Building on MOSTs: Investigating Productive Use of High-Leverage Student Mathematical Thinking is a collaborative project among researchers at Brigham Young University, Michigan Technological University and Western Michigan University that focuses on improving the teaching of secondary school mathematics by exploring the teaching practices that allow teachers to elicit and take advantage of MOSTs.

We have developed an initial theoretical conceptualization of a productive way teachers can coordinate their work around MOSTs—a teaching practice we refer to as building. Our current conceptualization of building includes four subpractices:

  1. Make the object of consideration clear (make precise)
  2. Turn the object of consideration over to the students with parameters that put them in a sense-making situation (grapple toss)
  3. Orchestrate a whole-class discussion in which students collaboratively make sense of the object of consideration (orchestrate)
  4. Facilitate the extraction and articulation of the mathematical point of the object of consideration (make explicit)

Although this conceptualization of building and its subpractices makes sense in theory, our experience studying MOSTs suggests that the practice is seldom enacted in classrooms. We thus will study the practice of building on MOSTs by working together with teachers to generate and then analyze instantiations of the practice.

Our Current Work:

During the first year of the project, we will be developing and piloting MOST-Eliciting Prompts (MEPs)óbrief mathematical undertakings that have a high likelihood of surfacing particular MOSTs as students share their thinking in response to the prompt. These MEPs will initially be developed by drawing on our prior work studying MOSTs, the literature, and our own teaching experiences. MEPs will be constructed around broad mathematical ideas so they can be "dropped into" different 6-12 grade classes at almost any time during the year. The MEPs will be piloted in several classrooms and the resulting student thinking will be used to identify prompts that reliably elicit specific MOSTs, and thus are MEPs. After the MEPs are developed, future work will involve engaging a group of 12 teacher-researchers in cycles of (a) implementing a MEP, (b) providing initial reactions and feedback, (c) participating in a small-group debriefing meeting, and (d) participating in a large-group research meeting. The goal of these cycles is to capture increasingly better enactments of the building practice.

The core research questions of the project are:

  • What does it look like to build on MOSTs in a way that coordinates the core principles underlying their productive use?
    Our work to answer this research question will involve analysis of records of the teacher-researchers' attempts to implement the building practice during six MEP enactment cycles. Drawing heavily on the procedures we have established for analyzing MOSTs and for analyzing teacher responses to student thinking, this analysis will have two main foci. The first focus is understanding whether our current building prototype—including the four building subpractices—satisfies core principles of quality mathematics instruction that we have gleaned from mathematics education literature. These principles are that student mathematics is at the forefront, students are positioned as legitimate mathematical thinkers, students are engaged in sense-making, and students work collaboratively. The second focus is understanding whether there are other collections of subpractices that also satisfy the core principles. In answering this research question, we hope to better understand how the coordination of subpractices produces the teaching practice of building.
  • What are variations in how enacting the building subpractices coordinate the core principles?
    Our work to answer this research question, like the previous research question, will involve the retrospective analysis of records of the teacher-researchers' attempts to implement the building practice during the six MEP enactment cycles. However, to answer this particular question we will focus specifically on the enactment of each of the subpractices of the teaching practice of building on MOSTs. By focusing on these subpractices, we hope to better understand what the individual subpractices look like, and which enactments of these subpractices do and do not work well.
  • What are teachers' experiences in attempting to build on MOSTs?
    Our work to answer this question will involve the ongoing analysis of the teacher-researchers' attempts to implement the building practice and their reflections on these attempts during the six MEP enactment cycles. This work will include watching MEP enactment videos and reviewing teacher feedback to select segments or collections of segments that will be the focus of group discussion among the project PIs and the teacher-researchers. Subsequent analysis of teacher feedback and meeting discussions, as well as the video of the MEP enactments, will allow us to ascertain what aspects of building are particularly accessible or challenging, and consider how teachers can be supported in their enactment of building on MOSTs. This analysis will also inform the ongoing planning of our work, including modifications to the building prototype and the work we do with the teacher-researchers to prepare them for future MEP enactments.


This project is funded by the National Science Foundation, grant #'s:

WMU DRL-1720613
MTU DRL-1720566
BYU DRL-1720410

Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in these materials are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.