805 views

Uploaded by 'Emmanuel Orimogunje

save

- Dean
- Business Game
- practicum 3 summative evaluation
- transcript tcsj
- Concept of Teaching
- LC
- Business Communication - EnG301 Power Point Slides Lecture 05
- alternative course credit policy
- gaelscoil banndan
- CA Collaborative 8th Grade Algebra
- The Divide Between Policy and Practice in Efl High School Classrooms in Japan
- cover letter
- ADEC Al Hamdanya Grand Private School 2015 2016
- CFSManual_Ch06_052009
- Annotated Bibliography H-M
- el_196811_brown
- resume-michelle sciullo
- 5,6- Personality & Attitudes Readonly
- BasemAbdelrahman, PMP, CPLPProfile (10)
- Personal Qualities of a Good Teacher
- cv-template-School-Teacher.docx
- New Elementary Teachers’ Knowledge and Beliefs about Instructional.pdf
- Design of an Integrated Curriculum for Alianza Social Educativa Ase
- philosophy statement
- DO_s2016_042--DLL
- Studies in Teacher Education Psychology
- Chapter6 Culture
- maths lessonplan 8 10 12
- ashley bowers rl
- CV Assaignment
- Female Teachers Job Stress
- Pilot Study
- Boko Haram
- Teachers Perception 2
- Osomo Realism
- Water for WATER
- constituion
- Advantages of division of labour
- Teachers Behaviour and Maths Performance

You are on page 1of 20

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.

1

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

2

1. teachers. school owners. school policy makers.3 HYPOTHESIS The following hypothesis would be raised and tested during the course of this study. This would invariably give students a strong background if they decide to study course in the field of science and Engineering. school administrators. Teachers behaviour has no significant impact on students performance 2. Mathematic as a course is the backbone of science and technology studies. 1. Pupils performance in Mathematic can be attributed to other factors asides teachers behaviour 3.4 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY The significance of this study is in its attempt to find solution to the problem of failure in mathematics. Teachers behaviour has no significant impact on Nursery pupils performance in mathematics 1. 3 . Objectively utilizing the recommendations of this research would go a long way in improving the performance of pupils and students in Common Entrance Examination.offer suggestions and recommendations that are considered necessary to improve the performance of pupils in Mathematics. students and parents. The suggestions and recommendations of this research would also be useful for all stakeholders in the educational system: the government. The findings and recommendations of this would go a long way in improving performance of students in mathematics. This study will shed light on how teachers’ behaviour affects performance of students in mathematics.

7 DEFINITION OF TERMS Behaviour: refers to the actions of somebody.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. Nursery schools only would be the focus and for this study only five schools would be sampled. usually in relation to its environment.6 SCOPE AND THE LIMITATION OF THE STUDY This research would be conducted in Lagos State. 1. Does teachers behaviour have unique impact on pupils performance in mathematics 1.1. What are the behaviours of teachers that have impact on students’ performance? 3. The five schools would be chosen randomly from Nursery schools in Epe Local Government. How does the teachers’ behaviour affect pupils’ performance? 4. What are the behaviours teachers are expected to exhibit? 2. 1. The time constraint for this research and the cost implications has necessitated the limiting of this study to only five schools. which includes the other organisms or systems around as well as the physical environment 4 .

This depicts negative attitude to teaching. Also Igwe (1985) showed that the effect of teachers’ attitudes to mathematics was stronger on the students’ mathematical achievement than on their attitudes. Also. read and regurgitate. Ogunniyi (1982) found that students’ positive attitude towards science could be enhanced by the following teacher-related factors: • Teachers’ enthusiasm.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. (1985) found that the effect of teachers’ attitude towards assessment practices on students’ achievement and their attitude towards Physics was positive. Chidolue (1986) found that teachers’ attitude towards Biology teaching is one of the major contributors towards explaining the variance in students’ cognitive achievement. Okpala. In the same vein Onocha.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. 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. 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.0 2. (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.

• Teachers’ resourcefulness and helpful behaviour. 1993) and. were presented. Koehler and Grouws (1992) examined research on teaching from the perspective of complexity. The highest level (level 4) reflects current research. Four levels of complexity and presentative models. This includes knowledge of how students think and learn (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). 2. thus having a strong theoretical foundation (Koehler & Grouws.2 FACTORS INFLUENCING TEACHERS KNOWLEDGE Teachers’ behaviour. is influenced by the teacher’s knowledge (of the content to be taught. 2001). Ball. in particular. where research questions in teaching and learning are being approached from several perspectives. how this occurs 6 . In the 1980s Brophy (1986) noted that despite the remarkable progress made in research. From the above we can say that the role of the teacher as facilitator of learning and the contributions to students’ achievement is enormous.1 Teacher knowledge Koehler and Grouws (1992). b) their beliefs about the discipline of mathematics and c) what the teacher does or says within the classroom. classroom teaching (including research on school mathematics instruction) was in its infancy. 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. 2000. Koehler and Grouws’ proposed model (1992) postulates that outcomes of learning are based on a learner’s own actions or behaviours. that reflected the changes and progress made in research on teaching. which are influenced by a) their beliefs about themselves as learners. 2. 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). according to the model.2. 1992). • Teachers’ thorough knowledge of the subject-matter and their making Mathematics quite interesting.

2001). form part of a teacher’s knowledge of student learning (Fennema & Franke. 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. 1989). 2000). 1992) but also examines sensitivity to the unique ways of learning. 1986). 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. Ball & Bass. Pedagogical content knowledge (also termed pedagogical 7 . 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”. thinking about. 2000). 2001). 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. as well as understanding the processes the students will use and the difficulties and successes likely to occur. and beyond pure subject matter knowledge the teacher needs to know how to teach mathematics (NRC. 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. and doing mathematics that the students have developed (NRC. 1992). 2002. Knowledge of how students acquire the knowledge of the mathematics content being addressed. 1996).within specific mathematics content (Fennema & Franke. It has been presumed that teachers will develop this knowledge framework as a result of training and experience (Foss & Kleinsasser. The knowledge mathematics teachers need include knowledge of mathematics itself (subject content knowledge) (Muijs & Reynolds. Shulman (1986) presents a framework for discussion of teacher knowledge which postulates that teachers make decisions based on their knowledge.

Shulman. Harland and Kinder (1997) indicate that this knowledge can have a positive and substantial influence on teachers’ 8 . Correnti & Miller. 2002). classroom organizational procedures. 2002. 1986). test items (Fennema & Franke. Shulman (1987) changes the term of curricular knowledge to curriculum knowledge but still defines it as “tools of the trade” (p. and motivational techniques. 1987). different ways of presenting mathematics (Rowan.. school produced curriculum materials.8) which could be transcribed as knowledge of the materials and media (“tools”) through which mathematics instruction is carried out and assessed (Turner-Bisset. 1997). difficulties and common errors (Ball & Bass. 1986) through examples. conceptions.. 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”. behaviour management techniques. 2000) by blending content and pedagogy (Ball et al. 1989) in order to make the subject matter accessible.content knowing by Penso. other teaching resources and teaching apparatus. illustrations. 2001). activities. 87) Curricular knowledge includes knowledge of texts and schemes used to teach mathematics. It includes knowledge of approaches to school mathematics topics. 2002) i. examinations. 1992) and explanations (including alternative instructional methods (Rowan. or by means of instructional media (Ernest. Shulman. teachers’ knowledge of teaching procedures such as effective strategies for planning.e. methods. their contents and ways to use them. (p. tests and syllabi (Turner-Bisset. It is knowledge that a teacher uses to transform and represent knowledge either directly by the teacher. 2002). knowledge of mathematical tasks. comprehensible and compelling to a particular group of learners (Shulman. knowledge of students (Penso. 2000). 2001). Correnti & Miller. 2001. classroom practice. can be described as practical knowledge of teaching (knowledge of how to teach that is specific to what is being taught) (Jegede et al. models and simulations (Geddis & Wood.

2001) through such processes as the selection of content and emphasis. according to Muijs and Reynolds (2002).2. meanings. Studies of teachers’ beliefs in Mathematics Education have investigated teachers’ beliefs about the nature of mathematics (Ernest. pedagogy. 1989) and is not consensual and is therefore held in varying degrees of conviction (Thompson.4). 1992). 1989). 2000) and use of resources. Both teacher’s knowledge and beliefs have also been viewed as being context specific (Fennema & Franke. Turner-Bisset (2001) completes the triadic relationship between teacher knowledge. rules. mental images. Belief systems.classroom practice. it is difficult to distinguish between knowledge and beliefs. values and ideology (Ernest. with Manouchehri (1997) noting that teachers translate their knowledge of mathematics and pedagogy into practice through the filter of their beliefs. as well as general conceptions of mathematics teaching. concepts. 2001) via teacher behaviour (Muijs & Reynolds. Thompson (1992) theorizes that because teachers treat their beliefs as knowledge. A belief consists of the teacher’s system of conceptions. and modes of learner learning (Ernest. 2002. susceptible to change in light of experience” (p. 1992).2 Teacher beliefs Teacher beliefs is the second factor in Koehler and Grouw’s model (1992). Schoenfeld. 1989). beliefs and attitude by noting that “one’s beliefs about a subject can influence one’s attitude towards it”. Teachers’ beliefs about the nature of mathematics are conscious or subconscious beliefs. are “dynamic and permeable mental structures. and preferences concerning the nature of mathematics as a whole (discipline of 9 .146) 2. (p. 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. the selection of suitable curricula (NCTM. styles of teaching. as beliefs have a powerful impact on teaching (NRC. Cohen and Ball (2001) note the importance and value of teachers combining their knowledge of content.

1989) that appear to affect teacher behaviour (Schoenfeld. skills (Ernest. Mathematics is not seen as a finished product. Instrumentalist view: Mathematics is looked upon as being useful and consisting of an unrelated collection of facts. as quoted by Thompson (1992. At the centre of this view 10 . Three philosophies/views of mathematics are distinguished due to their observed occurrence in mathematics teaching (Thompson. Platonistic view: Mathematics is viewed as a static/ fixed body (NRC. that teachers may hold consciously or implicitly (Thompson. 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). These beliefs or conceptions form the bases of the teachers’ own philosophy of mathematics.136). Ernest (1989) notes that teachers in practice might combine elements from these views. 2001). p. Problem solving view: This view is characterized by a dynamic problem-driven view of mathematics as a continually expanding field of human inquiry. rules. 1984) but also their prevalence in the academic study of the philosophy of mathematics. 1989). 1992). and its results remain open for revision (Ernest.mathematics) (Ernest. 2003) – typically underlay by a constructivist view of mathematics learning (Cobb & Bauserfeld. 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. Kuhs and Ball (1986). 1995). 1989) and processes to be memorized (Leung. 1989. consisting of interconnecting structures and truths which are to be discovered and not created (Ernest. 2001) but a unified body of knowledge and procedures. 1995).

1992. This view of teaching would follow naturally from the instrumentalist view (Ernest.is the learners’ active involvement in constructing meaning from experiences by doing mathematics (De Jong & Brinkman. combined with stress on the use of exact. 1997) through exploration and formalizing ideas. Content Focused With An Emphasis On Conceptual Understanding: Mathematics teaching in this view is driven by the content itself that emphasizes conceptual understanding (Thompson. 1992). b) knowledge of mathematics is demonstrated by correctly answering and solving problems using the learned rules. p. 1992).136). 1995) are emphasized in this view of teaching mathematics. In instruction. This view of teaching would naturally follow the conception of the nature of mathematics that Ernest (1989) labels Platonist. content is made the focus of classroom activity while emphasising students’ understanding of ideas and processes. 1995). dealing with self generated ideas and involving methods of inquiry (Thompson. Classroom Focused With Mathematical Teaching Based on Knowledge about Effective Classrooms 11 . Content Focused With An Emphasis On Performance: Student performance and mastery of mathematical rules and procedures. 1989) of the nature of mathematics. who views mathematics as a dynamic discipline. rigorous mathematical language (Leung. This view is likely to be advocated by those who have a problem solving view of mathematics. c) computational procedures should be “automatized”. 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 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.

Attitudes are defined as internal beliefs that influence personal actions (Schunk. and confidence in the teacher’s own mathematics teaching abilities (Ernest. 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.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. 1989). 1992).392) that attitude is learned indirectly through one’s experience and exposures. 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. Shulman (1987) mentions that teachers should possess knowledge of student characteristics. 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. This present study will investigate the relative impact of teachers’ behaviour on performance of Nursery school pupils 12 . 1996. enjoyment and enthusiasm for the teaching of mathematics. 1989). Attitudes to mathematics and its teaching are important contributors to a teacher’s make-up and approach. 1996). 2.2.3 Teachers’ Attitude Teachers’ attitude towards mathematics itself includes liking (Quinn. with Koehler and Grouws (1992) indicating that student characteristics have an influence on the teacher’s behaviour. 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. 1996). but neither defined which characteristics and how these characteristics influence the teacher’s behaviour. Teachers’ attitude to the teaching of mathematics include liking. 1998). Gagnè believes (according to Schunk.

13 .

1 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY RESEARCH DESIGN The research study will examine the relative impact of teachers’ behaviour to Nursery school performance in Mathematics. Age.CHAPTER THREE 3. procedure for the data collection and analysis of the data collected. 3. 3. 3.2 POPULATION AND SAMPLE OF THE STUDY For the purpose of this study. Agree.6 PROCEDURE FOR COLLECTION OF DATA The researcher will disseminate the instrument randomly in all the involved Nursery Schools. the population would be the entire Nursery Schools in Epe.0 3. research instrument.4 CONSTRUCTION OF THE INSTRUMENT The pupils’ questionnaire will consist of background information such as Name of school. 14 .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. Five schools however would be sampled for this study. Section B consists of questions made up of ten items of information about their learning conditions.3 RESEARCH INSTRUMENT A technical self designed documentation/instrument (questionnaire) will be used for this research work to gather necessary information about the study. Sex. It is a 5 point scaled questionnaire ranging from Strongly Agree. 3. 3. Disagree and Strongly Disagree. This discusses the method used in gathering necessary information.

15 .7 ANALYSIS OF DATA The analysis of the data will be carried out using statistical methods. T-test and Questionnaire.3.

D. (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. P. Ernest. T. Lagos. (1997). The Elementary School Journal. 213-218. Teacher thinking and conceptual change in science and mathematics education. E. In D.L. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Grouws (Ed. Bridging practices: Intertwining content and pedagogy in teaching and learning to teach. Dada. Cobb. Journal of Teacher Education. European Journal of Teacher Education.Department of Teacher Education Bajah. Von Glasersfeld (Ed. 22(3). & Franke. D. A. The knowledge. A. L..A. Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and 16 . Federal Republic of Nigeria 2004: National Policy on Education (Revised). De Jong. (1993). S.REFERENCES Abimbade.).. Wood. Ball. (1992). 13-33. & Yackel. 93(4).) Radical Constructivism in Mathematics Education. A constructivist approach to second grade mathematics...L. 241247. P. F. & Alant. O. Journal of Education for Teaching. 1999: Teaching and teacher preparation in the twenty first century. Teachers’ knowledge and its impact. (2000). 373-397. Fennema. & Brinkman. 15(1). NERC Press. beliefs and attitudes of the mathematics teacher: A model. 1999: The Challenges of Science Technology and Teacher Education in Nigeria Beyond the year 2000. Ball. E. S. 121-124. African Journal of Education 1(91) 43-49. In E. With an eye on the mathematical horizon: Dilemmas of teaching elementary school mathematics.. South African Journal of Education. 20(2). E. M. (1989). 51(3).T. (1992).

& Nisbet. The mathematics classroom in Beijing. & Wood. Transforming subject matter and managing dilemmas: A case study in teacher education. Koehler. New York: Macmillan. & Kinder. 287-308.. 297-325. (pp. A. (1995). 115-125).. Trainee teachers’ perception of their knowledge about expert teaching.D Thesis University of Ibadan.. & Chan. 113-135.). L. M. S.. S. Mathematics-teachers’ knowledge bases: Implications for teacher education. Kanes. (2003). Ibadan Jegede. 17 . Igwe. A. S.. (1996). An Empirical Analysis. K. A. The utility of case study methodology in mathematics teacher preparation. S. D. Leung. (1997). New York Wiley and Sons Inc. Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning: A project of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. N.84. Educational Research. Manouchehri. Geddis. Handbook of Psychotherapy and Behaviour Change. 29. & Kwok. C. Garfield (Eds). (pp. Taplin. New York: Macmillan. Mathematics teaching practices and their effects. 13(6). 147-164). (2000). Computers and Education. Hong Kong and London. Teaching and Teacher Education. (1999). 30(1). A.. 24(2). & Enderson. (1997). Teacher Education Quarterly. 1-17. S. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education. E. Kong. & Grouws. O.learning: A project of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. M. 159. Teachers’ continuing professional development: Framing a model of outcomes. 2002: Relative effects of Framing and Team assisted instructional Strategies on students’ learning outcomes in selected difficult chemistry concepts. F. (1992). I. Educational Studies in Mathematics. Grouws (Ed. Harland. In D. British Journal of In-Service Education. 42(3). K.O. C. An intensive teaching and learning environment for graph sketching. Unpublished Ph. 32. J.. 71. 23(1). 611-626. M..

(pp. Effects of mathematics methods courses on the mathematical attitudes and content knowledge of preservice teachers. & Cole. Harvard Educational Review. D. Chicago. (2001). Journal of Teacher Education. Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. 57(1).Muijs.). & Miller.J. E. 91(2). Shulman. S. 1-22. 4-14. 239278). National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. In L.. L. Shulman. (2000). 30(1). Teachers’ beliefs and behaviours: What really matters? Journal of Classroom Interaction. Correnti. 25-37. H.. (1998). B. D. Ill. (2002).. Mathematics education in the twentieth century.. 18 . survey research tells us about teacher effects on student achievement: Insights from the “Prospects” study of elementary schools. VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. L. R. R. J. 104(8). Schunk. (2002). J. 108. S. Quinn. Rowan. N. Corno (Ed. (1996). Schoenfeld. 37. (1986). S. 37(2). H.: Merrill. D. (2002). Teachers College Record. AsiaPacific Journal of Teacher Education. What largescale. 15(2). Teaching content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge: A model from geography education. Pedagogical content knowledge: How do student teachers identify and describe the causes of their pupils learning difficulties. (1996). D. Principles and standards for school mathematics. Englewood Cliffs. Education across a century: The centennial volume. Learning theories: An educational perspective (2nd ed. R.). Ormrod. B. & Reynolds.: National Society for the Study of Education. 1525-1567. Reston. 3-15. (1987). A. J. Educational Researcher. Journal of Educational Research. University of Chicago Press. 47(1). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Penso.

147-164). (1984). Thompson. Educational Studies in Mathematics.G. London: David Fulton 19 . A. The relationship of teachers’ conceptions of mathematics and mathematics teaching to instructional practice. A. (pp. New York: Macmillan. Grouws (Ed. 15. (1992). A. In D. Expert teaching: Knowledge and pedagogy to lead the profession.G. Turner-Bisset. R. 105-127.). Teachers’ beliefs and conceptions: A synthesis of the research.Thompson. (2001). Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning: A project of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

there are four options ranging from Strongly Agree (SA). and Disagree (D) in this section. Now tick appropriately (√) the option that best suit your opinions.QUESTIONNAIRE THE RELATIVE IMPACT OF TEACHERS’ BEHAVIOUR TO NURSERY SCHOOL PERFORMANCE IN MATHS SECTION A NAME:____________________ SEX: MALE ______________ AGE _______________ SECTION B In this Section. Agree (A). Strongly Disagree (SD). 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 .

- DeanUploaded byherher01
- Business GameUploaded byRiyas Yahiyakhan
- practicum 3 summative evaluationUploaded byapi-395453264
- transcript tcsjUploaded byapi-362428103
- Concept of TeachingUploaded bySathish Rajamani
- LCUploaded byEarl Conese
- Business Communication - EnG301 Power Point Slides Lecture 05Uploaded byFriti Friti
- alternative course credit policyUploaded byapi-246262669
- gaelscoil banndanUploaded byapi-268011476
- CA Collaborative 8th Grade AlgebraUploaded byJack Hung
- The Divide Between Policy and Practice in Efl High School Classrooms in JapanUploaded byGlobal Research and Development Services
- cover letterUploaded byapi-298227236
- ADEC Al Hamdanya Grand Private School 2015 2016Uploaded byEdarabia.com
- CFSManual_Ch06_052009Uploaded byyadiarriaza
- Annotated Bibliography H-MUploaded byReuben Justin M. Vitto
- el_196811_brownUploaded byoluomo1
- resume-michelle sciulloUploaded byapi-240400708
- 5,6- Personality & Attitudes ReadonlyUploaded byPriyanka Rajanala
- BasemAbdelrahman, PMP, CPLPProfile (10)Uploaded byBasem Abdelrahman
- Personal Qualities of a Good TeacherUploaded byChe Barundia Oña
- cv-template-School-Teacher.docxUploaded byJauhar Jauharabad
- New Elementary Teachers’ Knowledge and Beliefs about Instructional.pdfUploaded byPJ Gape
- Design of an Integrated Curriculum for Alianza Social Educativa AseUploaded byYamith J. Fandiño
- philosophy statementUploaded byapi-301987252
- DO_s2016_042--DLLUploaded byLee Ann Cabasi
- Studies in Teacher Education PsychologyUploaded byYasmina Hassaine
- Chapter6 CultureUploaded byLabarinto Eron John
- maths lessonplan 8 10 12Uploaded byapi-185218679
- ashley bowers rlUploaded byapi-259918676
- CV AssaignmentUploaded byBasem Abdelrahman

- Female Teachers Job StressUploaded by'Emmanuel Orimogunje
- Pilot StudyUploaded by'Emmanuel Orimogunje
- Boko HaramUploaded by'Emmanuel Orimogunje
- Teachers Perception 2Uploaded by'Emmanuel Orimogunje
- Osomo RealismUploaded by'Emmanuel Orimogunje
- Water for WATERUploaded by'Emmanuel Orimogunje
- constituionUploaded by'Emmanuel Orimogunje
- Advantages of division of labourUploaded by'Emmanuel Orimogunje
- Teachers Behaviour and Maths PerformanceUploaded by'Emmanuel Orimogunje