A Study Of Mathematics Anxiety in Pre-Service Teachers

Peer Reviewed

A Study Of Mathematics Anxiety in Pre-Service Teachers

Gina Gresham PhD1,2

The study investigated the changes in levels of mathematics anxiety among pre-service teachersin six different sections of a mathematics method courses for early childhood/elementary

education pre-service teachers. The changes were a function of using Bruner�s framework ofdeveloping conceptual knowledge before procedural knowledge and using manipulatives andother activities to make mathematics concepts more concrete and meaningful. Data were

collected using quantitative and qualitative measures. Two hundred forty-six pre-serviceteachers completed a 98-item Likert-type survey. Informal discussions, informal interviews,and questionnaire-guided narrative interviews were conducted with pre-service teachers. Data

revealed a statistically significant reduction in mathematics anxiety in pre-service teachers(p<.001) who completed a mathematics methods course that emphasized Bruner�s model ofconcept development. Results of the study have implications for teacher education programsconcerning how future teachers are trained, the measurement of mathematics anxiety levels

among pre-service teachers, and the determination of specific contexts in which mathematicsanxiety can be interpreted and reduced.

KEY WORDS: mathematics anxiety; pre-service teachers; pre- and postcomparison; mathematicsmethods course.

INTRODUCTION

Do you like mathematics? Chances are yourimmediate response was a negative one. Research hasshown that mathematics anxiety has been a commontopic among educators (Bursal & Paznokas, 2006;Reys, 1995; Singh, Granville, & Dika, 2002;Thompson, 1992; Zettle & Raines, 2002). Mathe-matics anxiety has it roots in teaching and teachers(Tobias, 1998; Vinson, 2001; Widmer & Chavez,1982) and has been tied to poor academic perfor-mance of students, as well as to the effectiveness ofearly childhood/elementary teachers (Bush, 1989;Hembree, 1990). The beliefs that pre-service teachers

hold are very similar to those held by severelymathematics anxious people in mathematics anxietyclinics (Bursal & Paznokas, 2006; Tooke & Lind-strom, 1998). Pre-service teachers have poorer atti-tudes toward mathematics than the general collegepopulation (Emenaker, 1996), and have greatermathematics anxiety when the subject either is, or isperceived to be, under evaluation (Wood, 1988).

A significantly larger percentage of pre-serviceteachers were reported to experience higher levels ofmathematics anxiety than were other undergraduateuniversity students (Bursal & Paznokas, 2006; Harper& Daane, 1998; Hembree, 1990; Kelly & Tomhave,1985). Mathematics anxiety has an effect on learning,and may perhaps be a greater block to mathematicslearning than supposed deficiencies in our schoolcurricula and teacher preparation programs (Marti-nez, 1987). This is cause for alarm, considering thatteachers who possess higher levels of mathematicsanxiety may unintentionally pass on these negativefeelings to their students (Wood, 1988).

1Teaching and Learning Principles, University of Central Florida,

P.O. Box 161250Orlando, FL 32816-1250, USA;2Correspondence should be directed to Gina Gresham PhD,

Teaching and Learning Principles, University of Central Florida,

P.O. Box 161250Orlando, FL 32816-1250, USA;

e-mail: [email protected]

Early Childhood Education Journal, Vol. 35, No. 2, October 2007 (� 2007)DOI: 10.1007/s10643-007-0174-7

1811082-3301/07/1000-0181/0 � 2007 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

Limited research exists regarding the effective-ness of a mathematics methods course in reducing themathematics anxiety levels among pre-service teach-ers (Bursal & Paznokas, 2006; Williams & Ivey, 2001;Zettle & Raines, 2002). This study was conducted toadd to this body of knowledge and will identifymathematics anxiety and the research of mathematicsanxiety regarding instruction and pre-service teach-ers. It will also highlight the methods used in thestudy and changed levels of pre-service teachers�mathematics anxiety after participation in a mathe-matics methods course and provide a discussion andsummary of the study�s conclusions.

MATHEMATICS ANXIETY DEFINED

For many, mathematics anxiety is a feeling ofhelplessness, tension, or panic when asked to performmathematics operations or problems. It has beendescribed as an ‘‘I can�t syndrome,’’ a feeling ofuncertainty, of not being able to do well in mathe-matics or with numbers (Tobias, 1998). Bursal andPaznokas (2006) and Gresham (2004) present it as alack of applied understanding and/or an irrationaldread of mathematics, often leading to avoidance ofthe subject. Mathematics anxiety is a state of dis-comfort which occurs in response to situationsinvolving mathematical tasks which are perceived asthreatening to self esteem, and can often create anegative attitude toward the subject (Burns, 1998;Zettle & Raines, 2002). In turn, these feelings of anx-iety can lead to fear, distress, shame, inability to cope,sweaty palms, nervous stomach, difficulty breathing,and loss of ability to concentrate (Burns, 1998; Bursal& Paznokas, 2006; Dutton & Dutton, 1991; Hembree,1990). Richardson and Suinn (1972) say mathematicsanxiety is a feeling of tension and anxiety that inter-feres with the manipulation of numbers and the solv-ing of mathematical problems in a wide variety ofordinary life and academic situations. In each of thesedefinitions, mathematics anxiety is considered to bespecific to mathematics instruction and mathematicsrelated activities so deliberative in nature that it caninterfere with mathematics performance and inhibitsubsequent learning (Burns, 1998; Bursal & Paznokas,2006; Gresham, 2004; Hembree, 1990; Kelly &Tomhave, 1985; Tobias, 1998; Zettle & Raines, 2002).

MATHEMATICS ANXIETY AND

INSTRUCTION

Many studies now show that too many studentsin the United States have a moderate level of proce-

dural knowledge of mathematics and an even lowerlevel of conceptual knowledge (Vinson, 2001).Therefore, mathematics power is diminished andmathematics anxiety is increased. Several commoninstructional teaching techniques cause mathematicsanxiety, such as assigning the same work for everyone,teaching the textbook problem by problem, insistingon only one correct way to complete a problem, lec-turing, concentrating more on basic skills rather thanconcepts, and devoting more time to seatwork, andwhole class instruction (Furner & Berman, 2005;Tobias, 1998). These ‘‘traditional’’ ways of teachingcan be the cause of mathematics anxiety.

Effective teachers of mathematics know that theymust follow the modes of learning as presented byBruner so students are provided with concrete expe-riences that form the basis of pictorial and symbolicmathematics learning (Vinson, 2001). Therefore,Bruner�s mode of instruction was used as theinstructional foundation for this study. Bruner�stheoretical framework based upon cognitive struc-ture, is that learning is an active process in whichlearners construct new ideas of concepts based upontheir current or past knowledge. For example, theconcept of prime numbers appears to be more readilygrasped when the students, through construction,discover that certain handfuls of beans cannot be laidout in completed rows and columns. Such quantitieshave either to be laid out in a single file or in anincomplete row-column design in which there is al-ways one extra or one too few to fill the pattern. It iseasy for the student to go from this step to therecognition that a multiple table, so called, is a recordsheet of quantities in completed multiple rows andcolumns. Here is factoring, multiplication, andprimes in a construction that can be visualized(Bruner, 1961). Using this constructivist approach,the goal of instruction is to help learners developlearning and thinking strategies, focus on the indi-viduals� active construction of knowledge, and facil-itate learning by encouraging active inquiry.

Perhaps one of the enduring merits of Bruner�swork is its equal attention to theorizing not onlyabout how students learn but also about how toshape instructional practices to encourage suchlearning. Students learn most about a particularsubject when they learn how to ‘‘[obtain] knowledgefor oneself for use of one�s own mind’’ (Bruner, 1961,p. 22, quoted in Driscoll, 1994). Problem-basedlearning offers one of the best ways of facilitatingstudents� discovery learning, Bruner claimed, becauseit provides students with both the guided practice in

182 Gina Gresham

inquiry and the ‘‘cognitive conflicts’’ through whichstudents expand their conceptual frameworks (Dric-soll, 1994). Bruner would probably say that somestudents do not succeed in college curricula because(1) the subjects they are expected to master are notbeing offered in an appropriate mode of representa-tion for all students and (2) different ways of knowingand learning often do not facilitate student learningequally well in formal instructional settings. Bruner�stheories provide educators with useful ways ofthinking with greater complexity about how studentslearn and how best to offer instruction, involving theuse of concrete material, semi-concrete or pictorialactivities, and by exploring new ways to attackproblems symbolically (Driscoll, 1994).

Effective mathematics instruction will prevent thedevelopment of or reduce mathematics anxiety(Seymour, 1996; Tobias, 1998). According to quali-tative interviews with teachers across the UnitedStates, effective mathematics instruction is ‘‘learningin action’’ (Vinson, 2001, p. 91). Tobias (1998) sug-gested that ‘‘learning in action’’ is using activities suchas problem solving activities, simulations, discoveries,challenges, and games. This non-traditional approachto teaching can reduce mathematics anxiety(Hembree, 1990; Tobias, 1998). Other strategies toreduce mathematics anxiety include establishing asupportive classroom, using manipulatives to bridgefrom concrete to abstract, using a variety of tech-niques, and addressing students� attitudes towardsmathematics (Taylor & Brooks, 1986). Further, it hasbeen suggested that professors who teach collegecourses for pre-service teachers should themselvesincorporate the strategies as defined by the NationalCouncil of Teachers of Mathematics (2000) (SeeAppendix A for NCTM Strategies). One commonalitywas found among programs reporting a reduction inmathematics anxiety. Material was introduced slowly,the instructor assumed no prior mathematicalknowledge, and students were encouraged to discusstheir own thought processes in learning (Wood, 1988).The most successful programs were those featuringteachers who attempted to change the way mathe-matics was perceived and learned and through chan-ges in instructional strategies (Bursal & Paznokas,2006; Teague & Austin-Martin, 1981; Wood, 1988).

MATHEMATICS ANXIETY AND PRE-SERVICE

TEACHERS

How then does the aforementioned affectpre-service teachers? Research has shown that a

disproportionately large percentage of pre-serviceteachers experience significantly high levels ofmathematics anxiety (Battista, 1990; Burns, 1998;Bursal & Paznokas, 2006; Gresham, 2004; Kelly &Tomhave, 1985; Singh et al., 2002; Sloan, Daane, &Giesen, 2002; Sovchik, Meconi, & Steiner, 1981;Vinson, 2001; Zettle & Raines, 2002). This leads todoubts as to their potential effectiveness in teachingmathematics to children (Burns, 1998; Sovchik,1996). Several educators agree that teachers transmittheir avoidance and fear of mathematics to theirstudents (Furner & Berman, 2005; Hembree, 1990;Kelly & Tomhave, 1985; Lazarus, 1974; Sloan et al.,2002; Tobias, 1998; Vinson, 2001; Zettle & Raines,2002). The instruction of mathematics seemed toplay a critical role in shaping one�s attitudes towardmathematics (Jackson & Leffingwell, 1999). Mathe-matics anxiety is directly related to perceptions ofone�s own mathematical skill in relation to skills inother subject areas and with negative attitudes to-wards mathematics (Wright & Miller, 1981). Inother words, negative attitudes toward mathematicscan produce negative results in mathematics thuscreating mathematics anxiety (Vinson, 2001).

Greenwood (1984) and others (Burton, 1984;Clute, 1984; Downie, Slesnick, Stenmark, & Hall,1983; Tobias, 1998) contended that the root of somemathematics anxiety lies in how one is taught mathe-matics. This is particularly significant since teachersare inclined to teach just as they were taught (Furner& Berman, 2005). A possible solution to the problemmay lie in the preparation of teachers of schoolmathematics. This solution supported by Bursal andPaznokas (2006), Stodolsky (1985), Tooke andLinstrom (1998), and Vinson (2001) indicated thatthe nature of instruction itself seems a powerfulsource in shaping later attitudes, expectations, andconceptions of learning.

RESEARCH INVOLVING MATHEMATICS

ANXIETY

Bursal and Paznokas� (2006) study showed thatover half of the 65 pre-service teachers involvedhad mathematics anxiety. Scholfield (1981) linkednegative teacher attitudes about mathematics tomathematics anxiety. Negative attitudes towardmathematics and mathematics anxiety influence howoften mathematics is used, as well as the willingness topursue advanced work in mathematics, and even thechoice of prospective occupations (Dutton & Dutton,1991). Negative attitudes toward mathematics and

183Mathematics Anxiety in ECE/ELEM Pre-service Teachers

mathematics anxiety can produce negative results inmathematics due to the reduction of effort expendedtoward the activity, the limited persistence one exertswhen presented with an unsolved problem, the lowindependence levels one is willing to endure, andwhether or not a certain kind of activity will even beattempted (Burns, 1998; Cruikshank & Sheffield,1992; Hembree, 1990; Post, 1992; Vinson, Sloan,Haynes, & Brasher, Gresham, 1998).

Particular groups of students have higher math-ematics anxiety levels (Battista, 1990; Bursal &Paznokas, 2006; Hembree, 1990). Female studentsand students who have previously received lower thanexpected or lower than average scores in mathematicsclasses have tended to have higher levels of mathe-matics anxiety (Battista, 1990; Betz, 1978; Bursal &Paznokas, 2006; Calvert, 1981). Studies have consis-tently shown that elementary education majors havethe highest or one of the highest levels of mathematicsanxiety (Hembree, 1990; Kelly & Tomhave, 1985;Vinson, 2001).

Kontogianes (1974) found that a self-pacedprogram in which pre-service teachers participated inlectures, group sessions, and individualized tutoringfrom the professor, positively affected the pre-serviceteachers� mathematics anxiety, achievement, reten-tion, and attitude. Sovchik et al. (1981) found areduction in mathematics anxiety among pre-serviceelementary teachers after participating in a mathe-matics methods course which implemented concretemanipulatives, open discussions, and student journallogs. Chapline�s (1980) study indicated a reduction ofmathematics anxiety after inductive approaches toproblem-solving, test preparations designed to reducemathematics anxiety, and student logs of attitudesand perceptions were used.

Effective teaching of mathematics should placeemphasis on manipulatives and authentic learningsituations that mimic situations of dealing withmathematics (Dutton & Dutton, 1991; Vinson, 2001).Studies by Bursal and Paznokas (2006), Hembree(1990), Tobias (1998), and Vinson (2001) found thatpre-service teachers� mathematics anxiety levels aresignificantly reduced when an emphasis was placedon understanding. The use of manipulatives andconcrete materials in the classroom could eliminatemathematics anxiety in students (Thompson, 1992).

As indicated, many studies have reported successin reducing mathematics anxiety in pre-serviceteachers. This study compared the pre- and postlevelsof pre-service teachers� mathematics anxiety andfound a reduction in mathematics anxiety among

those pre-service teachers. It implemented many ofthe same strategies found in the studies mentionedsuch as using concrete manipulatives, journal logs,and discussions. However, it differs from otherstudies in that pre-service teachers actively partici-pated in their own teaching experiences throughoutthe duration of the mathematics methods course. Inaddition, it involved six different course sections overa 4-year time period and involved a larger samplesize. The results provide insight into the durabilityand effectiveness of teacher training programs thatemphasize manipulatives and other strategies to helpreduce mathematics anxiety in pre-service teachers.

THE STUDY

Research Investigation

This study investigated early childhood/elemen-tary pre-service teachers� levels of mathematics anxi-ety. It also examined whether pre-service teachers�mathematics anxiety can be reduced after participa-tion in a mathematics methods course. The researchwas conducted during different sections of fall andspring semesters over 4 years.

Subjects

The subjects were 246 junior early childhood/elementary education pre-service teachers from alarge southeastern university who were enrolled in amathematics methods course focusing on methodsfor teaching elementary mathematics. The partici-pants were overwhelmingly female (237 out of 246);therefore no attempt was made to differentiate resultsby gender. The subjects were working toward a K-6endorsement in early childhood/elementary educa-tion from the state. They had a weekly practicumexperience in the schools throughout the semester. Allsubjects had completed at least two universitymathematics courses and one elementary mathemat-ics content course. Students were informed bothverbally and in writing that their participation in thestudy was completely voluntary and would notinfluence their grade in the course.

Data Collection

The Mathematics Anxiety Rating Scale (MARS)was used as the quantitative instrument for thisstudy. Developed by Richardson and Suinn (1972),the 98-item, self-rating Likert-type scale may beadministered either individually or to groups. Eachitem on the scale represents a situation which may

184 Gina Gresham

arouse mathematics anxiety by indicating ‘‘not atall,’’ a little,’’ ‘‘a fair amount,’’ ‘‘much,’’ or ‘‘verymuch.’’ The statements describe everyday life andacademic situations requiring mathematical thoughtor tasks and are rated as to the degree of anxiety thatrespondents perceived they would experience in thegiven situations (See Appendix B for MARS State-ment Examples). The MARS has been demonstratedto be a valid test (p<.001) with which it correlates ata level of .97. The test-retest reliability for theinstrument has been shown to range from .78 to .85and internal consistency has been reported as .97.Possible scores range from 24 to 120. The higher thescore, the higher the level of mathematics anxiety.

Procedures

Pre-service teachers were given the MARS pre-test on the first day of class for the semester. Bruner�smodel of instruction was also introduced. During themathematics methods course, pre-service teachersparticipated in discussion sessions, journal writing,teacher directed large and small group activities, liter-ature based mathematical activities, student grouppresentations involving hands-on manipulatives,implementation of hands-on approaches to teachingmathematic content that involved them with the useof various concrete materials commonly utilized inmathematics teaching, and a 12-week field experiencepracticum in the K-6 classroom (6-weeks in the K-2grades and 6 weeks in the 3–6 grades). During thefield experience practicum, each pre-service teachertaught four or more lessons involving the use ofconcrete manipulatives and the integration of litera-ture in the mathematics curriculum. The field expe-rience was supervised by both a university facultymember and the pre-service pupil�s full-time teacher.Pre-service teachers were required to write detailedlesson plans describing all their planned instructionalactivities for the field experience practicum. Theywere also required to keep journal logs of theirthoughts and processes during the 12-week teachingexperience and during the semester long methodscourse. During the last week of the semester, pre-service teachers were given the MARS as a posttest.

The qualitative methods of the study includedinformal observations of pre-service teachers duringthe methods course taught for the semester, ques-tionnaire-guided narrative interviews, informal dis-cussions, and informal interviews that were eitherinitiated by the pre-service teacher during or afterclass or by the professor (the researcher in this study).

The interviews were usually in response to questionsby pre-service teachers regarding their own personalconcerns, experiences, background, assignments, andmathematical teaching practices. However, pre-ser-vice teachers were asked specific interview questionsthroughout the research period (See Appendix C forInterview Questions). Field notes and audio record-ings of interviews and discussions were used andanalyzed and decoded for emerging themes.

Results

The pretest MARS score was subtracted fromthe posttest MARS score for each to reveal to dif-ference score (see Table I). A positive difference scoremeant that the pre-service teacher�s mathematicsanxiety actually increased during the semester. Anegative score meant that the pre-service teacher�smathematics anxiety decreased by that much. Table Ishows the raw score means by group (semester). Thistable reveals that the greatest difference in changescores from pretest to posttest existed between Fall-03 ()18.13) and Fall-05 ()49.40). This means that theaverage reduction of mathematics anxiety was sig-nificantly greater in the Fall-05 semester than in Fall-03 semester. A possible reason for this could be thatFall-03 semester was the professor�s first semester toteach at that particular college. In addition, it was theprofessor�s first time to teach a larger class populationsize. Table II provides the t-test comparisons ofpretest and posttest raw scores by semester.

Discussion and Summary

After comparing group means for the pretest andposttest scores, it was found that the overall pre-service teachers� mathematics anxiety was reduced(p<.001). In addition, pretest and posttest raw scoredifferences were highly significant. Although the gainfor Fall-03, Spring-04, and Spring-05 semesters werenot as great the Fall-04, Fall-05, Spring-06 semesters,

Table I. Mathematics Anxiety Raw Score Means

Semester Pretest Posttest Gain Students Per Semester

Fall-03 196.58 178.45 -18.13 40

Spring-04 188.62 165.6 -23.02 42

Fall-04 194.88 156.83 -38.05 41

Spring-05 205.15 181.92 -23.23 39

Fall-05 222.21 172.81 -49.4 43

Spring-06 218.85 179.56 -39.56 41

All Groups 204.38 172.52 -31.89 246

Note: p<.001


there was a change indicating a reduction in students�mathematics anxiety.

Informal interviews, questionnaire-guided nar-rative interviews, discussions, and journal logs indi-cated the emergence of several themes. Theseincluded: (a) attributing the reduction in theirmathematics levels to the use of manipulativesimplemented throughout the course, (b) the person-ality of the professor and inviting environment asproduced by the professor, and (c) the use of journalwriting used throughout the study. Students werespecifically asked what they felt contributed to theirdecrease in mathematics anxiety. Two hundredthirteen students attributed their mathematics anxi-ety reduction to the methodology and the use ofconcrete manipulatives provided in the course toteach the subject content. Eleven students attributedtheir lowered mathematics anxiety levels to theenthusiasm of the professor in teaching the subjectcontent and inviting atmosphere of the course. Six-teen students thought their mathematics anxietylevels were reduced by a combination of imple-mented methods including the methodology and useof concrete manipulatives used throughout thecourse, the professor�s enthusiasm and excitementtoward teaching the mathematics content includingthe inviting atmosphere of the mathematics class-room as produced by the professor, and journalwriting. Students commented on how the use ofjournal writing throughout helped them workthrough their mathematics anxiety while bothteaching students in their practicum and taking themethods course. Many students commented thatthey finally ‘‘understood concepts such as fractions,decimals, percents, probability and statistics, andalgebra when the topics were presented in a concreteand practical format’’. Others commented thatmathematics was now less ‘‘foreign’’ to them, notingthat perceptions of their abilities to understandmathematics concepts were now enhanced. The most

unanimous and interesting comment was that theyfelt as though their mathematics anxiety could havebeen prevented in elementary school, if they hadreceived instruction of mathematical conceptsthrough the use of concrete manipulatives.

Six students experienced an increase or nochange in mathematics anxiety. During interviews,questionnaire-guided narrative interviews, and dis-cussions, students revealed that they preferred do-ing mental math or working with others to solveproblems. They indicated more stress and lack ofunderstanding in working with manipulatives sincethey had never been introduced to them before.They implied they were unfamiliar with andintimidated by the manipulatives. Therefore, theystruggled with learning mathematics at the sametime they were learning to use manipulatives. Stu-dents also commented on the difficulty they expe-rienced to integrate both mathematics and literaturein their lesson planning. Although students weregiven access to literature, websites, and book lists,they expressed hardship in finding literatureappropriate for the skill they were teaching andwith the grade level in which they were assigned.Another rationale for their increased mathematicsanxiety included the course requirement of teachinglessons implementing manipulatives utilizing bothwhole and small group instruction. For many stu-dents, this was their first methods course and onlyexperience teaching a mathematics lesson before agroup of students.

CONCLUSION

Educators do have an impact upon their stu-dents� mathematics anxiety levels (Emenaker, 1996;Gresham, Vinson, Haynes, Brasher, & Sloan, 1998).The quality of mathematics instruction in the ele-mentary schools depends on the preparation of pre-service early childhood/elementary teachers ofmathematics (Battista, 1990). Bruner�s modes oflearning, with emphasis on the use of manipulativesand concrete learning of the mathematical content,journal logs, small and whole group instruction andpresentations, literature based activities, and practi-cum experiences during the mathematics methodscourse were implemented in this study. The concreteexperiences helped the pre-service teachers have abetter understanding of the procedural purposes andmathematical concepts. As per student interviews theuse of manipulatives aided the pre-service teachers inlearning how to teach mathematics.

Table II. t-Test Comparisons of Pretest and Posttest Raw Scores

by Semester

Semester Variables t df p

Fall-03 Pretest–Posttest 11.88 39 .0000*

Spring-04 Pretest–Posttest 19.64 41 .0000*


Spring-05 Pretest–Posttest 23.73 38 .0000*


Spring-06 Pretest–Posttest 26.75 40 .0049

Note: * p<.001

186 Gina Gresham

Limited research exists regarding the effective-ness of a mathematics methods course to identify andreduce mathematics anxiety in pre-service teachers(Bursal & Paznokas, 2006; Williams & Ivey, 2001;Zettles & Raines, 2002). The findings in this studysupport Vinson�s (2001) study in which pre-serviceteachers� mathematics anxiety levels were reducedafter using manipulatives and Bruner�s frameworkthroughout a mathematics methods course. Duringthis study, mathematics anxiety levels of early child-hood/elementary pre-service teachers were reduced asindicated by pre–post results, interviews and journallogs. Through interviews and informal discussions,pre-service teachers indicated a greater understandingof mathematics concepts and procedures. The resultsof this research study can help bridge the gap in theexisting research and influence the way future teach-ers are trained to teach mathematics. Understandingmathematical content and its presentation will helppre-service teachers teach their students effectively,thus preventing or reducing mathematics anxiety intheir future students.

APPENDIX A

Strategies from NCTM (2000)

• Remove the importance of ego from classroom practice

• Make mathematics relevant

• Allow for different social approaches to learning mathe-

matics

• Emphasize the importance of original, quality thinking

rather than rote manipulation of formulas

• Characterize mathematics as a human endeavor

• Let student share some input into their own evaluations

• Design positive experiences in mathematics classes

• Accommodate for different learning styles

• Emphasize that everyone makes mistakes in mathematics

APPENDIX B

Statement Examples from MARS (Richardson& Suinn, 1972)

Does the following make you anxious?

1. Figuring out a simple percentage, like the sales tax on

something you buy.

2. Being asked to add up 976 + 777 in your head.

3. Figuring out your grade average for last term.

4. Signing up for a mathematics course.

5. Studying for a mathematics test.

6. Taking a mathematics quiz.

7. Having a friend try to teach you how to do a math

problem and finding out you cannot understand what is

being said.

8. Having someone watch over you as you add up a col-

umn of numbers.

9. Listening to another student explain a math formula.

10. Looking through the pages of a math textbook.

11. Working on an income tax form.

12. Raising your hand in a math class to ask a question

about something you do not understand.

13. Reading the word ‘‘Statistics.’’

14. Figuring the sales for something that costs more than

$1.00.

15. Reading and interpreting graphs or charts.

APPENDIX C

Interview Questions

1. What do you think when you hear the word mathemat-

ics?

2. For me, mathematics is most like...?

3. How do you feel about mathematics?

4. How confident do you feel when asked to perform math-

ematics problems?

5. How confident do you feel when teaching mathematics?

6. Describe your most memorable teaching moment while

teaching mathematics during your internship. Why does

this stand out in your mind?

7. Describe your feelings when teaching mathematics.

8. Do you perform well in mathematics?

9. What do you think contributed to your mathematics

anxiety?

10. What contributed to your decrease/increase in mathe-

matics anxiety level?

11. Do you feel class discussions have helped you this semes-

ter? Why or why not?

12. Did this course help you address your mathematics anxi-

ety? How? Why or why not?

REFERENCES

Battista, M. (1990). The relationship of mathematics anxiety andmathematical knowledge to the learning of mathematicalpedagogy by pre-service elementary teachers. School Scienceand Mathematics, 86, 10–19.

Betz, N. (1978). Prevalence, distribution, and correlates of mathanxiety in college students. Journal of Counseling Psychology,25, 441–448.

Bruner, J. (1961). The process of education. Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.


Burns, M. (1998). Math: Facing an American phobia. Sausalito,CA: Math Solutions Publications.

Bursal, M., & Paznokas, L. (2006). Mathematics anxiety and pre-service elementary teachers� confidence to teach mathematicsand science. School Science and Mathematics, 106(4), 173–179.

Burton, G. (1984). Revealing images. School Science and Mathe-matics, 84, 199–207.

Bush, W. (1989). Mathematics anxiety in upper elementary schoolteachers. School Science and Mathematics, 89, 499–509.

Calvert, E. (1981). A study of the relationship between levels ofmathematics anxiety and gender, age, mathematical back-ground, and previous success in mathematics. (ERIC Docu-ment Reproduction Service No. ED 200-265).

Chapline, E. (1980). Teacher education and mathematics. Programdevelopment and evaluation. Washington DC: Women�s Edu-cational Equity Act Program: (ERIC Document ReproductionService No. ED 186 273), pp. 1–13.

Clute, P. (1984). Mathematics anxiety, instructional method, andachievement in a survey course in college mathematics. Journalfor Research in Mathematics Education, 15, 50–58.

Cruikshank, D., & Sheffield, L. (1992). Teaching and learningelementary and middle school mathematics. Columbus, OH:Merrill.

Downie, D., Slesnick, T., Stenmark, J., & Hall, L. (1983). We�remadly in love with math!. Instructor and Teacher, 93, 70–72.

Driscoll, M. (1994). Psychology of learning for instruction. Need-ham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Dutton, W., & Dutton, A. (1991). Mathematics children use andunderstand. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield Publishing Com-pany.

Emenaker, C. (1996). A problem solving based mathematics courseand elementary teachers� beliefs. School Science and Mathe-matics, 96(2), 65–71.

Furner, J., & Berman, B. (2005). Confidence in their ability to domathematics: The need to eradicate math anxiety so our futurestudents can successfully compete in a high-tech globallycompetitive world. Dimensions in Mathematics, 18(1), 28–31.

Greenwood, J. (1984). My anxieties about math anxiety. Mathe-matics Teacher, 77, 662–663.

Gresham, G. (2004). Mathematics anxiety in elementary students.CMC ComMuniCator, 29(2), 28–29.

Gresham, R., Vinson, B., Haynes, J., Brasher, J., & Sloan, T.(1998). A comparison of pre-and post-levels of mathematicsanxiety among pre-service teacher candidates enrolled in amathematics methods course. (ERIC Document ReproductionService No. ED 417137).

Harper, N., & Daane, C. (1998). Causes and reductions of mathanxiety in pre-service elementary teachers. Action in TeacherEducation, 19(4), 29–38.

Hembree, R. (1990). The nature, effects, and relief of mathematicsanxiety. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 21, 33–46.

Jackson, C., & Leffingwell, R. (1999). The role of instructors increating math anxiety in students from kindergarten throughcollege. The Mathematics Teacher, 92(7), 583–586.

Kelly, W., & Tomhave, W. (1985). A study of math anxiety andmath avoidance in pre-service elementary teachers. ArithmeticTeacher, 32, 51–53.

Kontogianes, J. (1974). The effect of achievement, retention, andattitude of an individualized instructional program in math-ematics for prospective elementary school teachers. DoctoralDissertation, University of Oklahoma, 1973. DissertationAbstracts International, 34, 5802-A.

Lazarus, M. (1974). Mathophobia: Some personal speculations.National Elementary Principal, 53, 16–22.

Martinez, J. (1987). Preventing math anxiety: A prescription.Academic Therapy, 23, 117–125.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Curriculumand evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston,VA:Author.

Post, T. (1992). Teaching mathematics in grades K-8. Boston: Allyn& Bacon.

Reys, R. (1995). Helping children learn mathematics. Boston: Allyn& Bacon.

Richardson, F., & Suinn, R. (1972). The mathematics anxietyrating scale: Psychometric data. Journal of Counseling Psy-chology, 19, 551–554.

Scholfield, H. (1981). Teacher effects on cognitive and affectivepupil outcomes in elementary school mathematics. Journal ofEducational Psychology, 73, 462–471.

Seymour, D. (1996). Math is learning in action. Learning, 43–47.Sloan, T., Daane, C., & Giesen, J. (2002). Mathematics anxiety and

learning styles: What is the relationship in elementary pre-service teachers? School and Science Mathematics, 102(2), 84–87.

Singh, K., Granville, M., & Dika., S. (2002). Mathematics andscience achievement: Effects of motivation, interest, andacademic engagement. Journal of Educational Research, 95,323–332.

Sovchik, R. (1996). Teaching mathematics to children. New York:HarperCollins.

Sovchik, R., Meconi, L., & Steiner, E. (1981). Mathematics anxietyof preservice elementary mathematics methods students.School Science and Mathematics, 81, 643–648.

Stodolsky, S. (1985). Telling math: Origins of math aversion andanxiety. Educational Psychologist, 20(3), 125–133.

Taylor, L., & Brooks, K. (1986). Building math confidence byovercoming math anxiety. Adult Literacy & Basic Education,10, 7–8.

Teague, P., & Austin-Martin, G. (1981). Effects of a mathematicsmethods course in prospective elementary schools teachers�math attitudes, math anxiety, and teaching performance.(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 220 555).

Thompson, A. (1992). Teachers� beliefs and conceptions: Asynthesis of the research. In D. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook ofresearch on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 12–15).New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.

Tobias, S. (1998). Anxiety and mathematics. Harvard EducationReview, 50, 63–70.

Tooke, D., & Lindstrom, C. (1998). Effectiveness of a mathematicsmethods course in reducing math anxiety in pre-serviceelementary teachers. School Science and Mathematics, 98(3),136–139.

Vinson,B. (2001).A comparison of pre-service teachersmathematicsanxiety before and after a methods class emphasizing manip-ulatives. Early Childhood Education Journal, 29(2), 89–94.

Vinson, B., Sloan, T., Haynes, J., Brasher, J., & Gresham, R.(1998). A comparison of pre-service teachers; Mathematicsanxiety before and after a methods class emphasizing manip-ulatives. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED417136).

Widmer, C., & Chavez, A. (1982). Math anxiety and elementaryschool teachers. Education, 102, 272–276.

Williams, S., & Ivey, K. (2001). Affetive assessment and mathe-matics classroom engagement: A case study. Education Studiesin Mathematics, 47, 75–100.

Wood, E. (1988). Math anxiety and elementary teachers: Whatdoes research tell us?. For the Learning of Mathematics, 8(1),8–13.

Wright, D., & Miller, D. (1981). Math anxiety: A research report.(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 212 465).

Zettle, R., & Raines, S. (2002). The relationship of trait and testanxiety with mathematics anxiety. College Student Journal, 34,246–258.

188 Gina Gresham

Documents

A Study Of Mathematics Anxiety in Pre-Service Teachers