This exploratory study investigated the influence of High Performance Team (HPT) training on sociomathematical norms and differing levels of the Math-Talk Learning Community framework (Math-Talk) when sixth-grade student teams solved challenging mathematics problems while working in teams. HPT training involved (1) training students on distinct roles in the team problem-solving process, (2) challenging students with complicated mathematical problems, and (3) holding students accountable for contributions to the team. This research project explored the initial stages of the relationship between HPT and student-to-student mathematics conversations though the lens of the Math-Talk Learning Community framework. The researcher studied four teams (i.e., four cases) with four middle school students in each team/case during a 7-week timeframe. The research study had three phases. The first phase involved gathering baseline data regarding the students’ sociomathematical norms. During the second phase, the students were trained to work in HPT and then solved challenging mathematics problems in teams. During the last phase, the researcher collected data to explore shifts in sociomathematical norms and student autonomy after the students had the opportunity to be trained and work in HPT. The researcher used descriptive statistics to analyze the quantitative data and open and axial coding to analyze the qualitative data. The analysis included both within- and cross-case analysis. The descriptive statistics used to analyze the changes in sociomathematical norms and Math-Talk levels indicated that the levels of sociomathematical norms increased when teachers gave students opportunities to participate in mathematics discussion. Specifically, students were most adept in the area of explaining and justifying reasoning and least skilled in the area of indicate when solutions are valid. The role of the teacher was key to maintaining high levels of Math-Talk. The teachers needed to give appropriate support to maintain these levels in three different areas: (1) select problems that were the appropriate level of complexity and provide scaffolding when needed, (2) ensure students understood the context for the mathematics problems, and (3) teach students how to find their own errors or be ready to give feedback regarding whether students’ answers were correct.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-08-02T21:42:54Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Luiz Carlos Mendes de Brito.pdf: 1846772 bytes, checksum: 22d80787dffefa29afa621966a802efb (MD5) Previous issue date: 2009-02-19 / Multifunctional team evaluation is a concept that has been approached by the academy more often on the last two decades. Several theories and methodologies have been developed to reduce the qualitative and perceptive effect on the evaluations, comprising a number of different techniques that aim to describe and decode the components of a complex system of meanings. Focusing these techniques this project assessed and compared three models to evaluate team performance. The first model based on team member personality states that team results are influenced by individual personality and the right components previous selection are critical factors for the team performance. The second model correlates team member relationship with the level of performance. The third model evaluates the interaction among the members but did not measure the level of performance. The models were evaluated based on a case study methodology developed on a chemical industry located in S. Paulo. Evaluation data were compared with the team goals results after completion. The results approached the models selected satisfactorily and confirmed the influence suggested by authors. The three models comparison results did not allow to select one model as the most effective to evaluate team performance. It is possible, however, to suggest that a practical and effective evaluation for team performance could be built based on the combination of the three models.(AU) / Avaliação de desempenho de equipes multifuncionais é um conceito que tem sido abordado mais freqüentemente nas últimas duas décadas. Diversas teorias e conceitos foram desenvolvidos para tornar as avaliações menos qualitativas ou fundamentadas em percepções, compreendendo um conjunto de diferentes técnicas interpretativas que visam descrever e decodificar os componentes de um sistema complexo de significados. Com esse foco o projeto comparou três modelos de avaliação de desempenho de equipes. O primeiro modelo baseado na personalidade do participante, afirma que os resultados das equipes são influenciados pela seleção prévia dos participantes e que as características individuais desses participantes são críticas para o desempenho da equipe. O segundo modelo fundamenta suas afirmações nas relações interconectadas de positividade e negatividade; questionamento e argumentação e atuação em equipe. O terceiro modelo baseado no processo de interação de grupos também avalia as relações que influenciam o alto desempenho de equipes multifuncionais. Os três modelos foram comparados, através de um estudo de caso único em indústria química paulista, medindo-se os resultados de correlação das equipes e as interações entre os participantes das equipes. As metas atingidas pelas equipes foram utilizadas para suportar os resultados das avaliações dos modelos como sistema de avaliação de equipes. Pode-se concluir que houve uma aproximação satisfatória confirmando a influência sugerida pelos modelos avaliados. A comparação entre os três modelos não permitiu afirmar qual dos três modelos é mais eficaz para avaliação de equipes. Entretanto, é possível, sugerir que a combinação de elementos dos três modelos permitirá a construção de um processo eficaz e prático de avaliação de equipes.(AU)