CHAPTER 2

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK AND PROBLEM ANALYSIS

T he previous chapter introduced the background of the CASCADE-IMEI study,

that aimed to develop and evaluate a learning environment in order to assist
student teachers in UPI Bandung learning RME as a new approach for mathematics
education. This chapter presents the conceptual framework and problem analysis of the
study. It reviews relevant literature and the connections to the Indonesian context.
First, section 2.1 explains the concept of curriculum and its connection to the context of
junior secondary mathematics in Indonesia. Section 2.2 discusses the concept of RME
including its theoretical background, its materials, its teaching approach and its
assessment. Section 2.3 presents the concept of curriculum implementation and its
strategies. Section 2.4 describes the process of student teacher learning in pre-service
mathematics teacher education in Indonesia, as well as the more general process of
teacher learning. Next, the principle of web-based performance support systems is
discussed in section 2.5. The chapter concludes by offering tentative implications for the
learning environment to be developed.

2.1 THE CURRENT MATHEMATICS CURRICULUM IN INDONESIA

The purpose of this study was to assist student teachers in learning RME, which
includes how to develop RME lesson plans and materials and how to implement
these in the classroom practice. Hence, the concept of curriculum is important.
The next sections elaborate on the concept of curriculum as relates it to the junior
secondary school mathematics curriculum in Indonesia.

2.1.1 Concept of curriculum

The basic working definition of curriculum used here is that of curriculum as 'a
plan for learning' (cf. Taba, 1968; van den Akker, 1998). The plan can be found at
different levels of various educational settings. At the micro level (classroom), the
Conceptual framework and problem analysis 23

curriculum refers to a plan for concrete instructional activities. At the meso level
(school or institutional) it refers to a course or an educational program and at the
macro level it is used to indicate a more general curricular framework for a district,
province or nation.

For the discussion on curriculum development and implementation, it is helpful to

use the representations of the curriculum according to the typology as proposed
by Goodlad, et al. (1979) and adapted by van den Akker (1998). These include:
ideal curriculum, the original assumptions and intentions of the designer; formal
curriculum, the concrete curriculum documents, such as student materials and
teacher guides; perceived curriculum, the curriculum as interpreted by teachers;
operational curriculum, the actual instructional process as realized in the classroom
(also referred to as curriculum-in-action or the enacted curriculum); experiential
curriculum, the curriculum as it is experienced by the pupils; and attained curriculum,
the learning outcomes of the pupils. In some studies the term intended curriculum is
used, which refers to a combination of the ideal and formal curriculum while
implemented curriculum refers to a combination of the perceived and the operational
curriculum. This typology (cf. van den Akker, 1998; Ottevanger, 2001) has proven
to be helpful in understanding the relationships and discrepancies between
different representations of the curriculum in practice. This typology will be
elaborated in the next section by taking mathematics curriculum at the junior
secondary school level as an example.

Also, a curriculum can be characterized as being ‘site specific’ or ‘generic’ (cf.

Marsh & Willis, 1995). In cases where the target group of a curriculum is small
and homogenous and all persons involved (such as pupils, trainees or developers)
are in relatively close proximity to each other and know each other quite well, one
can speak of a site-specific curriculum. On the contrary, a generic curriculum is
developed for a large and diverse target group and the physical distance between
the participants is usually great. Finally, Marsh and Willis define curriculum
development as a collective and intentional process or activity considered to be
beneficial for curriculum change.

2.1.2 Analysis of the current mathematics curriculum in Indonesia

This study assists student teachers in learning to teach mathematics on the level of
Conceptual framework and problem analysis 24

junior secondary school. Consequently, it is important to first discuss the current

junior secondary mathematics curriculum in Indonesia’s schools. The Goodlad's
typology that was introduced in the former section was used as an analysis
framework. The curriculum was taken from the Curriculum Implementation
Guide (MONE, 1993) as a part of the national curriculum.

Ideal curriculum
The ideal curriculum contains the original assumptions and intentions of the
designer, or goals for all topics to be learned by pupils in the school. According to
MONE (1993), the goals of mathematics education curriculum in the junior
secondary mathematics are that pupils:
• can use the concepts, identify symbols and facts and recognize the elements in
the topics;
• can solve problems in the topics, and are able to apply the learned approaches
in other subjects and everyday live;
• have the knowledge concerning geometry in one, two and three dimension;
can use mathematical concepts to communicate ideas and data, and are able to
interpret the meaning of statistics;
• have a critical attitude, are open, are consistent and appreciate mathematics;
and
• start understanding mathematics deductively, which can give rise to a
systematic way of thinking.

Formal curriculum
This type of curriculum represents the concrete curriculum materials, such as
student materials and teacher guides, that are developed based on the ideal
curriculum. The strands in junior secondary school include: arithmetic, algebra,
geometry, trigonometry, probability and statistics. For each topic, information is
provided on the depth and breadth of treatment, as well as its goals. Regions,
schools or teachers who need materials other than the minimal materials are
required to develop them themselves. In this guide, the term materials means the
main content of curriculum or student materials (for all pupils) and enrichment
materials (for high achieving pupils only). Use of the minimal materials is also
suggested for the remedial teaching of the weaker pupils. However, as Somerset
(1997) and Suryanto (1996) reported, the current materials lack quality and have
Conceptual framework and problem analysis 25

been designed with a mechanistic approach in mind, i.e. one that stresses drill and
practice. The books are more product-oriented then process-oriented. In
addition, the lesson materials contain only learner materials; teacher guides are
lacking. Therefore, the goals of the ideal curriculum (such as: pupils can use
mathematical concepts to communicate ideas, pupils have a critical attitude, are
open to and appreciative of mathematics) are far from achieved. The gap between
the ideal curriculum and the formal curriculum of mathematics in junior secondary
schools is broad, indeed.

Perceived curriculum
This type of curriculum relates to the curriculum as it interpreted by the teachers
in the schools. In the national curriculum (MONE, 1993), it is presumed that
teachers should design and develop lesson preparations in the form of a year-plan,
quarterly plan and daily lesson plans. These plans are critical since not all learners
have their own textbooks. However, due to a lack of quality materials and the lack
accompanying instructor’s guides, it becomes the teacher's responsibility to
arrange all requirements in the lesson plan (Somerset, 1997; Suryanto, 1996).
Hence, most teachers do not clearly understand what the intended means. Some
teachers perceived that the goal of mathematics education is simply to prepare
their pupils to answer the questions or mathematics tasks found in the textbooks
or in the national exams.

Operational curriculum
This type of curriculum refers to the approach chosen by the teacher to make
pupils active in the learning process. It relates to the use of teaching methods and
assessment strategies. The curriculum guide (MONE, 1993) suggested that the role
of teachers is to teach the pupils and to help them understand the mathematics
tasks. Teachers are supposed to use teaching strategies that will inspire active
involvement of their pupils. Yet, according to Marsigit (2000), teachers mostly use
the common, traditional, expository teaching method (that they learned in teacher
education). This method usually consists of the following steps:
• teacher starts the class by explaining a mathematics rule of a mathematics
topic;
• teacher then presents an example on how to use the rule in solving a
mathematical task from the textbook;
Conceptual framework and problem analysis 26

• teacher calls some pupils forward to solve some mathematical tasks from the
textbook in the front of the class;
• the remaining tasks are assigned as homework; and
• teacher closes the lesson by giving summary.

In conducting the assessment, moreover, the curriculum explicitly suggests that

teachers use mathematics tasks that invite divergent answers, such as open-ended
problems that can be solved by more than one strategy. But in most cases,
teachers were unable to follow this suggestion since the textbooks do not provide
these kinds of examples. Hence, there is a discrepancy between the formal
curriculum and the operational curriculum. Teachers need to be supplied with
exemplary materials with open-ended problems, or need to learn to construct
these materials themselves. Furthermore, the curriculum guide (MONE, 1993)
suggested that the methods used for teaching mathematics should be adapted to
the characteristics of the concepts, strands, topics and the cognitive development
of the pupils. Nevertheless, as has been extensively discussed in the Indonesia’s
newspaper , most teachers focus almost exclusively on teaching how to solve the
specific mathematics tasks most likely to be found in the national examination.
Therefore, their approach doesn't even attempt to foster true understanding of the
mathematics concepts.

Experiential curriculum
This type of curriculum refers to the way that curriculum materials and
instructional processes influence pupils' learning of mathematics in the classroom.
Suryanto (1996) reported that the mathematics curriculum materials in the junior
secondary level are lacking practical applications. This problem is also found in
the primary schools. Hence, because the concepts are not experientially real to
them, pupils perceive mathematics as a very abstract and thus a difficult subject
compared to others. Besides, since the instructional process most often in use
does not move the pupils to activity, they remain passive (Marpaung, 1995).

Attained curriculum
The attained curriculum (or learning outcomes of the pupils in mathematics)
mainly refers to students’ achievements and attitudes. It is mentioned in the
curriculum guide (MONE, 1993)that in order to determine the achievement of the
Conceptual framework and problem analysis 27

pupils, teachers should evaluate the pupil both during and at the end of the
instructional process. However, based on the reports of Somerset (1997) and
Suryanto (1996), most teachers do not focus on the formative evaluation (during
the instructional process), but focus only on the summative evaluation (at the
end). Therefore, measurements of the learning outcomes of pupils place emphasis
on the cognitive part of the learning outcome. Changes in attitudes are not taken
into consideration as learning outcomes. Furthermore, the MONE curriculum
(1993) suggests that teachers should provide enrichment materials for pupils who
want to deepen their knowledge of mathematics and remedial teaching for those
who have difficulty in learning mathematics. However, very few teachers have
sufficient time to conduct these kinds of activities in addition to their normal
teaching responsibilities. The number of hours spent by teachers on instructional
time in Indonesian junior secondary schools (including mathematics) is
categorized at the highest level in the world (Mullis et al., 2000) – that is ranked
3rd of 38 countries. Hence, the gap between weak and the smart pupils tends to
remain or even grow.

Based on the analysis of the mathematics curriculum for the Indonesian junior
secondary level, it can be concluded that there are large disconnects between the
intended and the implemented curriculum, as well as between the implemented
and the learned curriculum (experiential and attained curriculum). This also
means that there is a gap between the ideal mathematics curriculum and the
attained curriculum of the pupils. In order to reduce that gap it is important to
focus on the intermediate stage of curriculum – the implemented curriculum
(Ottevanger, 2001) – since this stage may have the greatest influence on closing
the gap.

As stated in Chapter 1, there were three issues in secondary mathematics education

in Indonesia, namely: quality of curriculum materials, teaching methods and
assessment strategies. This means there is a gap between the intended curriculum
and the implemented curriculum. This study intends to investigate how the gap
between the intended and the implemented curriculum can be reduced by
introducing RME.
Conceptual framework and problem analysis 28

2.2 UNDERSTANDING RME

This section explains the theoretical background of RME. First, the underlying
philosophy and the five tenets of RME are given. Then, the concepts of RME
curriculum materials and RME exemplary lesson materials are presented.

2.2.1 Philosophy and characteristics of RME

As a theory of teaching and learning in mathematics education, RME has its own
philosophy and characteristics. It encompasses views on what mathematics is,
how pupils learn mathematics, and how mathematics should be taught. This
theory is strongly influenced by Hans Freudenthal's concept of 'mathematics as a
human activity' (Freudenthal, 1991). According to Freudenthal, pupils should not
be treated as passive recipients of ready-made mathematics, but rather that
education should guide the pupils towards using opportunities to discover and
reinvent mathematics by doing it themselves.

The characteristics of RME can historically be related to the levels that Van Hiele
distinguished in learning mathematics (cf. de Lange, 1996): (1) pupils reach the
first level of thinking as soon as they can manipulate the known characteristics of
a pattern that is familiar to them; (2) as soon as they learn to manipulate the
interrelatedness of the characteristics they will have reached the second level; (3)
they will reach the third level of thinking when they start manipulating the intrinsic
characteristics of relations. Traditional instruction is inclined to start at the second
or third level, while realistic instruction starts from the first level. In order to start
at the first level – the one that deals with phenomena that are familiar to the pupils
– Freudenthal’s didactical phenomenology that learning should start from a meaningful
contextual problem, is used. Furthermore, by guided reinvention through progressive
mathematization, pupils are guided didactically to progress efficiently from one level
to another level of thinking through mathematization.

The combination of Van Hiele’s three levels, Freudenthal’s didactical

phenomenology and Treffer’s progressive mathematization (Treffers, 1991) result
in the five characteristics (tenets) of RME (de Lange, 1987; Gravemeijer, 1994):
• the use of contexts in phenomenological exploration;
• the use of models or bridging by vertical instruments;
Conceptual framework and problem analysis 29

• the use of pupils’ own creations and contributions;

• the interactive character of the teaching process or interactivity; and
• the intertwining of various mathematics strands or units.

These characteristics can be used as a study guideline not only in the process of
adapting RME curriculum materials to the Indonesian context, but also in the
process of pre-service training for student teachers in teacher education. Each of
the following sub-sections briefly describes a single characteristic.

The use of contexts in phenomenological exploration

In RME, the starting point of mathematics instruction should be experientially real
to the student, allowing them to become immediately engaged in the contextual
situation. This means that instruction should not start with the formal system.
The phenomena by which mathematics concepts appear in reality should be the
source of concept formation. The process of extracting the appropriate
mathematical concept from a concrete situation is described by de Lange (1987) as
conceptual mathematization. This process forces pupils to: explore the situation; find
and identify the relevant mathematical elements; schematize and visualize in order
to discover patterns; and develop a model resulting in a mathematical concept. By
a process of reflecting and generalizing, the pupils will develop a more complete
concept. It is then expected that the pupils will subsequently apply mathematical
concepts to other aspects of their daily life, and by so doing, reinforce and
strengthen the concept. This process is called applied mathematization (see Figure
2.1).

Figure 2.1 Conceptual and applied mathematization (de Lange, 1996)

Conceptual framework and problem analysis 30

The use of models or bridging by vertical instruments

The term model refers to situational models and mathematical models that are
developed by the pupils themselves. First, the model is a model of a situation that is
familiar to the pupils. By a process of generalizing and formalizing, the model
eventually becomes an entity on its own. It then becomes possible to use this
entity as a model for mathematical reasoning. Four levels of models in learning and
teaching RME are described below (see also Figure 2.2):

Figure 2.2 Levels of models in RME (Gravemeijer, 1994)

• the situational level, where domain-specific, situational knowledge and strategies

are used within the context of the situation;
• referential level or the level ‘model of’, where models and strategies refer to the
situation described in the problem;
• general level or the level ‘model for’, where a mathematical focus on strategies
dominates over the reference to the context; and
• formal level of mathematics, where one works with conventional procedures
and notations.

As an example from Gravemeijer (1994), in the first level, long division is

associated with real-life activities such sharing sweets among children. Here, the
pupils bring in their situational knowledge and intuitive strategies and apply them
in the situation. The second level is entered when the same division of sweets is
presented as a written task and the division is modeled with paper and pencil.
Then, the focus is shifted towards strategies from a mathematical point of view.
Now, the pupil is just dealing with the numbers, without thinking of the situation.
Finally, the fourth level would be composed of the standard written algorithm for
Conceptual framework and problem analysis 31

long division. This example shows how self-developed (or emergent) models of the
pupils serve to bridge the gap between informal and formal knowledge
(Gravemeijer, 1994).

The use of pupils own creations and contributions

Pupils should be asked to create concrete things. By making 'free production',
pupils are forced to reflect on the their learning process. According to Streefland
(1991), pupils show greater initiative when they are encouraged to construct and
produce their own solutions. In addition, free productions can form an essential
part of assessment. For example, pupils may be asked to write an essay, to do an
experiment, to collect data and draw conclusions, to design exercises that can be
used in a test, or to design a test for other pupils in the classroom.

The interactive character of the teaching process or interactivity

Interaction between pupils and between pupils and teachers is an essential part in
RME instructional processes. Explicit negotiation, intervention, discussion,
cooperation and evaluation are essential elements in a constructive learning
process in which the students’ informal methods are used as a vehicle to attain the
formal ones. In this interactive instruction, pupils are engaged in explaining,
justifying, agreeing and disagreeing, questioning alternatives and reflecting. For
instance, pupils are encouraged to discuss their strategies and to verify their own
thinking rather than focusing on whether they have the right answer. Such
activities can enable pupils to depend less on the teacher to tell them whether they
are right or wrong. Hence, the pupils find opportunities to develop confidence in
using mathematics.

The intertwining of various learning strands or units

In RME, the integration of mathematical strands or units is essential. It is often
called the holistic approach, which incorporates applications, and implies that
learning strands should not be dealt with as separate and distinct entities. Instead,
an intertwining of learning strands is exploited in solving real life problems. One
of the reasons that student have such difficulty applying mathematics is that it is
taught 'vertically'– that is, with the various subjects being taught separately,
neglecting the cross-connections. In practical applications, one usually needs
more than algebra alone or geometry alone.
Conceptual framework and problem analysis 32

The five characteristics or tenets of RME are used as a guideline in designing

curriculum materials.

2.2.2 Designing RME curriculum materials

In order to design or redesign curriculum materials based on the realistic
approach, they should represent the five characteristics of RME. Streefland (1991)
developed realistic mathematics lesson materials (fractions in elementary school)
using three levels of construction: the classroom level, the course level and the
theoretical level.

The classroom level

At this level, instructional activities are designed based on all the characteristics of
RME. Open material is introduced into the learning situation and opportunity is
provided for carrying out free production. Then, characteristics of RME are
applied to the lesson by:
• situating the intended material in reality which serves as source and as area of
application, starting from meaningful contexts having the potential to produce
mathematical material;
• intertwining with other strands or units such as fractions and proportions;
• producing tools in the form of symbols, diagrams and situation or context
models during the learning process through collaborative effort;
• learning through construction is carried out by arranging student activities, so
they can interact with each other, discuss, negotiate, and collaborate; and
• encouraging pupils to follow this kind of constructional activity by giving them
an assignment that leads to free productions.

In summary, Figure 2.3 shows how all the characteristics of RME are pictured in a
model for designing RME curriculum materials.
Conceptual framework and problem analysis 33

Figure 2.3 A model for designing RME curriculum materials

(adapted from Streefland, 1991)

Course level
This level is also called the level of the instructional sequence. The materials
constructed at the classroom level are now used according to their mathematical
and didactical essence in order to shape the general outline of the course. At this
level, after the materials from the classroom levels were tried out and revised, they
are expanded to other contents and contexts in order to develop the instructional
sequence of that topic. This means the measures taken to achieve contributions
to the learning process at the local level must be continued at the general level.

Theoretical level
All activities that took place in both preceding levels, such as design and
development, didactical reflection, and trying out in the classroom, form the
source of theoretical production – the generative material for this level. Here, a
theory in the form of a local theory for a specific area of learning is constructed,
revised and tested again during additional cyclic developments.

The CASCADE-IMEI study focused on the classroom level, in which the exemplary
lesson materials for some mathematics topics from the available realistic
mathematics books were adapted to the Indonesian culture. The process of
adaptation of these materials will be elaborated in Section 2.5.4.

2.2.3 RME exemplary lesson materials

RME exemplary lesson materials refer to learner materials and teacher guides.
They can be used as a learning trajectory for teachers in the RME classrooms.
Conceptual framework and problem analysis 34

They usually consist of the following main components: content materials, learner
and teacher activities, and assessment.

Content materials
RME materials are associated with real-life activities where domain-specific,
situational knowledge and strategies are used within the context of a genuine
situation. A variety of contextual problems are integrated in the curriculum right
from the start. But, the sequence of the contextual problems has to guide pupils
to the mastery of a mathematical concept. Furthermore, the difficulty level of the
contextual problems should be appropriate for the goals of the particular
mathematics topic. De Lange (1995) characterized three levels of goals in
mathematics education: lower level, middle level, and higher order level. In the
traditional program, the goals were classified as lower level goals that are based on
formula skills, simple algorithms and definitions. In RME, goals also include
'middle' and 'higher' level goals. At the middle level, connections are made
between the different tools of the lower level and the underlying concepts. It may
not be clear in which strand the operations take place, but simple problems have
to be solved without unique strategies. Moreover, the new goals also emphasize
reasoning skills, communication and the development of a critical attitude. These
are called 'higher order' thinking skills. In general, RME developers need to find
contextual problems that allow for a wide variety of solution procedures –
preferably those which, considered together, already indicate a possible learning
process through a process of progressive mathematization.

Activities: The role of the teacher and pupils.

The role of the RME teacher in the classroom are (de Lange, 1996; Gravemeijer,
1994): a facilitator, an organizer, a guide and an evaluator. Generally, the roles of
RME teachers can be seen from the following common teaching-learning
processes:
1. Facilitate pupils with a contextual problem that relates to the topic as the
starting point.
2. During an interaction activity, give the pupils a hint, for instance by drawing a
table on the board, guiding the pupils individually or in a small group in case
they need help.
3. Let the pupils find their own solution. This means that pupils are free to make
discoveries at their own level, to build on their own experiential knowledge,
Conceptual framework and problem analysis 35

and perform shortcuts at their own pace.

4. Organize and stimulate the pupils to compare their solutions in a class
discussion. Ask the pupils to communicate, argue and justify their solutions.
The discussion refers to the interpretation of the situation sketched in the
contextual problem and also to focus on the adequacy and the efficiency of
various solution procedures.
5. Give other contextual problems.

The role of pupils in RME classroom is mostly that they work individually or in a
group, they are active and should be more or less independent, they can not turn
to the teacher for validation of their answers or for directions or for a standard
solution procedure, and they are asked to produce free creations or contributions.

Assessment
In RME, the assessment functions not only in the margin of instruction, but it is
also an integral part of the instructional process (de Lange, 1995; Van den Heuvel-
Panhuizen, 1996). Ideally, during assessment activities, pupils can show their
abilities to solve problems using different strategies. Moreover, through
interactive discussions during the learning process, they can learn different
strategies developed by other pupils. The strategies used by pupils can be good
feedback for the teachers in order to improve the next lesson. In addition, pupils
learn to use various strategies for solving problems during the exams.

De Lange (1995) formulated the following five guiding principles of assessment in

RME:
1. The primary purpose of testing is to improve learning and teaching. This
means that assessment should take place during the teaching-learning process
in addition to at the end of a unit or course.
2. Methods of assessment should enable the pupils to demonstrate what they
know rather than what they do not know. Assessment can be conducted by
using problems that have multiple solutions and can be approached using
multiple strategies.
3. Assessment should operationalize all of the goals of mathematics education:
lower, middle and higher order thinking level.
4. The quality of mathematics assessment is not determined by its accessibility to
Conceptual framework and problem analysis 36

objective scoring. For that reason, the use of objective tests and mechanical
tests should be eschewed in favor of assessments in which we can see whether
pupils truly understand the mathematical concepts involved.
5. The assessment tools should be practical, fit into the usual school practice.

Assessment can be conducted in the classroom using strategies both during the
interaction process (formative), and products of their solutions (summative). In
RME, both the process and product are considered important. Hence, these two
assessment strategies should be applied in tandem when developing assessment
materials.

In summary, the characteristics of RME curriculum materials, described above, are

assumed to be better aligned with the intended Indonesian mathematics
curriculum as compared with the current mathematics education – especially in
junior secondary education. Hence, introducing RME in mathematics education in
Indonesia might reduce the gap between the intended and the implemented
curriculum, or even between the intended and the learned curriculum.

2.3 CURRICULUM IMPLEMENTATION

As a mentioned in Chapter 1, in order to introduce RME in Indonesia, some good
implementation strategies are needed. This section presents the strategies for
implementing the new curriculum.

2.3.1 Concept of curriculum implementation

Curriculum implementation can be defined as the translation of the intended
curriculum into the operational curriculum, i.e. the classroom practice.
Implementation is often presented as the second phase in a three-phase model of
change: initiation, implementation and continuation (or institutionalization)
(Fullan, 2001). Initiation is the process that leads up to and includes a decision to
adopt or proceed with a change. In developing countries such as Indonesia,
change programs are often initiated centrally, driven by political factors and by
external agencies – especially if these agencies also provide funding for such
programs. Implementation or initial use is the process that involves the first
experiences of attempting to put an idea or reform into practice. Continuation or
Conceptual framework and problem analysis 37

institutionalization refers to whether the change gets built in as an ongoing part of

the system or the normal practice of an institution or a school, or disappears, such
as by way of an explicit decision to discontinue the change or through attrition. A
continuation requires successful implementation and needs to be planned for and
given ample attention during the implementation phase.

2.3.2 Strategies in curriculum implementation

Three strategies are often used when implementing an innovation in schools, that
is: treating teachers as learners, using exemplary curriculum materials and learning
by designing. Each of these strategies is briefly discussed below.

Treating teachers as learners

The teacher has a key role in the implementation of a curriculum innovation in the
classroom (van den Akker, 1998). Putting a new curriculum into practice requires
teachers to learn new roles. According to Fullan (2001), this requires a change in
their beliefs, teaching approach and use of materials. Therefore, curriculum
reform can be seen as a learning process for teachers. They are required to use
new or revised materials and to make use of new teaching methods. In addition,
in many cases curriculum reform will involve a change in teachers' beliefs about
student learning. Professional development during the implementation of
curriculum reform is therefore important.

Comiti and Ball (1996) suggested that pre-service teacher education must
recognize student teachers as learners. They must have a chance to experience
new approaches and to master new content in order to learn some important
aspects of that approach. Also, they should be able to reflect with colleagues and
others on what happens in the classroom. Peer collaboration can play an
important role in this process (Thijs, 1999).

Initial use of exemplary lesson materials

Exemplary lesson materials can contribute to the additional support for teachers
during an implementation process. Such materials are useful for teachers if they
contain many so-called procedural specifications, which are very clear and specific
directions for use, including instructional and technical guidelines. These
directions for use should focus particularly on essential, yet vulnerable elements of
Conceptual framework and problem analysis 38

the curriculum innovation (van den Akker, 1998). From an implementation

perspective, exemplary lesson materials can be seen as materials for teachers that
serve as a catalyst for curriculum implementation (van den Akker, 1998;
Ottevanger, 2001).

Furthermore, Ball and Cohen (1996) state that exemplary curriculum materials can
better contribute to professional practice when they are created with closer
attention to the process of curriculum enactment. A curriculum enactment is
constructed jointly by teachers, students and materials in particular contexts, even
if it seems to be only a partial reconstruction of supplied materials. Materials
could be designed to place teachers in the center of curriculum construction and
make teachers' learning central to efforts to improve education, without requiring
heroic assumptions about each teacher's capacity as an original designer of
curriculum.
As teachers enact curriculum in and with their classes, they work across five
domains:
• teachers are influenced by the trajectory of their learning of the content, what
they think about their students, about what students bring to instruction, and
students' likely ideas about the content;
• teachers work with their own understanding of the material, which shapes their
interpretations of what the central ideas are, and how to respond to students'
ideas;
• teachers fashion the materials for students, choose tasks or models, and
navigate instructional resources such as textbooks in order to design
instruction;
• teachers must manage the classroom interaction in such a was as to increase
the intellectual and social environment of the class; and
• teachers are influenced by their views of the broader community and contexts
in which they work.

Functions of exemplary lesson materials were differentiated by van den Akker

(1998): helping to create an image regarding the lesson organization; providing
teachers with aids to realize an effective lesson in accordance with the initial
intentions of the designer(s); and stimulating reflection on the teachers’ roles and
stimulation of any possible adaptations of the teachers’ attitudes towards the
Conceptual framework and problem analysis 39

innovation. These functions should be represented both in the learner materials

and in the teacher guide.

Learning by designing
After being treated as learners and having gained experience with the use of
exemplary lesson materials, teachers may be involved in redesigning curriculum
materials that they can use in their teaching practice. Wiggins and McTighe (1998)
pointed out that in order to make learners fully understand what they are learning,
they should be asked not only to explain and interpret, but also to apply their
knowledge and skills by using and adapting what they know into different
contexts. Before teachers teach a mathematics topic in the classroom, they have
to consider the learning goal, the learning activities and the thinking and learning
in which the pupils might be engaged. All of these aspects are brought together in
a lesson plan. Simon (1995) refers to this plan as being a "hypothetical learning
trajectory". Simon calls the learning trajectory hypothetical because the actual
learning trajectory is still not known before the real instructional activities are
carried out. Then, after the plan has been used in the classroom, it can be revised
for use in the next subsequent lesson. This strategy shows similarities to one of
the tenets of the RME: that learners need to be invited to reflect on what they have
learned, by for example, designing exercises or mathematical problems that can be
used in a test of for other pupils in the classroom.

Based on this line of reasoning, Gravemeijer and Cobb (2001) suggest lending
support to teachers by creating a resource of exemplary lesson materials as a
starting point, so they can redesign these materials to suit the specific needs of
their situation. Moreover, Seegers and Gravemeijer (1997) suggest that the
support for teachers in implementing the RME curriculum covers not only the
content of the instruction (sequences of materials) but also the development of
micro-didactic knowledge or the nature of instructional practice that deals with the
character of the teaching/learning process. They argued that it is only on this
micro-didactic level that beliefs may play an important role.

In this study, these strategies are used and integrated in the process of supporting
student teachers in learning how to teach with a RME approach in the context of
pre-service teacher education.
Conceptual framework and problem analysis 40

2.4 TEACHER LEARNING IN PRE-SERVICE EDUCATION

This section describes processes and problems of pre-service mathematics
teachers learning to teach for the first time according to a new approach. First, an
elaboration on the concept of learning to teach is given. Then, the current
practice in pre-service education in Indonesia is presented.

2.4.1 Pre-service Mathematics teachers learning to teach

In this context, learning means learning to teach while using new teaching methods
in the classroom. According to Borko and Putnam (1996), learning to teach is a
complex process. Novice teachers must learn multiple sets of knowledge, skills
and attitudes in order to be well prepared to enter the teaching profession. They
must learn enough classroom management skills to maintain order in a classroom,
and to keep students motivated and productively engaged. They must learn about
the subject matter that they will have to teach, as well as about their pupils and
how they learn, and so on. Moreover, Arends (1994) pointed out that learning to
teach can be seen as a process in which development progresses rather
systematically through stages. An opportunity for growth can fail to yield fruit
unless appropriate experiences occur.

Basically, new teachers have three types of concerns when in the process of
learning to teach (Arends, 1994; Borko & Putnam, 1996). First, personal factors
refer to the concern about their own personal survival when new teachers have
their first classroom experiences. They worry about their interpersonal adequacy
and whether or not their pupils and their supervisor respect and like them. Also,
they worry about the adequacy of their content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge
and beliefs required for teaching for understanding in ways that are currently
advocated in the educational community. Secondly, beginning teachers have
concerns about the teaching situation in the schools. Those aspects can include: too
many students, inappropriate teaching materials, teaching method and assessment
strategies. Finally, beginning teachers have concerns about their pupils. In this
stage, they reach for higher-level issues and start asking questions about the social
and emotional needs of pupils, being fair, and the match between the teaching
strategies and materials.
Conceptual framework and problem analysis 41

2.4.2 Mathematics pre-service teacher education in Indonesia

The current Indonesian pre-service teacher education uses the curriculum from
1991. In the department of mathematics education, courses are categorized into
four types (see also Table 2.1): (1) foundation of education studies or general
education including theory of education, management of education as well as
guidance and counseling; (2) subject matter studies or content mathematics
courses such as Geometry, Calculus, Algebra, Statistics and Computation
mathematics; (3) professional studies or method courses such as teaching
approaches, development of teaching preparation, seminars in mathematics
education, secondary education curricula and assessments; and (4) teaching
practice as well as research or a final project in mathematics education. These
categories are consistent with Ben-Peretz's (1994) conclusion about teacher
education curricula in the world, that most of them are categorized in four types:
foundation of education studies, subject matter studies, method courses and
teaching practice.

Table 2.1 Courses categories in Indonesian teacher education

Year /Course Foundation Content Method Teaching
practice
First
Second
Third
Fourth

Practice in laboratory schools plays an important role in pre-service mathematics

teacher education. It is usually conducted in one of two ways, either in the
method courses or in teaching practice. In the method courses, student teachers
perform both as curriculum developers and as teachers. They have to prepare the
instructional activities along the traditional stages of curriculum development, that
is: defining objectives, selecting content and learning experiences, choosing
appropriate methods and classroom organization, gathering or developing the
necessary materials, and making decisions about formative and summative
evaluation. Then, they perform as teachers, trying out the materials using the new
teaching methods in classroom practice. At the end of the course, they have to
make a report and present it in front of their colleagues and teacher educators.
Similar activities are carried out in the final year, when they are doing practice
Conceptual framework and problem analysis 42

teaching. In this time, student teachers also perform both as curriculum

developers and as teachers, during which they have to develop their curriculum
materials, implement them in the classroom and reflect on their experiences.
These kinds of curriculum development activities (preparing lessons and
accompanying materials, carrying out those plans and reflecting on what occurred)
can increase the professional growth of student teachers (cf. McKenney, 2001).

Yet, the issue remains that pre-service mathematics teachers in Indonesia do not
receive adequate preparation for their teaching practice. This could be caused by
some obstacles that are often discussed among teacher educators. First, student
teachers do not have enough resources for learning to teach, such as method
books, lesson examples or electronic tools (e.g. video). Second, they have only
limited time allotted for learning how to teach, since they also have to follow other
courses that do not deal with teaching mathematics. Finally, they do not get a
good teaching model from the method courses. Teacher educators often focus on
the theoretical part but less on practical aspects. It is also mentioned by Borko
and Putnam that teacher educators place greater emphasis on facts and procedures
than on understanding the disciplines they need for teaching.

In conclusion, it is clearly understood that learning to teach using a new approach

is not an easy task for student teachers. They have to master a set of skills related
to the content to be taught, how pupils learn and how to teach. Besides, they have
to learn how to develop their instructional activities and to teach using a new
teaching method in the classroom practice. Therefore, the current approaches
used in Indonesian teacher education could be improved upon in order to address
these complexities in a better way.

2.5 SUPPORTING STUDENT TEACHERS IN LEARNING RME

As discussed in the previous section, learning to teach is no easy task for
mathematics student teachers in Indonesia. On the one hand, they have to
perform both as curriculum developers and as teachers. Sometimes, they also
have to perform as researchers in the seminar or the final project courses. On the
other hand, they have only limited time and teaching resources. The situation
becomes more complicated when they learn to teach with a new method such as
Conceptual framework and problem analysis 43

RME. As a new approach in Indonesia, there are no books, papers or other

materials related to RME. It is assumed that these obstacles cannot be overcome
by a short pre-service course. Hence, it is assumed in this study that a learning
environment is needed in which student teachers can learn not only the theory of
RME, but also the skills relating to how to use that knowledge in redesigning their
own materials, and to teach using these materials in the classroom. The next
section discusses the concept of the learning environment and the way this
concept is applied in this study.

2.5.1 Learning environment

In general, a learning environment (LE) is a place where learning occurs. Wilson
(1996) defines a 'constructivist' learning environment as a place where learners
may work together and support each other as they use a variety of tools and
information resources in their pursuit of learning goals and problem solving
activities. He states that at a minimum, an LE contains: the learner and a setting or
a space in which the learner acts using tools and devices, collecting and
interpreting information, interacting with others, etc.

Moreover, Perkin (1991) makes a distinction between 'minimalist' and 'rich' LEs:
• 'Minimalist’ or ‘traditional’ LEs emphasize information banks or sources of
information (e.g. textbooks, videotapes), symbol pads or surfaces for the
construction and manipulation of symbols and texts (e.g. drawing programs,
word processors, databases); task managers-elements of the environment that set
tasks, provide guidance, feedback and changes in direction (such as teacher,
student, and computer-based instruction programs).
• 'Rich’ or ‘constructivit’ LEs contain more: construction kits or areas for
presenting, observing and manipulating less natural phenomena (e.g.
simulation programs and games); and phenomenaria, or areas for presenting,
observing and manipulating natural phenomena (e.g. teaching simulation,
teaching practice); as well as place more control of the environment in the
hands of the learners themselves. Students in constructivist LEs are typically
engaged in multiple activities in pursuit of multiple goals, with the teacher
serving the role of guide and facilitator. An example of a contructivist or rich
LE is called a REAL (rich learning environment for active learning) (Grabinger,
1996). A REAL is one attempt to bring together thoughts, ideas and theories in
Conceptual framework and problem analysis 44

a way that will help teachers at all levels to develop classroom environments
that foster higher-level thinking skills – especially reflection, problem solving,
flexible thinking and creativity.

Finally, Wilson (1996) categorized LEs into three types.

• Computer-based LE such as computer microworlds. In these microworlds,
students "enter" a self-contained computer-based environment to learn. These
microworlds may be supported by a larger classroom environment, but may
also stand alone.
• Classroom-based LE. In many settings, the classroom is thought of as the primary
learning environment. Various technologies may function as tools to support
classroom learning activities. An example of a classroom-based environment is
Grabinger's (1996) Rich Environments for Active Learning (REALs).
• Virtual LEs that make use of the Internet. Some computer-based learning
environments are relatively open systems, allowing interactions and encounters
with other participants, resources and representations. In a virtual
environment, students interact primarily with other networked participants,
and with widely disseminated information tools. Open, virtual environments
have tremendous potential for learning, but they carry their own set of design
challenges and concerns.

The last two types of LE are used in this study, that is the RME course (classroom-
based LE) and the web support (virtual LE).

2.5.2 Classroom-based learning environment (RME course)

As described in section 2.3.1 and 2.3.2, learning to teach using a new approach is
not an easy task. It requires learning the approach not only theoretically, but also
practically. The learners need an environment in which they can practice how to
prepare teaching materials, how to use the materials, how to manage the
classroom, how to deal with pupils, etc. Hence, it is important to provide such a
classroom-based environment (e.g. RME course) that could assist student teachers
in their learning.
In so doing, Borko and Putnam (1996) summarized their analysis results of
facilitating teachers' learning to teach into five features that can contribute to
successful learning opportunities for new teachers. These are:
Conceptual framework and problem analysis 45

1. addressing teachers' pre-existing knowledge and beliefs about teaching,

learning, learners and subject matter;
2. providing teachers with sustained opportunities to deepen and expand their
knowledge of subject matter;
3. treating teachers as learners in a manner consistent with the program's vision
of how teachers should treat students as learners;
4. grounding teachers' learning and reflection in classroom practice; and
5. offering ample time and support for reflection, collaboration, and continued
learning.

Points 3 and 4 are similar to the second strategy of the curriculum implementation
(see also section 2.3.2). All points could be provided by a classroom-based
learning environment (either in teacher education or school classroom).

In addition to these features, Comiti and Ball (1996), who organized their research
about preparing teachers on three teacher education institutions in Germany,
France, and the USA, suggest three ways of helping teachers to teach mathematics
in pre-service teacher education:
1. help student teachers to learn all mathematics approaches and their views of
how mathematics is taught and learned;
2. help student teachers to learn about pupils’ mathematical thinking, and how to
teach mathematics while taking into account the pupils’ ability; constructing
learning situations that give meaning to mathematical subjects; and
3. coach student teachers in developing their capacity to learn, in thinking about
their actions and thereby transforming them, in thinking about what they
wanted to do and what they actually did, thinking about their practice, and
becoming able to search for and use resources.

The first two points are related to the first implementation strategy (see also
section 2.3.2), i.e. that student teachers should have the learners role so they could
learn both the materials and experience how to teach with those materials. In
addition, the third point is similar to the second implementation strategy or the
use of exemplary lesson materials.

In the context of RME, Goffree and Oonk (1999) reported that training for
Conceptual framework and problem analysis 46

developing RME teachers in the Netherlands should be based on the theory of

RME itself. This is in line with Borko and Putnam's (1996), Comity and Ball (1996)
and first strategy of the curriculum implementation (see also section 2.3.2) that
student teachers should be treated as learners. During the time in which the
student teachers learn RME, their learning process in the course should be
analogous with mathematics learning of pupils in the classroom. The training has
some main steps:
1. Use of real contexts. Give student teachers concrete situations and familiar
contexts as a starting point of the training (the first characteristics of RME) so
they are directly engaged and come up with their own informal solutions,
which are affected by their earlier experiences with learning mathematics and
teaching mathematics.
2. Mathematising and didactising. Guide student teachers by using sequences of
problems into the process of both mathematising and didactising.
3. Reflection. Ask student teachers to carry out mathematical activities
appropriate for pupils’ ability levels, and then reflect on and discuss the results
in small groups with their peers. These reflective discussions create a
foundation for learning how to work with pupils. Reflections on childrens’
learning process combined with the student teachers’ own experiences in
learning mathematics contribute to the creation of an educational basis for
teaching mathematics to pupils. During this process, student teachers work
with pupils and study their learning process while continually referring back to
their own learning process.

During the training, student teachers not only learn how to mathematize but also
how to didactize. While the former is related to the materials, the latter is related
to the teaching/learning process, which Gravemeijer (1997) calls micro-didactic
knowledge.

Finally, regarding the structure of the mathematics education course for student
teachers, the suggestions given by Selter (1997, 2001) can be used. He suggests
including four important sessions in teacher education, including sessions on:
1. understanding the new approach by providing a theoretical overview and by
actually doing mathematics (the mathematical component);
2. designing instructional materials (the didactical component);
Conceptual framework and problem analysis 47

3. managing the new situation in the classroom during teaching practice (the
practical component); and
4. understanding the ways that pupils learn mathematics in the school classrooms
(the assessment or psychological component).

These four components are used in the RME course or the classroom-based
learning environment. The course is mainly supported by another environment –
that is a virtual environment or web support. The next section elaborates the web
support and its development guidelines.

2.5.3 Virtual learning environment (web support)

It is assumed in this study that a web-based support tool can play a valuable role in
improving the performance of student teachers in learning and teaching RME, and
that such a tool can be used by mathematics student teachers in the long term.

Web-based support tools are strongly related to the domain of electronic

performance support systems (EPSSs). As briefly discussed in the section 1.3.2,
an EPSS is an electronic system that provides performance support such as
information, advice, learning opportunities and tools to its users (Gery, 1991;
Nieveen, 1997; Stevens & Stevens, 1995). The purpose of an EPSS is to support
the performance of a job or task. In this study, the system aims to support the
performance of mathematics student teachers learning and teaching using the RME
approach.

In order to achieve this goal, the EPSSs include components which should be
ideally available on demand at any time, any place, and regardless of the situation.
An EPSS typically includes some or all of the following five components (Gery,
1991; Raybould, 1995):
1. Tools – referring to external applications that can help users carry out tasks,
such as calculator, forms, templates, etc.
2. Information – referring to electronic access to reference information, which
remains the same for various users.
3. Learning/training opportunities – referring to embedded programs such as
interactive tutorials and multimedia (e.g. video clips) used to improve learners'
or teachers’ knowledge and skills.
Conceptual framework and problem analysis 48

4. Advice – referring to heuristic and dynamic support materials, which are

provided based on users' specific needs or questions.
5. Communication aids – referring to support for sharing knowledge with others
or for using the mailing list in which they can communicate with each other.

A web-based EPSS is an EPSS that uses the Internet as its delivery platform. These
EPSSs provide: (1) information and resources that can be accessed by users from
all over the world and (2) tools for communication and exchange of ideas using e-
mail facilities and newsgroups (Khan, 1997).

Generally, developing a system on the web offers distinct advantages. First, a

large amount of resources are readily available. There are vast amounts of
information online that can be repackaged and linked to the system’s users.
Second, the web provides a system that can be reached by a large population. In
addition, it offers the ability to easily update and add information without huge
investments in time and resources (unlike republishing and distributing printed
materials). Moreover, the web with its graphics and hyperlinks is fairly intuitive to
use. Ease of use is important since many target users are not proficient web users
or even computer users. Finally, the web offers communication capabilities such
as e-mail and mailing lists. Web browsers often contain a built in set of tools that
can be used for communication.
These advantages seem to match the needs of student teachers in Indonesia,
which is a big country with a large and dispersed population. This means that
developing web support for mathematics student teachers in Indonesian teacher
education may provide an added value to the future of mathematics education in
Indonesia. Hence, it is seen as worthwhile for the CASCADE-IMEI study to design
and develop a web support system in addition to the RME course, in order to help
mathematics student teachers in Indonesian teacher education in learning RME as a
new approach in mathematics education.

Based on the five common components of an EPSS and studies of Kirkley and
Duffy (1997), Khan (1997), Nieveen (1997), and Winnips (2001), several tentative
guidelines for the support of the web site were formulated (see table 2.2).
Conceptual framework and problem analysis 49

Table 2.2 Guidelines for support offered via the web

EPSS Support offer by the LE
Components
Tools support users in performing their tasks in learning RME. For
instance, tools can support student teachers in learning how to
redesign RME lesson materials in order to meet their immediate
teaching needs.
Information ! provides general information about RME that is needed by
users.
! includes web addresses (URLs) that consist of information
that strongly relates to the job of mathematics student
teachers.
Training provides opportunities for the users to learn how to teach RME in
the classroom.
Advice provides facilities in such a way that student teachers can learn
how to use the web site, how to deal with new concepts by asking
questions directly to the developer, or by looking up a new RME
term in a glossary.
Communication provides users with some tools for communication and
discussion.

The interface of the web site should be designed: to accommodate users so they
can easily access the support components on the web: to be user-friendly; and to
easily navigate around the web. Table 2.3 summarizes the guidelines for the user
interface of the web site (Khan, 1997; Winnips, 2001). They are categorized into
four parts: general, content, navigation and lay out.
Conceptual framework and problem analysis 50

Table 2.3 Guidelines for the user interface of the web site
General The web-based LE should be:
• flexible, by the fact that one of the advantages of the web site is that
the content can be constantly updated;
• simple in the use of colors, text and navigation; and
• consistent when using the graphics and text.
Content • The content of a site should be appropriate for its intended users.
Appropriate relates not only to the material itself, but also to the
way in which it is expressed.
• The web page should be designed for transmission of information in
both directions.
Navigation • Place navigational buttons on the same location on the screen
throughout a program, so that the user can always find them in the
same place.
• Don't let the user get lost in the information; a web page should
contain no more than two to three screens worth of information.
• Make sure the users have a good overview of the structure of a site,
so that they can easily find their way to what they want.
• Keep the users oriented by using the logo on each page .
• Menus lose their value if they don't carry at least four or five links;
text or list-based menu pages can easily carry a dozen links without
overwhelming the user or forcing users to scroll through long lists.
Layout • Choose background and text so that there is enough contrast.
• Be consistent in the style of graphics used in a product.
• Set as few heading styles and subtitles as are necessary to organize
the content, then use the chosen styles consistently.
• Use space effectively.
• Page design in HTML should emphasize the power of hypermedia
links to take full advantage of this medium.
• The page should look attractive and inviting; making a structured
pattern can help to accomplish this.

All of these general guidelines have been and will be used in the design and
development of the web support.

2.5.4 RME exemplary lesson materials

Ball and Cohen (1996) pointed out that curriculum materials are extremely
important for the student teacher. In everyday teaching practice, curriculum
materials are the essential substance of lessons and units, i.e. of what teachers and
Conceptual framework and problem analysis 51

pupils actually do. Moreover, curriculum materials are agents of instructional

improvement. The design and dissemination of curriculum materials is one of the
oldest strategies for attempting to influence classroom instruction, either for
conventional teaching or as a means to shape what pupils learn. Also, curriculum
materials and teachers' guides could support teachers’ learning.

RME exemplary lesson materials can be seen as the main materials of the learning
environment. The materials may be adapted either from RME books that were
developed by Freudenthal Institute experts or from "Mathematics in Context"
(MIC) books (mathematics books for student grade 5-8 in the USA). This series of
books was developed during a collaborative project between the Freudenthal
Institute and University of Wisconsin-Madison. Therefore, it is assumed that the
materials are valid from RME theoretical point of view. However, some special
alterations are needed before these materials are suitable for the Indonesian
context, such as: examples, curriculum level and the number of mathematics
problems.

The MIC curriculum materials consist of two parts: student materials and a teacher
guide. Basically, the student materials have the same content as the teacher guide
except for the following components, which are only found in the teacher guide
(Romberg & de Lange, 1998a):
• logistical preparation of lesson such as topic and time;
• explanation of learner activities, goals and concepts addressed in the lesson;
• materials or media that are needed in the lesson such as student activity sheets,
student assessment materials, etc.;
• learning trajectory about context used and learning activities;
• learning trajectory about assessment activities;
• alternative solutions of each problem and sample student work;
• explanation of how to execute the lesson for each problem such as grouping,
homework and assignments; and
• hints and comments about problems.

In general, the RME exemplary lesson materials may be adapted based on the
following guidelines concerning the content, support and organization of the
Conceptual framework and problem analysis 52

materials (Gravemeijer, 1994; 1997; Romberg & de Lange, 1998a; van den Akker,
1998):
• The content of the RME exemplary lesson materials should be adapted based on
the junior secondary mathematics curriculum in Indonesia. The process of
adapting materials should be guided by the characteristics of RME.
• The support part of the curriculum materials should consist of procedural
specifications or essential characteristics on how to use them. For example, it
should consist of concrete suggestions on the role of the teacher during the
realization of the lesson. Also, the support should include information on the
logistics of lesson preparation, such as what teachers should do before, during
and after the lesson.
• The organization of the exemplary materials should help student teachers in
putting them to use in the classroom. Preferably, the materials consist of
student materials, teacher materials and assessment aids on various topics,
parallel with the curriculum being used in schools.

Based on these guidelines, all prototypes of the lesson materials have been adapted
and developed. These design guidelines should be taken into account when
assisting student teachers to use the materials, to develop lesson materials by
adapting the available materials and to implement those materials in classroom
practice. The next section synthesizes all ideas and analysis results presented in
the previous sections.

2.6 IMPLICATIONS FOR THE CASCADE-IMEI STUDY

This section summarizes the results of the problem analysis and literature study
from all earlier sections, culminating in the conceptual framework of the study.

First, as a result of the literature study, there are problems in the secondary
mathematics education in Indonesia that are related to the pupils’ understanding
and attitude towards mathematics. These problems are assumed to be (at least
partly) caused by the gap between the intended curriculum and both the
implemented curriculum and the learned curriculum. Second, this study intends
to investigate how this gap can be narrowed by introducing RME in the secondary
schools by mathematics student teachers. However, introducing RME as an
Conceptual framework and problem analysis 53

innovation in teacher education in Indonesia is a complex process that involves

changes in use of materials, teaching methods and beliefs. Considering the fact
that student teachers have no experience concerning the innovation, a learning
environment in which they can learn the new theory, new lesson materials and
learn how to teach using the new method is assumed to be indispensable. Finally,
after student teachers learn RME in the learning environment, they may introduce
the new approach in secondary school classrooms leading to better understanding
of and attitude towards mathematics.

Figure 2.4 illustrates the conceptual framework of the study. The dashed line
shows the main structure of the LE, being composed of three main components:
the web support, the exemplary lesson materials and the RME course.

Problems in mathematics
education at secondary
schools level

Introducing RME as an
innovation through
teacher education

RME web RME exemplary RME Course

support lesson materials

Secondary school
math. classrooms

Figure 2.4 Conceptual framework of the CASCADE-IMEI study

First, an RME course should be designed including the following three domains: 1)
RME theory, 2) domain knowledge needed for learning to teach in the pre-service
education and 3) trends in curriculum implementation strategies. This course is
Conceptual framework and problem analysis 54

aimed at assisting student teachers learning RME theoretically and practically. This
means that in addition to a theoretical session for learning RME theory, student
teachers also have to be engaged in curriculum development activities, such as
making teaching preparations, trying them out in the schools, and reflecting on
their experiences.

Second, the web site has potential for supporting a pre-service course program.
The web site is mainly formed by three concepts: EPSSs, RME theory and teacher
learning in teacher education. With RME as the main content, the web should
support student teachers learning RME in the context of Indonesian teacher
education.

Third, exemplary lesson materials should be adapted based on the RME theory and
the junior secondary mathematics curriculum in Indonesia. The process of
adaptation should be based on the characteristics of RME. Together with the RME
course, it can provide student teachers with an orientation on the RME,
demonstrate the essential features of the RME and provide insight in how RME can
be used.

In summary, these three main components form the LE of the CASCADE-IMEI

study, which is intended to effectively promote pre-service student teachers
learning RME as a new theory in teaching and learning in Indonesian teacher
education. The next chapter discusses how the LE has been designed and
developed using a development research approach.