Quality of Instructional Explanation and its Relation to Student Learning in Primary Mathematics

Instructional explanation is deliberately designed for the purpose of teaching, and serves as responses to various queries from teachers, students, or queries about the nature of a domain in a school subject matter. The present study aimed to identify the features of quality instructional explanation that might serve as proximal indices of students' learning outcome. To do so, the study, firstly, developed an instrument to assess the quality of instructional explanations. Secondly, it examined how quality of instructional explanation would affect students' learning outcomes. Finally, the study investigated whether the teachers' backgrounds, such as mathematics knowledge for teaching or years of teaching, might yield high-quality of instructional explanation.;The data source of the current study was from the project "Has curriculum reform made a difference? Looking for change in classroom practice" (Ni, Li, Cai, & Hau, 2009). Thirty-nine teachers (20 teachers using a reform-oriented curriculum vs. 19 teachers utilizing a conventional curriculum) and their 2,239 students were included. All 39 classes had completed videotapes of lessons teaching new knowledge on the content of number. Teachers' instructional explanation was examined in terms of its structural features and quality. Quality of instructional explanation was evaluated on the three dimensions, accuracy (truthfulness), richness, and coherence. Student learning outcomes were measured with regard to cognitive (calculation, simple problem solving, and complex problem solving) and affective learning outcomes (self-reported interest in learning mathematics, classroom participation, views of mathematics, and views of learning mathematics).;The results indicated that the Chinese mathematics teachers scored high on the indices of accuracy (truthfulness) and coherence in instructional explanation. Their scores on the dimension of richness were relatively lower. Moreover, we found that a teacher's performance of instructional explanation was relatively stable across lessons. A few relationships were found between teachers' background factors (i.e., teaching age, educational level, mathematical knowledge for teaching, and belief towards mathematics) and their use of instructional explanation. Curriculum in use affected the quality of teachers' instructional explanation. For example, the teachers who used the reform-oriented curriculum were more likely to encourage students to use mathematical language, use multiple solutions and multiple representations than their counterparts of non-reformed classes. The teachers of non-reform classes were more inclined to use accurate teaching language and make connections with general concepts and principles than their peers of reform classes.;Teachers' instructional explanations were found to affect student learning outcomes. However, the effects differentiated across students' learning outcomes. We observed more effects on students' cognitive achievement than on affective achievement. Moreover, the effect of instructional explanation on student learning was moderated by curriculum in use, students' SES, and prior achievement. The effect appeared more obvious in the nonreform classes than the reform classes.;This study was significant in three respects. It has contributed to an understanding of the instructional features of Chinese mathematics classes and their relationship with student learning. Moreover, it has provided a useful tool for reserach and practice in matheamtics education. Finally, the results have some implications for teacher education.