Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Effect of Content Knowledge and Pedagogical Content Knowledge on Instructional Quality and Student Achievement

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Cognitive Activation in the Mathematics Classroom and Professional Competence of Teachers

Part of the book series: Mathematics Teacher Education ((MTEN,volume 8))

Abstract

This chapter presents the findings of analyses testing whether and to what extent mathematics teachers’ content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge systematically impact the quality of their instruction and, in turn, their students’ learning progress. Analyses based on a representative sample of grade 10 classes and their mathematics teachers showed that teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge was theoretically and empirically distinguishable from their content knowledge. Multilevel structural equation models revealed a substantial positive effect of pedagogical content knowledge on students’ learning gains that was mediated by the provision of cognitive activation and individual learning support.

This chapter is based on the following article: Baumert, J.; Kunter, M.; Blum, W.; Brunner, M.; Dubberke, T.; Jordan, A.; … Tsai, Y.-M. (2010). Teachers’ mathematical knowledge, cognitive activation in the classroom, and student progress. American Educational Research Journal, 47 (1), 133–180, Copyright 2010 by American Educational Research Association (Reprinted by permission of SAGE Publications, Inc.)

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • American Council on Education (1999) To touch the future: transforming the way teachers are taught. American Council on Education, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Attewell P, Domina T (2008) Raising the bar: curricular intensity and academic performance. Educ Eval Policy Anal 30(1):51–71. doi:10.3102/0162373707313409

    Google Scholar 

  • Ball DL (1990) The mathematical understandings that prospective teachers bring to teacher education. Elem School J 90(4):449–466. doi:10.1086/461626

    Google Scholar 

  • Ball DL (1991) Research on teaching mathematics: making subject-matter knowledge part of the equation. In: Brophy J (ed) Advances in research on teaching, vol 2, Teachers’ knowledge of subject matter as it relates to their teaching practice. JAI Press, Greenwich, pp 1–48

    Google Scholar 

  • Ball DL, Bass H (2003) Toward a practice-based theory of mathematical knowledge for teaching. In: Davis B, Simmt E (eds) Proceedings of the 2002 annual meeting of the Canadian Mathematics Education Study Group, Canadian Mathematics Education Study Group/Groupe Canadien d’étude en didactique des mathématiques, Edmonton/Alberta, pp 3–14

    Google Scholar 

  • Ball DL, Lubienski ST, Mewborn DS (2001) Research on teaching mathematics: the unsolved problem of teachers’ mathematical knowledge. In: Richardson V (ed) Handbook of research on teaching, 4th edn. American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC, pp 433–456

    Google Scholar 

  • Ballou D, Podgursky M (2000) Reforming teacher preparation and licensing: what is the evidence? Teach Coll Rec 102(1):5–27. doi:10.1111/0161-4681.00046

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumert J, Artelt C (2002) Bereichsübergreifende Perspektiven [Domain-transcending perspectives]. In: Baumert J, Artelt C, Klieme E, Neubrand M, Prenzel M, Schiefele U, … Weiß M (eds) PISA 2000: Die Länder der Bundesrepublik Deutschland im Vergleich. Leske + Budrich, Opladen, pp 219–235

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumert J, Kunter M (2006) Stichwort: Professionelle Kompetenz von Lehrkräften [Teachers’ professional competence]. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft 9(4):469–520. doi:10.1007/s11618-006-0165-2

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumert J, Schümer G (2001) Familiäre Lebensverhältnisse, Bildungsbeteiligung und Kompetenzerwerb [Family background, educational participation, and competency acquisition]. In: Baumert J, Klieme E, Neubrand M, Prenzel M, Schiefele U, Schneider W, … Weiß M (eds) PISA 2000: Basiskompetenzen von Schülerinnen und Schülern im internationalen Vergleich. Leske + Budrich, Opladen, pp 323–407

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumert J, Kunter M, Blum W, Brunner M, Dubberke T, Jordan A, … Tsai Y-M (2010) Teachers’ mathematical knowledge, cognitive activation in the classroom and student progress. Am Educ Res J 47(1):133–180. doi:10.3102/0002831209345157

    Google Scholar 

  • Blömeke S, Kaiser G, Lehmann R (eds) (2008) Professionelle Kompetenz angehender Lehrerinnen und Lehrer: Wissen, Überzeugungen und Lerngelegenheiten deutscher Mathematik-­Studierender und -Referendare – erste Ergebnisse zur Wirksamkeit der Lehrerausbildung [Professional ­competence of prospective teachers—knowledge, beliefs, and learning opportunities of mathematics teacher candidates in Germany: initial findings on the effectiveness of teacher education]. Waxmann, Münster

    Google Scholar 

  • Blömeke S, Lehmann R, Kaiser G (eds) (2010) TEDS-M 2008: Professionelle Kompetenz und Lerngelegenheiten angehender Mathematiklehrkräfte für die Sekundarstufe I im internationalen Vergleich [TEDS-M 2008: professional competence and learning opportunities of prospective lower secondary mathematics teachers in international comparison]. Waxmann, Münster

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloom HS, Hill CJ, Black AR, Lipsey MW (2008) Performance trajectories and performance gaps as achievement effect-size benchmarks for educational interventions. J Res Educ Eff 1(4):289–328

    Google Scholar 

  • Bollen KA, Long JS (1993) Testing structural equation models. Sage, Newbury Park

    Google Scholar 

  • Borko H, Livingston C (1989) Cognition and improvisation: differences in mathematics instruction by expert and novice teachers. Am Educ Res J 26(4):473–498

    Google Scholar 

  • Borko H, Eisenhart M, Brown C, Underhill R, Jones D, Agard P (1992) Learning to teach hard mathematics: do novice teachers and their instructors give up too easily? J Res Math Educ 23(3):194–222. doi:10.2307/749118

    Google Scholar 

  • Bransford J, Darling-Hammond L, LePage P (2005a) Introduction. In: Darling-Hammond L, Bransford J (eds) Preparing teachers for a changing world. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp 1–39

    Google Scholar 

  • Bransford J, Derry SJ, Berliner CD, Hammerness K (2005b) Theories of learning and their roles in teaching. In: Darling-Hammond L, Bransford J (eds) Preparing teachers for a changing world. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp 40–87

    Google Scholar 

  • Bromme R (1992) Der Lehrer als Experte [The teacher as expert]. Huber, Berne

    Google Scholar 

  • Bromme R (1997) Kompetenzen, Funktionen und unterrichtliches Handeln des Lehrers [Competencies, functions, and instructional practice of teachers]. In: Weinert FE (ed) Enzyklopädie der Psychologie, vol 3, Psychologie des Unterrichts und der Schule. Hogrefe, Göttingen, pp 177–212

    Google Scholar 

  • Brophy J (2000) Teaching. International Academy of Education, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • Clausen M (2002) Unterrichtsqualität – Eine Frage der Perspektive? [Instructional quality–a question of perspective?]. Waxmann, Münster

    Google Scholar 

  • Cochran-Smith M, Zeichner KM (2005) Studying teacher education: the report of the AERA panel on research and teacher education. Erlbaum, Mahwah

    Google Scholar 

  • Darling-Hammond L (2000) Teacher quality and student achievement: a review of state policy evidence. Educ Policy Anal Arch 8(1):1–46

    Google Scholar 

  • Darling-Hammond L (2006) No child left behind and high school reform. Harv Educ Rev 76(4):642–667

    Google Scholar 

  • De Corte E, Greer B, Verschaffel L (1996) Mathematics teaching and learning. In: Berliner DC, Calfee RC (eds) Handbook of educational psychology. Erlbaum, Mahwah, pp 491–549

    Google Scholar 

  • Deng Z (2007) Knowing the subject matter of a secondary school science subject. J Curriculum Stud 39(5):503–535. doi:10.1080/00220270701305362

    Google Scholar 

  • Desimone LM (2009) Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educ Res 38(3):181–199. doi:10.3102/0013189X08331140

    Google Scholar 

  • Döhrmann M, Kaiser G, Blömeke S (2010) Messung des mathematischen und mathematikdidaktischen Wissen: Theoretischer Rahmen und Teststruktur [Measuring mathematical knowledge and mathematical pedagogical knowledge: theoretical framework and test structure]. In: Blömeke S, Lehmann R, Kaiser G (eds) TEDS-M 2008: Professionelle Kompetenz und Lerngelegenheiten angehender Mathematiklehrkräfte für die Sekundarstufe I im internationalen Vergleich. Waxmann, Münster, pp 169–196

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehmke T, Blum W, Neubrand M, Jordan A, Ulfig F (2006) Wie verändert sich die mathematische Kompetenz von der neunten zur zehnten Klassenstufe? [How does mathematical literacy change from grade 9 to 10?]. In: Prenzel M, Baumert J, Blum W, Lehmann R, Leutner D, Neubrand M, … Schiefele U (eds) PISA 2003: Untersuchungen zur Kompetenzentwicklung im Verlauf eines Schuljahres. Waxmann, Münster, pp 63–86

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhart M, Borko H, Underhill R, Brown C, Jones D, Agard P (1993) Conceptual knowledge fall through the cracks: complexities of learning to teach mathematics for understanding. J Res Math Educ 24(1):8–40. doi:10.2307/749384

    Google Scholar 

  • Expertenkommission (2007) Ausbildung von Lehrerinnen und Lehrern in Nordrhein-Westfalen – Empfehlungen der Expertenkommission zur Ersten Phase [Education of teachers in North Rhein-Westphalia: recommendations of the expert committee]. Ministry of Innovation, Science, Research, and Technology, Düsseldorf

    Google Scholar 

  • Fennema E, Franke ML (1992) Teachers’ knowledge and its impact. In: Grouws DA (ed) Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning. Macmillan, New York, pp 147–164

    Google Scholar 

  • Fennema E, Carpenter TP, Franke ML, Levi L, Jacobs VR, Empson SB (1996) A longitudinal study of learning to use children’s thinking in mathematics instruction. J Res Math Educ 27(4):403–434. doi:10.2307/749875

    Google Scholar 

  • Floden RE, Meniketti M (2005) Research on the effects of coursework in the arts and sciences and in the foundations of education. In: Cochran-Smith M, Zeichner KM (eds) Studying teacher education. Erlbaum, Mahwah, pp 261–308

    Google Scholar 

  • Ganzeboom HBG, Treiman DJ (2003) Three internationally standardised measures for comparative research on occupational status. In: Hoffmeyer-Zlotnik JHP, Wolf C (eds) Advances in cross-national comparison: a European working book for demographic and socio-economic variables. Kluwer Academic/Plenum, New York, pp 159–193

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldhaber D, Brewer DJ (1997) Evaluating the effect of teacher degree level on educational performance. In: Fowler JW (ed) Developments in school finance 1996. National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education, Washington, DC, pp 197–210

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldhaber D, Brewer DJ (2000) Does teacher certification matter? High school teacher certification status and student achievement. Educ Eval Policy Anal 22(2):129–145

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodson IF, Marsh C (1996) Studying school subjects. Falmer Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodson IF, Anstead CJ, Mangan JM (1998) Subject knowledge: readings for the study of school subjects. Falmer Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodson IF, Hopmann S, Riquarts K (1999) Das Schulfach als Handlungsrahmen: Vergleichende Untersuchung zur Geschichte und Funktion der Schulfächer [The school subject as a frame of reference: a comparative study of the history and function of school subjects]. Böhlau, Cologne

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham JW, Cumsille PE, Elek-Fisk E (2003) Methods for handling missing data. In: Velicer WF (ed) Handbook of psychology: research methods in psychology, vol 2. Wiley, Hoboken, pp 87–114

    Google Scholar 

  • Greeno JG, Collins AM, Resnick LB (1996) Cognition and learning. In: Berliner DC, Calfee RC (eds) Handbook of educational psychology. Erlbaum, Mahwah, pp 15–46

    Google Scholar 

  • Grossman PL (1995) Teachers’ knowledge. In: Anderson LW (ed) International encyclopedia of teaching and teacher education, vol 2. Pergamon Press, Oxford, UK, pp 20–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Grossman PL, McDonald M (2008) Back to the future: directions for research in teaching and teacher education. Am Educ Res J 45(1):184–205. doi:10.3102/0002831207312906

    Google Scholar 

  • Grossman PL, Schoenfeld A (2005) Teaching subject matter. In: Darling-Hammond L, Bransford J (eds) Preparing teachers for a changing world. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp 201–231

    Google Scholar 

  • Gudmundsdottir S (1991) Pedagogical models of subject matter. In: Brophy J (ed) Advances in research on teaching, vol 2, Teachers’ knowledge of subject matter as it relates to their teaching practice. JAI Press, Greenwich, pp 265–304

    Google Scholar 

  • Harbison RW, Hanushek EA (1992) Educational performance of the poor: lessons from rural northeast Brazil. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Heller KA, Perleth C (2000) Kognitiver Fähigkeitstest für 4.–12. Klassen: (KFT 4–12+R) [Cognitive abilities test for grades 4–12: (KFT 4–12+R)]. Hogrefe, Göttingen

    Google Scholar 

  • Hiebert J, Stigler JW, Jacobs JK, Givvin KB, Garnier H, Smith M, … Gallimore R (2005) Mathematics teaching in the United States today (and tomorrow): results from the TIMSS 1999 Video Study. Educ Eval Policy Anal 27(2):111–132. doi:10.3102/01623737027002111

    Google Scholar 

  • Hiebert J, Morris AK, Berk D, Jansen A (2007) Preparing teachers to learn from teaching. J Teach Educ 58(1):47–61. doi:10.1177/0022487106295726

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill HC (2007) Mathematical knowledge of middle school teachers: implications for the no child left behind policy initiative. Educ Eval Policy Anal 29(2):95–114. doi:10.3102/0162373707301711

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill HC, Lubienski ST (2007) Teachers’ mathematics knowledge for teaching and school context: a study of California teachers. Educ Policy 21(5):747–768. doi:10.1177/0895904807307061

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill HC, Schilling SG, Ball DL (2004) Developing measures of teachers’ mathematics knowledge for teaching. Elem School J 105(1):11–30. doi:10.1086/428763

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill HC, Rowan B, Ball D (2005) Effects of teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching on student achievement. Am Educ Res J 42(2):371–406. doi:10.3102/00028312042002371

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill HC, Ball DL, Blunk M, Goffney IM, Rowan B (2007) Validating the ecological assumption: the relationship of measure scores to classroom teaching and student learning. Meas Interdiscip Res Perspect 5(2–3):107–117

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill CJ, Bloom HS, Black AR, Lipsey MW (2008) Empirical benchmarks for interpreting effect sizes in research. Child Dev Perspect 2(3):172–177. doi:10.1111/j.1750-8606.2008.00061.x

    Google Scholar 

  • Jordan A, Ross N, Krauss S, Baumert J, Blum W, Neubrand M, … Kunter M (2006) Klassifikationsschema für Mathematikaufgaben: Dokumentation der Aufgabenkategorisierung im COACTIV-Projekt [Classification scheme for mathematics tasks: documentation of task categorization in the COACTIV project]. Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Jöreskog KG, Sörbom D, Du Toit S, Du Toit M (2003) LISREL 8: new statistical features (3rd printing with revisions). Scientific Software International, Lincolnwood

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahan J, Cooper D, Bethea K (2003) The role of mathematics teachers’ content knowledge in their teaching: a framework for research applied to a study of student teachers. J Math Teach Educ 6(3):223–252. doi:10.1023/A:1025175812582

    Google Scholar 

  • Klieme E, Schümer G, Knoll S (2001) Mathematikunterricht in der Sekundarstufe I: „Aufgabenkultur“ und Unterrichtsgestaltung [Mathematics instruction at lower secondary level: “Task culture” and quality of instruction]. In: Klieme E, Baumert J (eds) TIMSS: Impulse für Schule und Unterricht. Forschungsbefunde, Reforminitiativen, Praxisberichte und Video-­Dokumente. BMBF, Bonn, pp 43–57

    Google Scholar 

  • Krauss S, Baumert J, Blum W (2008a) Secondary mathematics teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge and content knowledge: validation of the COACTIV constructs. Int J Math Educ 40(5):873–892. doi:10.1007/s11858-008-0141-9

    Google Scholar 

  • Krauss S, Brunner M, Kunter M, Baumert J, Blum W, Neubrand M, Jordan A (2008b) Pedagogical content knowledge and content knowledge of secondary mathematics teachers. J Educ Psychol 100(3):716–725. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.100.3.716

    Google Scholar 

  • Kunter M, Baumert J (2006) Who is the expert? Construct and criteria validity of student and teacher ratings of instruction. Learn Environ Res 9(3):231–251

    Google Scholar 

  • Kunter M, Dubberke T, Baumert J, Blum W, Brunner M, Jordan A, … Tsai Y-M (2006) Mathematikunterricht in den PISA-Klassen 2004: Rahmenbedingungen, Formen und Lehr-­Lernprozesse [Mathematics instruction in the PISA 2004 classes: conditions, forms, and teaching and learning processes]. In: Prenzel M, Baumert J, Blum W, Lehmann R, Leutner D, Neubrand M, … Schiefele U (eds) PISA 2003: Untersuchungen zur Kompetenzentwicklung im Verlauf eines Schuljahres. Waxmann, Münster, pp 161–194

    Google Scholar 

  • Lanahan L, McGrath DJ, McLaughlin M, Burian-Fitzgerald M, Salganik L (2005) Fundamental problems in the measurement of instructional processes: estimating reasonable effect sizes and conceptualizing what is important to measure. American Institutes for Research, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Leinhardt G (2001) Instructional explanations: a commonplace for teaching and location for contrast. In: Richardson V (ed) Handbook of research on teaching, 4th edn. American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC, pp 333–357

    Google Scholar 

  • Lüdtke O, Robitzsch A, Trautwein U, Köller O (2007) Umgang mit fehlenden Werten in der psychologischen Forschung [Handling of missing data in psychological research: problems and solutions]. Psychologische Rundschau 58(2):103–117

    Google Scholar 

  • Ma L (1999) Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics: teachers’ understanding of fundamental mathematics in China and the United States. Erlbaum, Hillsdale

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer RE (2004) Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? Am Psychol 59(1):14–19. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.59.1.14

    Google Scholar 

  • Mewborn D (2003) Teachers, teaching, and their professional development. In: Kilpatrick J, Martin WG, Schifter D (eds) A research companion to principles and standards for school mathematics. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Reston, pp 45–52

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell R, Barth P (1999) Not good enough: a content analysis of teacher licensing examinations: how teacher licensing tests fall short. Thinking K-16 3(1):1–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Monk DH (1994) Subject area preparation of secondary mathematics and science teachers and student achievement. Econ Educ Rev 1(2):125–145. doi:10.1016/0272-7757(94)90003-5

    Google Scholar 

  • Monk DH, King JA (1994) Multilevel teacher resource effects in pupil performance in secondary mathematics and science: the case of teacher subject matter preparation. In: Ehrenberg RG (ed) Choices and consequences: contemporary policy issues in education. ILR Press, Ithaca, pp 29–58

    Google Scholar 

  • Mullens JE, Murnane RJ, Willett JB (1996) The contribution of training and subject matter knowledge to teaching effectiveness: a multilevel analysis of longitudinal evidence from Belize. Comp Educ Rev 40(2):139–157. doi:10.1086/447369

    Google Scholar 

  • Munby H, Russell T, Martin AK (2001) Teachers’ knowledge and how it develops. In: Richardson V (ed) Handbook of research on teaching, 4th edn. American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC, pp 877–904

    Google Scholar 

  • Muthén LK, Muthén BO (2004) Mplus statistical analysis with latent variables: user’s guide, 3rd edn. Muthén & Muthén, Los Angeles

    Google Scholar 

  • National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) (2000) Principles and standards for school mathematics. NCTM, Reston

    Google Scholar 

  • National Education Longitudinal Study (NELS) (1995) National education longitudinal study of 1988: conducting cross-cohort comparisons using HS&B, NAEP, and NELS:88 academic transcript data

    Google Scholar 

  • National Mathematics Advisory Panel (2008) Foundations for success: the final report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. U.S. Department of Education, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Nye B, Hedges LV, Konstantopoulos S (2000) Effects of small classes on academic achievement: the results of the Tennessee class size experiment. Am Educ Res J 37(1):123–151

    Google Scholar 

  • Nye B, Konstantopoulos S, Hedges LV (2004) How large are teacher effects? Educ Eval Policy Anal 26(3):237–257. doi:10.3102/01623737026003237

    Google Scholar 

  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (eds) (2004) PISA: Learning for tomorrow’s world. First results from PISA 2003. France: OECD

    Google Scholar 

  • Peugh JL, Enders CK (2004) Missing data in educational research: a review of reporting practices and suggestions for improvement. Rev Educ Res 74(4):525–556

    Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich PR, Marx RW, Boyle RA (1993) Beyond cold conceptual change: the role of motivational beliefs and classroom contextual factors in the process of conceptual change. Rev Educ Res 63(2):167–199

    Google Scholar 

  • Prenzel M, Carstensen CH, Schöps K, Maurischat C (2006) Die Anlage des Längsschnitts bei PISA 2003 [The design of the PISA 2003 longitudinal study]. In: Prenzel M, Baumert J, Blum W, Lehmann R, Leutner D, Neubrand M, … Schiefele U (eds) PISA 2003: Untersuchungen zur Kompetenzentwicklung im Verlauf eines Schuljahres. Waxmann, Münster, pp 29–62

    Google Scholar 

  • Puntambekar S, Hübscher R (2005) Tools for scaffolding students in a complex learning environment: what have we gained and what have we missed? Educ Psychol 40(1):1–12. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep4001_1

    Google Scholar 

  • Putnam RT, Heaton RM, Prawat RS, Remillard J (1992) Teaching mathematics for understanding: discussing case studies of four fifth-grade teachers. Elem School J 93(2):213–228. doi:10.1086/461723

    Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds MC (ed) (1989) Knowledge base for the beginning teacher. Pergamon Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB (1983) The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 70(1):41–55. doi:10.1093/biomet/70.1.41

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowan B, Chiang F-S, Miller RJ (1997) Using research on employees’ performance to study the effects of teachers on students’ achievement. Sociol Educ 70(4):256–284. doi:10.2307/2673267

    Google Scholar 

  • Schafer JL, Graham JW (2002) Missing data: our view of the state of the art. Psychol Methods 7:147–177. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.7.2.147

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheerens J, Bosker R (1997) The foundations of educational effectiveness. Pergamon Press, Oxford, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Schilling SG, Hill HC (2007) Assessing measures of mathematical knowledge for teaching: A validity argument approach. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 5(2–3): 70–80

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt WH, Tatto MT, Bankov K, Blömeke S, Cedillo T, Cogan L, … Schwille J (2007) The preparation gap: teacher education for middle school mathematics in six countries mathematics teaching in the 21st century (MT21). MSU Center for Research in Mathematics and Science Education, East Lansing

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider B, Carnoy M, Kilpatrick J, Raudenbush S, Schmidt W, Shavelson R (2005) Estimating causal effects in experiments and secondary analyses of large-scale datasets in education: a think tank white paper. American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoenfeld AH (1998) Toward a theory of teaching-in-context. Issues Educ 4(1):1–94. doi:10.1016/S1080-9724(99)80076-7

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoenfeld AH, Minstrell J, van Zee E (2000) The detailed analysis of an established teacher carrying out a non-traditional lesson. J Math Behav 18(3):281–325. doi:10.1016/S0732-3123 (99)00035-8

    Google Scholar 

  • Seidel T, Shavelson RJ (2007) Teaching effectiveness research in the past decade: the role of theory and research design in disentangling meta-analysis results. Rev Educ Res 7(4):454–499. doi:10.3102/0034654307310317

    Google Scholar 

  • Sfard A (2003) Balancing the unbalanceable: the NCTM standards in the light of theories of learning mathematics. In: Kilpatrick J, Martin G, Schifter D (eds) A research companion for NCTM standards. National Council for Teachers of Mathematics, Reston, pp 353–392

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherin MG (1996) The nature and dynamics of teachers’ content knowledge. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  • Shuell T (1996) Teaching and learning in the classroom context. In: Berliner CD, Calfee RC (eds) Handbook of educational psychology. Macmillan, New York, pp 726–764

    Google Scholar 

  • Shulman LS (1986) Those who understand: knowledge growth in teaching. Educ Res 15(2):4–14

    Google Scholar 

  • Shulman LS (1987) Knowledge and teaching: foundations of the new reform. Harv Educ Rev 57(1):1–22

    Google Scholar 

  • Shulman LS, Quinlan KM (1996) The comparative psychology of school subjects. In: Berliner DC, Calfee RC (eds) Handbook of educational psychology. Macmillan, New York, pp 399–422

    Google Scholar 

  • Stefanou CR, Perencevich K, DiCintio M, Turner JC (2004) Supporting autonomy in the classroom: ways teachers encourage student decision making and ownership. Educ Psychol 39(2):97–110. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep3902_2

    Google Scholar 

  • Stein MK, Baxter JA, Leinhardt G (1990) Subject-matter knowledge and elementary instruction: a case from functions and graphing. Am Educ Res J 27(4):639–663

    Google Scholar 

  • Stengel BS (1997) “Academic discipline” and “school subject”: contestable curricular concepts. J Curriculum Stud 29(5):585–602. doi:10.1080/002202797183928

    Google Scholar 

  • Stigler J, Hiebert J (2004) Improving mathematics teaching. Educ Leadersh 61(5):12–17

    Google Scholar 

  • Stodolsky SS (1988) The subject matters: classroom activity in math and social studies. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Stodolsky SS, Grossman PL (1995) The impact of subject matter on curricular activity: an analysis of five academic subjects. Am Educ Res J 32(2):227–249

    Google Scholar 

  • Stuart EA (2007) Estimating causal effects using school-level data sets. Educ Res 36(4):187–198. doi:10.3102/0013189X07303396

    Google Scholar 

  • Swafford JO, Jones GA, Thornton CA (1997) Increased knowledge in geometry and instructional practice. J Res Math Educ 28(4):476–483. doi:10.2307/749683

    Google Scholar 

  • Tatto MT, Schwille J, Senk S, Ingvarson L, Peck R, Rowley G (2008) Teacher Education and Development Study in Mathematics (TEDS-M): conceptual framework. Michigan State University, College of Education, Teacher Education and Development International Study Center, East Lansing

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson PW, Thompson AG (1994) Talking about rates conceptually, part I: a teacher’s struggle. J Res Math Educ 25(3):279–303. doi:10.2307/749339

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson AG, Thompson PW (1996) Talking about rates conceptually, part II: mathematical knowledge for teaching. J Res Math Educ 27(1):2–24. doi:10.2307/749194

    Google Scholar 

  • Thorndike RL, Hagen E (1971) Cognitive Abilities Test (CAT). Houghton Mifflin, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner JC, Meyer DK, Cox KE, Logan C, DiCintio M, Thomas CT (1998) Creating contexts for involvement in mathematics. J Educ Psychol 90(4):730–745. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.90.4.730

    Google Scholar 

  • Tymms P (2004) Effect sizes in multilevel models. In: Schagen I, Elliot K (eds) But what does it mean? The use of effect sizes in educational research. National Foundation for Educational Research, London, pp 55–66

    Google Scholar 

  • Vosniadou S, Vamvakoussi X (2005) Examining mathematics learning from a conceptual change point of view: implications for the design of learning environments. In: Verschaffel L, Dochy F, Boekaerts M, Vosniadou S (eds) Instructional psychology: past, present and future trends. Fifteen essays in honour of Erik De Corte. Elsevier, Oxford, UK, pp 55–70

    Google Scholar 

  • Vosniadou S, Verschaffel L (2004) Extending the conceptual change approach to mathematics learning and teaching. Learn Instr 14(5):445–451

    Google Scholar 

  • Walberg HJ, Paik SJ (2000) Effective educational practices. International Academy of Education, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • Walshaw M, Anthony G (2008) The teacher’s role in classroom discourse: a review of recent research into mathematics classrooms. Rev Educ Res 78(3):516–551. doi:10.3102/0034654308320292

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang M, Haertel G, Walberg H (1993) Toward a knowledge base for school learning. Rev Educ Res 63(3):249–294

    Google Scholar 

  • Warm TA (1989) Weighted likelihood estimation of ability in item response theory. Psychometrika 54(3):427–450. doi:10.1007/BF02294627

    Google Scholar 

  • Wayne AJ, Youngs P (2003) Teacher characteristics and student achievement gains: a review. Rev Educ Res 73(1):89–122. doi:10.3102/00346543073001089

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenglinsky H (2002) How schools matter: the link between teacher classroom practices and student academic performance. Educ Policy Anal Arch 10(12). Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v10n12/

  • Wilson SM, Floden R (2003) Creating effective teachers: concise answers for hard questions. American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson SM, Youngs P (2005) Research on accountability processes in teacher education. In: Cochran-Smith M, Zeichner KM (eds) Studying teacher education: the report of the AERA panel on research and teacher education. Erlbaum, Mahwah, pp 591–643

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson SM, Floden R, Fernini-Mundy J (2001) Teacher preparation research: current knowledge, gaps, and recommendations. A research report prepared for the U.S. Department of Education. Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Winship C, Morgan SL (2007) Counterfactuals and causal inference: methods and principles for social research. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu ML, Adams RJ, Wilson M (1997) ConQuest: generalized item response modelling software manual. Australian Council for Educational Research, Melbourne

    Google Scholar 

  • Zumwalt KM, Craig E (2005) Teachers’ characteristics: research on the indicators of quality. In: Cochran-Smith M, Zeichner KM (eds) Studying teacher education: the report of the AERA panel on research and teacher education. Erlbaum, Mahwah, pp 157–260

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Educational Research, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Lentzeallee 94, 14195, Berlin, Germany

    Jürgen Baumert

  2. Institute of Psychology, Goethe University Frankfurt, PEG, Grüneburgplatz 1, 60323, Frankfurt, Germany

    Mareike Kunter

Authors
  1. Jürgen Baumert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mareike Kunter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jürgen Baumert .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. , Institute of Psychology, University of Frankfurt am Main, Postfach 125, Frankfurt am Main, 60054, Germany

    Mareike Kunter

  2. , Center for Educational Research, Max Planck Institute for Human Developme, Lentzeallee 94, Berlin, 14195, Germany

    Jürgen Baumert

  3. Mathematik/Informatik, Universität Kassel, Kassel, 34109, Germany

    Werner Blum

  4. Christian Albrecht University, Kiel, Lentzeallee 94, Berlin, 14195, Germany

    Ute Klusmann

  5. , Faculty of Mathematics Education of Math, University of Regensburg, Universitätsstr. 31, Regensburg, 93053, Germany

    Stefan Krauss

  6. , Institute of Mathematics, Carl von Ossietzky University of Oldenbu, Oldenburg, 26111, Germany

    Michael Neubrand

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Busine0ss Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Baumert, J., Kunter, M. (2013). The Effect of Content Knowledge and Pedagogical Content Knowledge on Instructional Quality and Student Achievement. In: Kunter, M., Baumert, J., Blum, W., Klusmann, U., Krauss, S., Neubrand, M. (eds) Cognitive Activation in the Mathematics Classroom and Professional Competence of Teachers. Mathematics Teacher Education, vol 8. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5149-5_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation