EDITORS

Tanya Evans
Ofer Marmur
Jodie Hunter
Generosa Leach
Jyoti Jhagroo

PROCEEDINGS OF THE 47th

CONFERENCE OF THE INTERNATIONAL
GROUP FOR THE PSYCHOLOGY OF
MATHEMATICS EDUCATION

Auckland VOLUME 2
Aotearoa New Zealand Research Reports
July 17-21 (A – G)
2024
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 47th CONFERENCE OF THE INTERNATIONAL
GROUP FOR THE PSYCHOLOGY OF MATHEMATICS EDUCATION

Auckland
New Zealand
July 17-21
2024

EDITORS
Tanya Evans
Ofer Marmur
Jodie Hunter
Generosa Leach
Jyoti Jhagroo

VOLUME 2
Research Reports
(A – G)
 PME-47
RETHINKING MATHEMATICS EDUCATION TOGETHER
Cite as:
Evans, T., Marmur, O., Hunter, J., Leach, G., & Jhagroo, J. (Eds.) (2024).
Proceedings of the 47th Conference of the International Group for the
Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2). Auckland, New Zealand: PME.

Website: https://events.massey.ac.nz/pme-47-conference/

Proceedings are also available on the IGPME website:

http://www.igpme.org

Copyright © 2024 left to authors

All rights reserved

ISBN: 978-1-0670278-2
ISSN: 0771-100X

Logo designed by Jason Lamontanaro

 MATHEMATICS TEACHER EDUCATORS’ EXPERTISE BASED
ON PEDAGOGICAL COMMUNICATION
Jonei Cerqueira Barbosa and Olive Chapman
Federal University of Bahia (Brazil) University of Calgary (Canada)

This study aimed to understand features of expertise of Mathematics Teacher

Educators (MTEs) based on their pedagogical communication in the form of academic
booklets to support preservice teachers’ learning. The booklets, authored by
experienced Brazilian MTEs, were analysed using grounded theory methods. The
findings offer insights of MTEs' expertise in terms of three pedagogical contexts
(mathematics, teaching mathematics, and academic research) and bridge-building
skills linking these contexts. The study offers a basis to enhance our understanding and
conduct future research on MTEs' expertise.

INTRODUCTION
Research on the Mathematics Teacher Educator (MTE) is in its infancy (Beswick &
Goos, 2018) compared to research on mathematics teachers that have had significant
attention over the last few decades. The need to research Mathematics Teacher
Educators (MTEs) is essential to understand how they could most effectively prepare
and further develop mathematics teachers for a rapidly changing world (Chapman et
al., 2022). Recent studies on MTEs have focused on those formally responsible for the
professional development of mathematics teachers (Chapman, 2021; Coura & Passos,
2021; Martignone et al., 2022; Masingila et al., 2018). These studies provide insights
into MTEs’ mathematical knowledge and practice, but as Chapman (2021) argued,
there needs to be consideration of alternative or expanded ways of researching and
understanding the MTE in relation to their work with educating teachers. In this paper,
we offer a possible way of doing this through a study that investigated MTEs’
expertise, which is interpreted broadly as an amalgam of knowledge, social
participation, and communication to teach mathematics teachers. This study
specifically focused on university-based MTEs and their expertise in preparing
preservice teachers through direct mathematics-related teacher education courses or
strategies. The aim was to identify key features of their expertise based on their
pedagogical communication to future teachers and new MTEs to further understand
their expertise. Following, we present related literature and theoretical perspectives,
the methodology, the results, and discussion of the findings.

RELATED LITERATURE AND THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES

Research on MTEs suggests specific ways of conceptualizing or understanding their
knowledge, practice, learning, and development (Beswick & Chapman, 2020; Goos &
Beswick, 2021). These ways tend to build on those used in research on mathematics
teachers. For example, research on MTEs often compares the specific mathematics
2 - 40
2024. In T. Evans, O. Marmur, J. Hunter, G. Leach, & J. Jhagroo (Eds.). Proceedings of the 47th Conference of
the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 40–47). PME.
 Barbosa & Chapman

knowledge of MTEs with that of mathematics teachers. Acknowledging that teachers

possess distinct mathematical knowledge, research has similarly recognized that MTEs
have a specific knowledge base (Chapman, 2021). This has implied efforts to expand
theoretical frameworks initially developed for teachers’ mathematical knowledge to
better understand MTEs' knowledge (Chapman, 2021).
Efforts to conceptualize MTE knowledge have led to the development of frameworks
like Mathematical Knowledge for Teaching Teachers (MKTT), inspired by the
Mathematical Knowledge for Teachers models. Researchers like Masingila et
al.(2018) and Superfine et al. (2020) have attempted to describe MKTT in various
domains. Martignone et al. (2022) expanded the Mathematics Teachers' Specialised
Knowledge (MTSK) model to create the Mathematics Teacher Educators' Specialised
Knowledge (MTESK) framework, which includes knowledge of teaching and learning
mathematics for students and teachers, as well as research knowledge in mathematics
education.
Beswick and Chapman (2015) raised the question of the distinctiveness of MTE
knowledge, suggesting it might be a form of meta-knowledge. Subsequent studies (e.g.,
Beswick & Goos, 2018) have recognised this meta-knowledge as part of MTE
knowledge. Beswick and Goos (2018) emphasised that MTE knowledge includes
understanding how teachers learn and develop competence. However, as Chapman
(2021) noted, the field still engages with diverse theoretical models and their
adaptations for MTEs from models used for mathematics teachers. Moreover, the
traditional focus on "knowledge" within the teacher thinking paradigm faces
challenges from social, situated, and communicational perspectives. Thus, there is an
ongoing need to explore beyond existing models. Helliwell and Chorney (2022)
suggest a focus on MTEs’ expertise as encompassing more than individual knowledge,
incorporating material and social factors. Accordingly, our study examines MTEs
through the lenses of expertise and pedagogical communication.
MTEs’ expertise is interpreted broadly in relation to practice, competence, skill, and
knowledge to teach mathematics teachers. We conceptualise MTEs’ expertise as an
amalgam of knowledge, social participation, and communication, reflecting the
specific know-how of MTEs in their role as educators. It encompasses how MTEs
anticipate, communicate, and facilitate pedagogical interactions with teachers. Thus,
similar to Helliwell and Chorney’s (2022) position, we view MTEs' expertise not as a
separate entity from how they pedagogically carry out and communicate their work.
Their expertise includes how they organise and carry out oral and written pedagogical
communication with prospective or in-service teachers to support their learning.
The construct of pedagogical communication can be seen in terms of the relationship
between the educator and the learner, which occurs through verbal, written, visual, or
gestural forms, with the purpose of constituting the message considered legitimate
(Bernstein, 2000). From this perspective, communication, which is pedagogical
because it has an educational purpose, involves the specialization, selection,

PME 47 – 2024 2 - 41
Barbosa & Chapman

sequencing, pacing, and criteria regarding the legitimate knowledge to be taught

(Bernstein, 2020). In this exploratory study of MTEs’ expertise, we adapted these
notions for researching experienced MTEs who developed written materials to support
preservice teachers' learning of mathematics for teaching and new/inexperienced
MTEs' learning to teach preservice teachers (PTs). This form of communication
represents the MTEs’ expertise that they are sharing with PTs and new MTEs. Thus, it
offers a means for us to explore the expertise of the MTEs. This combination of MTEs’
expertise and written pedagogical communication is also a unique way of researching
and understanding the work of MTEs.

METHODOLOGY
We used a grounded theory methodology (Charmaz, 2014) in this exploratory study to
derive theoretical insights from qualitative data, without using pre-established
theoretical models. This approach is consistent with Chapman's (2021) position that
research on MTEs should extend beyond adapting pre-established models based on
models of mathematics teachers’ knowledge.
Data sources consisted of pedagogical mathematics booklets created by ten Brazilian
MTEs, with experience ranging from seven to 30 years. Most of them, active in various
national universities, hold PhDs in Mathematics Education and contribute to research
in the field. The others, with PhDs in Mathematics, maintain a strong relationship with
Mathematics Education. These experienced MTEs (referred to as MTEs) created 20
booklets in their role as advisors for a preservice mathematics teacher program at the
newly established University of Federal District, Brazil, launched in the second
semester of 2023. The booklets were intended for use in preparing PTs through direct
mathematics-related teacher education courses or strategies and to support the
new/Inexperienced MTEs (IMTEs) that would be hired by the university for the new
education program. Thus, we viewed these booklets as encapsulating the MTEs’
expertise, which this study sought to understand.
The booklets, situated in a mathematics-content education context, covered
mathematics topics such as Numbers, Algebra, Geometry, Statistics, Probability, and
Measurement. Each booklet consisted of separate information directed to the PTs and
the IMTEs. For PTs, the information focused on tasks to develop their learning. For
the IMTEs, the information expanded on the PTs’ version to include guidance for them
to use it in the teacher education program. These booklets demonstrate how the
experienced MTEs who authored them articulated their pedagogical communication to
PTs and IMTEs at the university. Thus, as qualitative data for this study, they provided
insightful windows into the expertise of the MTEs.
Analysis of the data involved an emergent thematic approach through coding and axial
categorisation (Charmaz, 2014). The focus was on identifying features of expertise
among MTEs. Our analysis of the booklets resulted in identifying three principal
categories associated with three different pedagogical contexts: mathematics, teaching

2 - 42 PME 47 – 2024
 Barbosa & Chapman

mathematics and academic research. Each was characterized by its distinct purpose
regarding the pedagogical content communicated in the booklets. Connections made
among the categories were also identified within the booklets. These links emerged in
the information directed at the IMTEs as a “bridge-building” feature of the expertise
needed to engage the PTs in the mathematical activities/tasks. The three categories and
the links formed four themes (three pedagogical contexts and bridge-building) that
represent key features of the expertise for this group of MTEs, collectively, important
to meaningfully prepare PTs in a mathematics-content education context.

FINDINGS
The findings are presented in terms of the four themes that represent key features of
the expertise of the experienced MTEs related to preparing PTs through direct
mathematics-related teacher education courses. These themes are framed in three
pedagogical contexts and a process (bridge-building) that connects them.
MTEs’ expertise as pedagogical context of mathematics. The pedagogical context of
mathematics refers to tasks chosen by MTEs to broaden or deepen PTs' mathematical
understanding. This context emphasises the selection or creation of tasks and their
application in teacher education. Figure 1 exemplifies this pedagogical context.

Figure 1: Excerpts translated to English from an Algebra booklet.

In Figure 1, the MTE presents a task requiring the PTs to use Geogebra for exploring
the interplay between the parameters of a linear function's mathematical law and its
graphical representation. Figure 1 also depicts a subsequent dialogue box for IMTEs,
where the MTEs discuss potential responses, anticipate possible occurrences, and
discuss interventions. This exemplifies the MTEs’ expertise as pedagogical context of
mathematics, which extends beyond task selection or design to include foreseeing the
PTs’ responses and planning pedagogical interventions. In general, the MTEs’ written
pedagogical communication indicated that their pedagogical-based mathematics
content expertise includes a combination of knowledge of appropriate tasks to explore
a mathematics concept, PTs’ thinking in relation to the task, and intervention strategies
to support the PTs’ thinking about and learning of the concept.
MTEs’ expertise as pedagogical context of teaching mathematics. The pedagogical
context of teaching mathematics refers to the MTEs’ selection of tasks to enhance PTs'

PME 47 – 2024 2 - 43
Barbosa & Chapman

experiential knowledge, focusing on aspects of teaching mathematics practice. This

context involves engaging PTs in analysing curricular materials, student solutions,
teacher narratives, and classroom observations, always contextualised within school
practices. Figure 2 exemplifies this pedagogical context.

Figure 2: Excerpts translated to English from a Numbers booklet.

In Figure 2, the MTE introduces two narratives detailing fifth graders' approaches to a
mathematical problem, prompting PTs to analyse the students’ reasoning. The Figure
2 also shows how the MTE extends this initial task by suggesting tasks like applying
the problem with students or family members and linking algorithmic challenges to
operational understanding. This activity exemplifies a pedagogical context where
school-based mathematical solutions are central. In general, the MTEs’ pedagogical
communication indicated that their pedagogical-based mathematics-teaching expertise
includes designing tasks that concretely illustrate and allow PTs to engage in
mathematics teaching from the school perspective, using real or hypothetical examples.
MTEs’ expertise as pedagogical context of academic research. The pedagogical
context of academic research refers to MTEs’ communication of research findings
directly with the PTs. This use of research goes beyond informing MTEs’ teaching
practices but involves explicitly integrating research outcomes into educational tasks
with PTs, as depicted in the two examples in Figures 3.

Figure 3: Excerpts translated to English from booklets on Algebra and Numbers.

On the left of Figure 3, research presentation is integrated, as an argument, into a text
written to be used in the PTs’ learning. On the right of Figure 3, it is an activity for PTs
to engage with three academic articles, synthesising and discussing their insights with

2 - 44 PME 47 – 2024
 Barbosa & Chapman

peers. This approach aims to encourage PTs to distil findings and recommendations to
their professional practice. In general, the MTEs’ written pedagogical communication
indicated that their pedagogical-based academic research expertise includes selecting
pertinent mathematics education research for inclusion in teacher education, which can
be done in various ways, ranging from citing research studies to engaging PTs directly
with academic research.
MTEs’ expertise as bridge-building. The bridge-building metaphor refers to MTEs
explicitly making connections among the preceding mathematics, teaching
mathematics, and academic research pedagogical contexts. For instance, in Figure 4,
the MTE's pedagogical communication about linear equations involves introducing a
two-pan balance model, which aligns with the mathematics pedagogical context.
Although the situation is found in teaching practice, it was presented without this
reference on this extract. However, a subsequent reference to a scholarly article
critiquing the balance model's limitations matches with the academic research context.
The MTE then points out how these limitations might be addressed in classroom, which
now matches with the teaching mathematics context.

Figure 4: Excerpts translated to English from a booklet on Algebra.

Throughout the corpus occur other instances where the pedagogical contexts are
interconnected in many of the booklets, mostly how topics are sequenced. Another
example comes from one booklet which states that the IMTE should apply a
mathematical task with PTs to enhance their mathematical understanding. This is
followed by presenting school students’ solutions for the same task, prompting teachers
to discuss the students' reasoning and compare it to their own. This sequence, linking
both the mathematics and the teaching mathematics contexts, illustrates a bridge
between the two, prompting for relationships between teachers’ mathematical solutions
and student solutions. In general, the MTEs’ written pedagogical communication
indicated that their expertise includes a bridge-building process that involves inter-
linking of ideas from the three different pedagogical contexts (between any two or
among all three) to help PTs to understand the ideas in a connected way from different
perspectives or contexts.

PME 47 – 2024 2 - 45
Barbosa & Chapman

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

This study contributes to the current call by researchers (Beswick & Chapman, 2015;
Chapman, 2021; Helliwell & Chorney, 2022) to broaden the way we explore and
understand MTEs’ professional knowledge and practice. It demonstrates how a broader
conception of MTEs’ expertise that encompasses a fusion of consolidated experience,
knowledge, and modes of participation, and MTEs’ pedagogical communication to
support PTs’ learning could lead to understanding new features of MTEs’ expertise.
The findings suggest four of these features associated with three pedagogical contexts
(mathematics, teaching mathematics, academic research) and a bridge-building skill.
The three contexts are based on how the MTEs structured their pedagogical
communication, each serving a specific educational purpose. In the context of
mathematics, the MTEs’ expertise involved selecting, designing, and using
mathematical tasks to enhance PTs' mathematical understanding, without direct
reference to teaching practices. In the context of teaching mathematics, the MTEs’
expertise involved choosing activities that directly address school teaching practices
(real or hypothetical situations). In the context of academic research, the MTEs’
expertise involved dissemination of findings from research for the purpose of
informing teaching practice, ranging from informative texts to structured activities with
research reports.
The MTEs also demonstrated an important bridge-building skill of making meaningful
connections within and across the three contexts, based on their pedagogical
communication. This bridge-building feature of their expertise indicated the ways in
which they bridged the contexts to provide a meaningful basis for the PTs to engage
with and develop deep understanding of them.
In conclusion, the study suggests that MTEs’ expertise in preparing PTs through direct
mathematics-related teacher education courses/strategies includes features associated
with three pedagogical contexts. This study also suggests that MTEs’ expertise
includes a bridge-building feature used to integrate and navigate among multiple
pedagogical contexts. This bridge-building approach represents the dynamic interplay
between the different pedagogical contexts and the complexity of their professional
knowledge. Thus, it provides a basis to address the complexity of MTEs’ knowledge,
which, as Chapman (2021) noted, requires more attention.
While this exploratory study has limitations in terms of the sample of MTEs and
booklets used, it offers a basis to support future studies. For example, there needs to be
further exploration of the four aspects of expertise with other MTEs and to include
classroom observations of MTEs to understand these aspects from a lived perspective,
particularly the bridge-building approach. Exploring this bridge-building approach is
important to understand whether it exists in action, when and how it is used, and the
nature and treatment of possible tensions that likely exist among the three different
pedagogical contexts in trying to bridge them.

2 - 46 PME 47 – 2024
 Barbosa & Chapman

References
Bernstein, B. 2000. Pedagogy, Symbolic Control and Identity: Theory, Research, Critique
(Revised ed.). Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Beswick, K., & Chapman, O. (2015). Mathematics teacher educators’ knowledge for
teaching. In S. J. Cho (Ed.), Proc. 12th international congress on mathematical education:
Intellectual and attitudinal challenges (pp. 629–632). Berlin: Springer.
Beswick, K., & Goos, M. (2018). Mathematics teacher educator knowledge: What do we
know and where to from here? Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 21(5), 417–
427.
Beswick, K., & Chapman, O. (Eds.). (2020). International handbook of mathematics teacher
education, Volume 4: The mathematics teacher educator as a developing professional (2nd
Ed.). Leiden: Brill-Sense.
Chapman, O. (2021). Mathematics teacher educator knowledge for teaching teachers. In M.
Goos & K. Beswick (Eds.), The learning and development of mathematics teacher
educators: International perspectives and challenges (pp. 403–416). New York: Springer.
Chapman, O., Chitera, N., Climent, N., Dindyal, J., & Sztajn, P. (2022). Mathematics teacher
education should be responsive to a rapidly changing world. In C. Fernández, S. Llinares,
A. Gutiérrez, & N. Planas (Eds.), Proc. 45th Conference of the International Group for the
Psychology of Mathematics Education (vol. 1, pp. 69-88). PME.
Coura, F. C. F., & Passos, C. L. B. (2021). Knowledge of the mathematics teacher educator
who being a researcher of teaching. Zetetiké, 29, 1-18 – e021007.
Charmaz, K. 2014. Constructing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Goos, M., & Beswich, K. (Eds.). (2021). The learning and development of mathematics
teacher educators: International perspectives and challenges. New York: Springer.
Helliwell, T., & Chorney, S. (2022). (Re)conceptualising the expertise of the mathematics
teacher educator. In C. Fernández, S. Llinares, A. Gutiérrez, & N. Planas (Eds.), Proc. 45th
Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol.
1, pp. 207-208). PME.
Martignone, F., Ferretti, F., & Rodríguez-Muniz, L. (2022). What aspects can characterize
the specialised knowledge of a mathematics teacher educator? Educación Matemática,
34(3), 301-238.
Masingila, J., Olanoff, D., & Kimani, P. M. (2018). Mathematical knowledge for teaching
teachers: Knowledge used and developed by mathematics teacher educators in learning to
teach via problem solving. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 21, 429–450.
Superfine, A. C., Prasad, P. V., Welder, R. M., Olanoff, D., & Eubanks-Turner, C.
(2020). Exploring mathematical knowledge for teaching teachers: Supporting prospective
teachers’ relearning of mathematics. The Mathematics Enthusiast, 17(2/3), 367-402.

PME 47 – 2024 2 - 47