Building upon our article in the Winter 2024 issue of Connections, shared here are some insights into how mathematics faculty might use the Guidelines for Preparing and Supporting Elementary Mathematics Specialists (AMTE, 2024) to support their work in preparing and providing ongoing professional learning for Elementary Mathematics Specialists (EMSs). This article especially highlights elements and features of the mathematics content section, which is one of the three domains in the EMS Guidelines. It is the second in a multi-part series intended to offer support for mathematics teacher educators interested in: (1) developing initial and ongoing professional learning experiences for EMSs, and (2) advocating for EMS programs and state licensure.

The development of elementary teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching continues to be of high importance. Many prospective elementary teachers enter their initial preparation program with feelings of mathematics anxiety (Bleilock et al., 2010; Malinsky et al., 2006, as cited in Ganley et al., 2019). While experiences in mathematics content and methods coursework may improve their relationship with the subject, too many finish their program not feeling adequately prepared to teach with depth the broad range of PreK-Grade 5 or 6 mathematics. And even though mathematics is considered core content at the elementary school level, elementary teachers may have fewer opportunities to participate in ongoing mathematics-focused professional learning compared to their middle and high school counterparts who specialize in the subject. All in all, practicing elementary teachers’ time in both their initial preparation program and subsequent ongoing professional learning is divided amongst the multiple subjects they are typically responsible for teaching.

Elementary Mathematics Specialists have critical roles in supporting their colleagues’ (e.g., classroom teachers, specialists, paraeducators, teacher candidates) ongoing learning as well as transforming their attitudes toward mathematics and its teaching. Whether serving as formal or informal teacher leaders or working predominantly with students or teachers, EMSs are “advocates for high-quality, strengths-based, identity-affirming mathematics instruction and for equitable structures in schools so all students have access to meaningful, important, and relevant mathematics” (Swars Auslander & Rigelman, 2024). When it comes to EMSs and their content knowledge development, mathematics faculty may play an important role. They can support the development of aspiring and existing EMSs by teaching courses in licensure programs and engaging in initiatives that provide professional development at the state, regional, or district levels. They can collaborate with others who are university- and school-based in the conceptualization and development of EMS courses and programs as well as ongoing professional development, contributing important expertise and perspectives in these efforts. They can even partner with EMSs to co-lead mathematics circles and study groups or to co-facilitate lesson study cycles (CBMS, 2012) for teachers of elementary mathematics that may include individuals not specifically prepared as elementary teachers (e.g., special educators, language development specialists, paraeducators). 

Unlike the previous EMS Standards (2013), the mathematics content domain in the new EMS Guidelines (2024) extends well beyond a bulleted list. Instead, you’ll find: (1) an overview for each standard justifying the importance of the work in the area, (2) rich descriptions of the mathematical content knowledge needed by EMSs in their varied roles, (3) integration sidebars, and (4) mathematical storylines. The content domain includes the following five standards, with each having between two and four associated indicators:

• Standard C.1. Understanding Number Relationships and Structure
• Standard C.2. Generalizing Behaviors of Operations across Number Domains
• Standard C.3. Recognizing, Extending, and Generalizing Mathematical and Everyday Patterns
• Standard C.4. Exploring, Examining, and Enumerating Space
• Standard C.5. Investigating Questions and Interrogating Data through Statistical Problem Solving

The standards and indicators are not intended to be an exhaustive list of mathematical topics, rather they represent critical topics for EMSs to know and understand. Across them, there is specific attention to the mathematical throughline, student thinking (e.g., intuitive and informal knowledge students bring to school, prior school-based experiences that support knowledge development within the domain), and ways EMSs use their knowledge in support of both student and teacher learning of mathematics. Below are examples of some of the content domain’s features and elements.

Illustrative Examples from the EMS Guidelines

Two features of the EMS Guidelines mathematics content domain that aim to enhance understanding and application are the sidebars and storylines.

The integration sidebars highlight the connections between the “how” and the “what” of the mathematical knowledge needed by EMSs. That is, the “how” are the mathematical habits of mind or practices and processes of doing mathematics (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, 2020), and the “what” is the deep and flexible understanding of mathematics. Instead of providing a list of ways one might engage as a mathematical doer preceding or following the content standards, they are integrated within the description and specifically called out with sidebars as shown in Figure 1. This example falls within Standard C2: Generalizing Behaviors of Operations Across Number Domains and indicator C.2.a. Building Understandings of the Operations Through Contextualized Situations.

Further, each content standard includes a mathematical storyline for PreKindergarten through Grade 9 as shown in Figure 2. These storylines convey the “across-the-grades coherence” EMSs should understand. Given the importance of horizon content knowledge (i.e., awareness of how mathematical topics are related and build), these storylines can frame EMSs’ learning and reflection on their abilities to support and use responsive instruction and assessment.

Accompanying the rich descriptions of mathematics content and examples of student thinking, the content domain of the EMS Guidelines includes 9 sidebars reflective of the mathematical practices and processes of doing mathematics and 5 mathematical storylines aligned with each of the standard’s areas.

Using the EMS Guidelines in Your Context

While Part 1 of this series highlighted the pedagogy and leadership domains and illustrative vignettes depicting the work of EMSs in variable roles, shared here in Part 2 are insights into the content domain and embedded features. As noted in Part 1, the EMS Guidelines are intended for any mathematics teacher educator who prepares and supports EMSs in their work, including those who are in higher education, school systems, or regional- or state-level agencies. Whether you have state-level licensure for EMSs or not, mathematics faculty members have a role in ensuring a well-prepared educator workforce. Given the prevalence of mathematics anxiety coupled with the importance of elementary teacher content knowledge, the increasingly different routes to teacher licensure, and the broad range of variably-prepared educators (e.g., special educators, specialists, paraeducators) potentially involved in the mathematics education of elementary-aged students, now more than ever mathematics faculty can make a difference by getting involved in the preparation and ongoing support of EMSs. As indicated above, their expertise and perspectives are beneficial to both the initial preparation and ongoing support of EMSs and their colleagues. 

References

Association of Mathematics Teacher Educators (2024). Guidelines for preparing and supporting elementary mathematics specialists. https://amte.net/sites/amte.net/files/EMS%20Standards%202024_AMTE.pdf

Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences (2012). The Mathematical Education of Teachers II. American Mathematical Society and Mathematical Association of America. https://cbmsweb.org/the-mathematical-education-of-teachers/

Ganley, C. M., Schoen, R. C., LaVenia, M., & Tazaz, A. M. (2019). The construct validation of the math anxiety scale for teachers. AERA Open, 5(1), 2332858419839702.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2020). Catalyzing change in early childhood and elementary mathematics: Initiating critical conversations.

Swars Auslander, S., & Rigelman, N. (2024, Winter). A resource to support mathematics teacher educators' work with teacher leaders, part 1: The case of education faculty. Connections. https://www.amte.net/connections/2024/12/resource-support-mathematics-teacher-educators-work-teacher-leaders-part-1-case