi (1986) and Odunsi (1988) confirmed that teachers’ attitude towards Integrated Science teaching affect their students’ attitude to and achievement in the subject while Ogunwuyi (2000) found significant causal relationship between the teachers’ attitude and students’ achievement in Integrated Science. (1985) reported in one of his findings that teachers’ attitude towards science is a significant predictor of pupils’ science achievement as well as their attitude. 5 . Chako (1981) reported in a study of teacher and student characteristics as correlates of learning outcomes in mathematics that teachers’ attitude towards teaching significantly predict students’ attitude as well as achievement in Mathematics.0 2. Okpala.1 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK It has been observed that teachers teach Mathematics in a way that merely requires the pupils to listen. In the same vein Onocha. This depicts negative attitude to teaching.CHAPTER TWO 2. Teachers’ attitude towards the teaching of Mathematics plays a significant role in shaping the attitude of students towards the learning of Mathematics. Chidolue (1986) found that teachers’ attitude towards Biology teaching is one of the major contributors towards explaining the variance in students’ cognitive achievement.
classroom teaching (including research on school mathematics instruction) was in its infancy. is influenced by the teacher’s knowledge (of the content to be taught. how learners learn/understand that specific content and methods to teach that specific content) in addition to teachers’ attitudes and beliefs about teaching and mathematics. 1992). 2000. 2. • Teachers’ thorough knowledge of the subject-matter and their making Mathematics quite interesting. 2. Ball.1 Teacher knowledge Koehler and Grouws (1992). note that teacher behaviour is influenced by the teacher’s understanding of the particular content and knowledge of how students might learn (National Research Council (NRC). thus having a strong theoretical foundation (Koehler & Grouws. b) their beliefs about the discipline of mathematics and c) what the teacher does or says within the classroom. were presented. how this occurs 6 . In the 1980s Brophy (1986) noted that despite the remarkable progress made in research. that reflected the changes and progress made in research on teaching.2. which are influenced by a) their beliefs about themselves as learners. 1993) and. Koehler and Grouws’ proposed model (1992) postulates that outcomes of learning are based on a learner’s own actions or behaviours. Koehler and Grouws (1992) examined research on teaching from the perspective of complexity.• Teachers’ resourcefulness and helpful behaviour. according to the model.2 FACTORS INFLUENCING TEACHERS KNOWLEDGE Teachers’ behaviour. 2001). Four levels of complexity and presentative models. From the above we can say that the role of the teacher as facilitator of learning and the contributions to students’ achievement is enormous. The highest level (level 4) reflects current research. where research questions in teaching and learning are being approached from several perspectives. This includes knowledge of how students think and learn (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). in particular.
2000). Pedagogical content knowledge (also termed pedagogical 7 . It has been presumed that teachers will develop this knowledge framework as a result of training and experience (Foss & Kleinsasser. form part of a teacher’s knowledge of student learning (Fennema & Franke. and beyond pure subject matter knowledge the teacher needs to know how to teach mathematics (NRC. 1989). Ball (1993) rephrases this kind of knowledge as “I must consider the mathematics in relation to the children and the children in relation to the mathematics”. 2001). Ormrod and Cole (1996) report that an increase in knowledge of content could lead to changes in classroom practice that also reflect increased sophistication in pedagogical content knowledge. 1996). 2000). and doing mathematics that the students have developed (NRC. 1986). Knowledge of mathematics (content knowledge) is transformed by means of practical knowledge of mathematics teaching (both pedagogical and curricular) into representations for the classroom use of content knowledge (Ernest. Knowledge of how students acquire the knowledge of the mathematics content being addressed. 2002. Shulman (1986) presents a framework for discussion of teacher knowledge which postulates that teachers make decisions based on their knowledge. The knowledge mathematics teachers need include knowledge of mathematics itself (subject content knowledge) (Muijs & Reynolds. Ball and Bass (2000) note that understanding and knowing subject matter knowledge is imperative in listening flexibly (hear what they are saying or where they might be heading) but also to be able to create suitable opportunities for learning (Ball. This includes knowledge of how to present mathematical topics and ideas (pedagogical content knowledge) and knowledge of mathematics curriculum materials and resources (curricular knowledge) (Shulman. 1992). as well as understanding the processes the students will use and the difficulties and successes likely to occur. thinking about. 2001). Ball & Bass. 1992) but also examines sensitivity to the unique ways of learning.within specific mathematics content (Fennema & Franke.
behaviour management techniques. classroom practice. their contents and ways to use them. examinations. It is knowledge that a teacher uses to transform and represent knowledge either directly by the teacher. can be described as practical knowledge of teaching (knowledge of how to teach that is specific to what is being taught) (Jegede et al. Shulman.. Shulman (1987) changes the term of curricular knowledge to curriculum knowledge but still defines it as “tools of the trade” (p. or by means of instructional media (Ernest. knowledge of students (Penso. 2002. (p.e. difficulties and common errors (Ball & Bass. activities. other teaching resources and teaching apparatus. 2002). and motivational techniques. knowledge of mathematical tasks. conceptions. tests and syllabi (Turner-Bisset. 1992) and explanations (including alternative instructional methods (Rowan. 2001. 2000) by blending content and pedagogy (Ball et al. It includes knowledge of approaches to school mathematics topics. 2002). Harland and Kinder (1997) indicate that this knowledge can have a positive and substantial influence on teachers’ 8 . teachers’ knowledge of teaching procedures such as effective strategies for planning. 2002) i. comprehensible and compelling to a particular group of learners (Shulman. 2001). 1987). test items (Fennema & Franke. 2000). illustrations. 2001). methods. Ball and Bass (2000) summarize pedagogical content knowledge as a "unique subject specific body of pedagogical knowledge that highlights the close interweaving of subject matter and pedagogy in teaching”. classroom organizational procedures. Correnti & Miller. Correnti & Miller. models and simulations (Geddis & Wood. 1986).8) which could be transcribed as knowledge of the materials and media (“tools”) through which mathematics instruction is carried out and assessed (Turner-Bisset. 1989) in order to make the subject matter accessible. different ways of presenting mathematics (Rowan. 87) Curricular knowledge includes knowledge of texts and schemes used to teach mathematics.content knowing by Penso.. 1986) through examples. Shulman. 1997). school produced curriculum materials.
and preferences concerning the nature of mathematics as a whole (discipline of 9 .146) 2. meanings. rules. concepts. Turner-Bisset (2001) completes the triadic relationship between teacher knowledge. 1989). 1989) and is not consensual and is therefore held in varying degrees of conviction (Thompson. 1989). Thompson (1992) theorizes that because teachers treat their beliefs as knowledge. Schoenfeld.classroom practice. Studies of teachers’ beliefs in Mathematics Education have investigated teachers’ beliefs about the nature of mathematics (Ernest.2.4). beliefs and attitude by noting that “one’s beliefs about a subject can influence one’s attitude towards it”. (p. with Manouchehri (1997) noting that teachers translate their knowledge of mathematics and pedagogy into practice through the filter of their beliefs. A belief consists of the teacher’s system of conceptions. the selection of suitable curricula (NCTM. 2000) and use of resources. values and ideology (Ernest. Both teacher’s knowledge and beliefs have also been viewed as being context specific (Fennema & Franke. 1992). as well as general conceptions of mathematics teaching. styles of teaching. Belief systems. mental images. according to Muijs and Reynolds (2002).2 Teacher beliefs Teacher beliefs is the second factor in Koehler and Grouw’s model (1992). are “dynamic and permeable mental structures. Fennema and Franke (1992) note that there is a relationship between a teacher’s knowledge and beliefs and according to Muijs and Reynolds (2002) these are related to student achievement. 2002. pedagogy. susceptible to change in light of experience” (p. 1992). and modes of learner learning (Ernest. 2001) via teacher behaviour (Muijs & Reynolds. 2001) through such processes as the selection of content and emphasis. Cohen and Ball (2001) note the importance and value of teachers combining their knowledge of content. as beliefs have a powerful impact on teaching (NRC. Teachers’ beliefs about the nature of mathematics are conscious or subconscious beliefs. it is difficult to distinguish between knowledge and beliefs.
and its results remain open for revision (Ernest. 2001).136). At the centre of this view 10 . consisting of interconnecting structures and truths which are to be discovered and not created (Ernest. Ernest (1989) notes that teachers in practice might combine elements from these views. 1995). rules. Platonistic view: Mathematics is viewed as a static/ fixed body (NRC. 1989) that appear to affect teacher behaviour (Schoenfeld. 1995). These beliefs or conceptions form the bases of the teachers’ own philosophy of mathematics. skills (Ernest. Kuhs and Ball (1986). 1989) and processes to be memorized (Leung. Instrumentalist view: Mathematics is looked upon as being useful and consisting of an unrelated collection of facts.mathematics) (Ernest. Mathematics is not seen as a finished product. 1992). 1984). Problem solving view: This view is characterized by a dynamic problem-driven view of mathematics as a continually expanding field of human inquiry. The second belief system teachers hold is a mental model of mathematics teaching that Ernest (1989) views as the key determinant of how mathematics is taught. 1984) but also their prevalence in the academic study of the philosophy of mathematics. 2003) – typically underlay by a constructivist view of mathematics learning (Cobb & Bauserfeld. Thompson. p. 1989. Three philosophies/views of mathematics are distinguished due to their observed occurrence in mathematics teaching (Thompson. as quoted by Thompson (1992. 2001) but a unified body of knowledge and procedures. that teachers may hold consciously or implicitly (Thompson. have identified at least four dominant and distinctive views teachers hold of how mathematics should be taught: Learner focused: Mathematics teaching in this view focuses on the learner’s personal construction of mathematical knowledge (Manouchehri & Enderson. 1989).
This view has the following central premises: a) rules are the basic building blocks of all mathematical knowledge (as mathematics is perceived as a fixed body of knowledge) thus making all mathematical behaviour rule-governed (Leung. 1995). 1992). Classroom Focused With Mathematical Teaching Based on Knowledge about Effective Classrooms 11 . Content Focused With An Emphasis On Conceptual Understanding: Mathematics teaching in this view is driven by the content itself that emphasizes conceptual understanding (Thompson. b) knowledge of mathematics is demonstrated by correctly answering and solving problems using the learned rules. This view of teaching would follow naturally from the instrumentalist view (Ernest. 1992. 1989) of the nature of mathematics. combined with stress on the use of exact. d) it is not necessary to understand the source or reason for student errors as further instruction will result in appropriate learning (Kuhs and Ball 1986 as quoted by Thompson. This view of teaching would naturally follow the conception of the nature of mathematics that Ernest (1989) labels Platonist. rigorous mathematical language (Leung. Content Focused With An Emphasis On Performance: Student performance and mastery of mathematical rules and procedures. 1997) through exploration and formalizing ideas.is the learners’ active involvement in constructing meaning from experiences by doing mathematics (De Jong & Brinkman. 1995) are emphasized in this view of teaching mathematics. c) computational procedures should be “automatized”. content is made the focus of classroom activity while emphasising students’ understanding of ideas and processes.136). p. dealing with self generated ideas and involving methods of inquiry (Thompson. In instruction. 1992). who views mathematics as a dynamic discipline. This view is likely to be advocated by those who have a problem solving view of mathematics.
1992). Attitudes to mathematics and its teaching are important contributors to a teacher’s make-up and approach. Teachers’ attitude to the teaching of mathematics include liking. Attitudes are defined as internal beliefs that influence personal actions (Schunk. Shulman (1987) mentions that teachers should possess knowledge of student characteristics. 1989). and confidence in the teacher’s own mathematics teaching abilities (Ernest. 1996).392) that attitude is learned indirectly through one’s experience and exposures. 1989). teacher’s confidence in his or her own mathematical abilities: the teacher’s mathematical self concept and the teacher’s valuing of mathematics (Ernest. enjoyment and interest in mathematics. because of the effect they can have on a child’s attitude to mathematics and its learning but ultimately on student achievement in mathematics (Ernest. Koehler and Grouws (1992) note that teachers’ behaviour is not only influenced by their beliefs but also by their attitudes towards mathematics and the teaching of mathematics. p. This present study will investigate the relative impact of teachers’ behaviour on performance of Nursery school pupils 12 . 2. 1989).Central to this view is the notion that classroom activity must be well structured and efficiently organized according to effective teacher behaviours identified in process-product studies of teaching effectiveness (Thompson. A teacher’s self-concept is formed through experiences and interpretations of the environment and depends heavily on reinforcement and evaluations by significant others (Schunk. with Koehler and Grouws (1992) indicating that student characteristics have an influence on the teacher’s behaviour.2. 1996. but neither defined which characteristics and how these characteristics influence the teacher’s behaviour. enjoyment and enthusiasm for the teaching of mathematics. 1998). Gagnè believes (according to Schunk.3 Teachers’ Attitude Teachers’ attitude towards mathematics itself includes liking (Quinn. 1996).
3. Sex. 3.2 POPULATION AND SAMPLE OF THE STUDY For the purpose of this study. This discusses the method used in gathering necessary information.3 RESEARCH INSTRUMENT A technical self designed documentation/instrument (questionnaire) will be used for this research work to gather necessary information about the study. Age. Section B consists of questions made up of ten items of information about their learning conditions.0 3.6 PROCEDURE FOR COLLECTION OF DATA The researcher will disseminate the instrument randomly in all the involved Nursery Schools. It is a 5 point scaled questionnaire ranging from Strongly Agree. Disagree and Strongly Disagree. Five schools however would be sampled for this study.CHAPTER THREE 3. the population would be the entire Nursery Schools in Epe. research instrument. 3.1 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY RESEARCH DESIGN The research study will examine the relative impact of teachers’ behaviour to Nursery school performance in Mathematics. 3. Agree.4 CONSTRUCTION OF THE INSTRUMENT The pupils’ questionnaire will consist of background information such as Name of school.5 VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY OF THE INSTRUMENT The validity and reliability of the instruments will be ensured by presenting it to experts in the field of educational psychology. 3. 14 . procedure for the data collection and analysis of the data collected.
3. 15 .7 ANALYSIS OF DATA The analysis of the data will be carried out using statistical methods. T-test and Questionnaire.
Teacher thinking and conceptual change in science and mathematics education. P. S. (1993). 22(3).L.. 20(2). L. 1999: The Challenges of Science Technology and Teacher Education in Nigeria Beyond the year 2000.. Von Glasersfeld (Ed.) Radical Constructivism in Mathematics Education. E. Bridging practices: Intertwining content and pedagogy in teaching and learning to teach. 241247. (1992). Dada. P. S. 13-33.Department of Teacher Education Bajah. (1997). & Yackel. 15(1). Journal of Education for Teaching.T. Dordrecht: Kluwer. A. In E. 1999: Teaching and teacher preparation in the twenty first century. Grouws (Ed. 51(3).. 213-218.REFERENCES Abimbade. Ball. A constructivist approach to second grade mathematics. Lagos. European Journal of Teacher Education. Journal of Teacher Education. (2002). A comparative study of the attitudes of teachers at special and educationally inclusive schools towards learners with little or no functional speech using communication devices. & Alant. Wood. 373-397. South African Journal of Education. & Franke. Cobb.). Ball. D. De Jong. The Elementary School Journal. E. African Journal of Education 1(91) 43-49.L.. T.. F. 121-124. In D. M. Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and 16 . Federal Republic of Nigeria 2004: National Policy on Education (Revised). NERC Press. (2000). E. 93(4). D. (1992). Teachers’ knowledge and its impact. The knowledge. With an eye on the mathematical horizon: Dilemmas of teaching elementary school mathematics. Fennema. & Brinkman. A. O. (1989).A. beliefs and attitudes of the mathematics teacher: A model. Ernest.
Unpublished Ph. & Grouws. K. Harland. The utility of case study methodology in mathematics teacher preparation. & Nisbet. (1995). 23(1). In D. Hong Kong and London. S... O. S. M. Geddis.learning: A project of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.. Igwe. British Journal of In-Service Education. Taplin. 71. & Chan. (pp. & Kwok. S. (2000). & Kinder. 113-135. (1992). The mathematics classroom in Beijing. 30(1). Ibadan Jegede. Computers and Education. J. Educational Studies in Mathematics. M. New York: Macmillan. C. 24(2). 297-325. Teaching and Teacher Education. F. L. (1997). Koehler.. 42(3). S. 115-125). An intensive teaching and learning environment for graph sketching. 611-626.D Thesis University of Ibadan. A. Handbook of Psychotherapy and Behaviour Change. 17 . An Empirical Analysis. 2002: Relative effects of Framing and Team assisted instructional Strategies on students’ learning outcomes in selected difficult chemistry concepts.). Transforming subject matter and managing dilemmas: A case study in teacher education. & Wood. Leung. 13(6). (1999).. (1997). D. New York: Macmillan. Kong. Mathematics teaching practices and their effects. I. Educational Research. Teachers’ continuing professional development: Framing a model of outcomes. Teacher Education Quarterly.O. (1996). Trainee teachers’ perception of their knowledge about expert teaching. 147-164). A. Mathematics-teachers’ knowledge bases: Implications for teacher education. Manouchehri. S. (2003). Grouws (Ed. A. M. C. 287-308. 159. Kanes. K. 29. A. 32. E. (pp. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education. N. New York Wiley and Sons Inc.. Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning: A project of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics...84. Garfield (Eds). & Enderson. 1-17.
D. Principles and standards for school mathematics. Teachers’ beliefs and behaviours: What really matters? Journal of Classroom Interaction. Education across a century: The centennial volume. 37. & Reynolds. Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform.. University of Chicago Press. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1998). Teaching content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge: A model from geography education. S. R. What largescale. 57(1). AsiaPacific Journal of Teacher Education. H.). Teachers College Record. J. Penso. 37(2). Schoenfeld.: Merrill.Muijs. 18 . survey research tells us about teacher effects on student achievement: Insights from the “Prospects” study of elementary schools. N. Rowan. (1987). Shulman. Pedagogical content knowledge: How do student teachers identify and describe the causes of their pupils learning difficulties. R. S. (pp.J. In L. D.. 239278). B. D. 47(1). 4-14. Learning theories: An educational perspective (2nd ed. VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. R. Correnti. L.. L. (1996). Mathematics education in the twentieth century.). 1525-1567. Journal of Teacher Education. 3-15. (2002). (2002). 25-37. E. (1986). Ill. Effects of mathematics methods courses on the mathematical attitudes and content knowledge of preservice teachers. & Cole. Chicago. Journal of Educational Research. 91(2). 108. Shulman. Quinn. Schunk. Ormrod. A. Englewood Cliffs. B. 1-22. 104(8). (1996). 30(1). J. 15(2). Harvard Educational Review. Educational Researcher. J.. Reston. (2000). D. S. (2001). & Miller. H.: National Society for the Study of Education. Corno (Ed. (2002).
147-164). Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning: A project of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. 105-127. A. Turner-Bisset.G. (1984). Teachers’ beliefs and conceptions: A synthesis of the research. R. (pp. Thompson. Educational Studies in Mathematics. (1992). Expert teaching: Knowledge and pedagogy to lead the profession. A.Thompson. The relationship of teachers’ conceptions of mathematics and mathematics teaching to instructional practice. London: David Fulton 19 . Grouws (Ed. In D. A. New York: Macmillan.). 15. (2001).G.
Now tick appropriately (√) the option that best suit your opinions. Agree (A). NAME OF SCHOOL:____________ FEMALE _________________ S/N 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 My teacher likes me My teacher get angry easily My teaches all the pupils equally My teachers always encourages and motivates me I want to be like my teacher I usually understand what my teacher teaches me My teachers teaches other subjects better than Maths I have higher scores in Maths than other subjects SA A D SD 20 . there are four options ranging from Strongly Agree (SA).QUESTIONNAIRE THE RELATIVE IMPACT OF TEACHERS’ BEHAVIOUR TO NURSERY SCHOOL PERFORMANCE IN MATHS SECTION A NAME:____________________ SEX: MALE ______________ AGE _______________ SECTION B In this Section. and Disagree (D) in this section. Strongly Disagree (SD).
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.