Mathematical Knowledge for Teaching in Elementary Teacher Education: A Systematic Review with Limited Meta-Analytic Synthesis

Meita Fitrianawati; Muhammad Ardi Kurniawan; Vita Istihapsari

doi:10.56741/IISTR.ijlree.002176

Authors

Meita Fitrianawati
meita.fitrianawati@pgsd.uad.ac.id
Universitas Ahmad Dahlan https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3748-3718
Muhammad Ardi Kurniawan Universitas Ahmad Dahlan https://orcid.org/0009-0000-8874-743X
Vita Istihapsari Universitas Ahmad Dahlan https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7194-631X

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.56741/IISTR.ijlree.002176

Keywords:

Content Knowledge, Mathematical Knowledge for Teaching, Meta-Analysis, Pedagogical Content Knowledge, Prospective Elementary Teachers

Abstract

This study synthesizes empirical research on Mathematical Knowledge for Teaching (MKT) in elementary teacher education through a systematic review combined with a limited meta-analytic synthesis. Following PRISMA 2020 procedures, studies published between 2015 and 2025 were identified from ERIC, Scopus, Google Scholar, Garuda Kemdikbud, and DOAJ. Fourteen quantitative and mixed-methods studies met the inclusion criteria, although only five provided sufficient statistical data for effect size estimation. Effect sizes were calculated using Cohen’s d and Hedges’ g, and pooled under a random-effects model in CMA version 3 and the R-package metafor. The findings indicate that MKT among elementary teachers, both prospective and early-career, is generally uneven across domains, with stronger performance in common content knowledge and persistent weaknesses in specialized content knowledge and horizon content knowledge, especially in fractions and geometry. The pooled effect (d = 0.62, 95% CI [0.38, 0.86], k = 5) suggests that structured pedagogical interventions can improve MKT, although the evidence base remains limited and heterogeneous. Cross-study patterns, rather than formal subgroup meta-analytic tests, suggest that teaching experience, mathematical content domain, and initial pedagogical knowledge are associated with variation in MKT outcomes. The study highlights implications for strengthening elementary teacher education curricula, particularly within the Kurikulum Merdeka framework in Indonesia, and for improving future MKT research design and reporting.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Meita Fitrianawati, Universitas Ahmad Dahlan

is a lecturer in the Department of Elementary Teacher Education, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Universitas Ahmad Dahlan, Yogyakarta, Indonesia. Her academic interests include elementary education, child development, learning innovation, educational assessment, and teacher professional development. She has participated in various research and community engagement projects related to primary education and has published scholarly works in national and international academic journals. (email: meita.fitrianawati@pgsd.uad.ac.id).

Muhammad Ardi Kurniawan, Universitas Ahmad Dahlan

is a lecturer in the Department of Indonesian Language and Literature Education, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Universitas Ahmad Dahlan, Yogyakarta, Indonesia. His research focuses on Indonesian language education, literacy studies, language learning innovation, educational technology, and literature instruction. He actively contributes to research, academic publications, and community service programs aimed at enhancing language competencies and literacy development among learners. (email: ardi.kurniawan@pbsi.uad.ac.id).

Vita Istihapsari, Universitas Ahmad Dahlan

is a lecturer in the Department of Mathematics Education, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Universitas Ahmad Dahlan, Yogyakarta, Indonesia. Her research interests include mathematics education, mathematical thinking, problem-solving, curriculum development, and innovative learning approaches. She has been involved in numerous educational research projects and has published articles in reputable journals, particularly in the fields of mathematics learning and teacher education. (email: vita.istihapsari@pmat.uad.ac.id).

References

L. Darling-Hammond, “Teacher education around the world: What can we learn from international practice?,” Eur. J. Teach. Educ., vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 291–309, 2017, doi: 10.1080/02619768.2017.1315399. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2017.1315399

L. S. Shulman, “Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching,” Educ. Res., vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 4–14, 1986, doi: 10.3102/0013189X015002004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X015002004

D. L. Ball, M. H. Thames, and G. Phelps, “Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special?,” J. Teach. Educ., vol. 59, no. 5, pp. 389–407, 2008, doi: 10.1177/0022487108324554. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487108324554

H. C. Hill, S. G. Schilling, and D. L. Ball, “Developing measures of teachers’ mathematics knowledge for teaching,” Elem. School J., vol. 105, no. 1, pp. 11–30, 2004, doi: 10.1086/428763. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/428763

S. Krauss et al., “Pedagogical content knowledge and content knowledge of secondary mathematics teachers,” J. Educ. Psychol., vol. 100, no. 3, pp. 716–725, 2008, doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.100.3.716. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.100.3.716

N. Pincheira and Á. Alsina, “Mathematical knowledge of early algebra exhibited by pre-service early childhood education teachers,” Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ., vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 461–487, 2025, doi: 10.1007/s10763-024-10478-y. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-024-10478-y

F. Arwadi, S. Sidjara, and Suarlin, “The pedagogical content knowledge of mathematics pre-service teachers on geometry topic in Universitas Negeri Makassar,” Mosharafa: J. Pendidik. Mat., vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 759–770, 2023, doi: 10.31980/mosharafa.v12i4.1189. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31980/mosharafa.v12i4.1189

E. Chandia et al., “Knowledge profiles on numbers for teaching by primary education pedagogy students,” Int. Electron. J. Math. Educ., vol. 20, no. 3, art. no. em0828, 2025, doi: 10.29333/iejme/16080. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/16080

H. C. Hill, B. Rowan, and D. L. Ball, “Effects of teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching on student achievement,” Am. Educ. Res. J., vol. 42, no. 2, pp. 371–406, 2005, doi: 10.3102/00028312042002371. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312042002371

C. Y. Charalambous, H. C. Hill, M. J. Chin, and D. McGinn, “Mathematical content knowledge and knowledge for teaching,” J. Math. Teach. Educ., vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 579–613, 2020, doi: 10.1007/s10857-019-09443-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-019-09443-2

J. Baumert et al., “Teachers’ mathematical knowledge, cognitive activation in the classroom, and student progress,” Am. Educ. Res. J., vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 133–180, 2010, doi: 10.3102/0002831209345157. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831209345157

I. V. S. Mullis, M. O. Martin, P. Foy, D. L. Kelly, and B. Fishbein, TIMSS 2019 International Results in Mathematics and Science. Boston, MA, USA: TIMSS & PIRLS Int. Study Center, Boston College, 2020.

T. Fukaya, D. Nakamura, Y. Kitayama, and T. Nakagoshi, “A systematic review and meta-analysis of intervention studies on mathematics and science pedagogical content knowledge,” Front. Educ., vol. 9, art. no. 1435758, 2024, doi: 10.3389/feduc.2024.1435758. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1435758

D. T. Tarusu, “Kemampuan pedagogik matematika SD pada mahasiswa PGSD FIP UNIMA,” Mosharafa: J. Pendidik. Mat., vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 263–271, 2018, doi: 10.31980/mosharafa.v7i2.32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31980/mosharafa.v7i2.32

Z. Aksu and Ü. Kul, “The mediating role of mathematics teaching efficacy on the relationships between pedagogical content knowledge and mathematics teaching anxiety,” SAGE Open, vol. 9, no. 3, art. no. 2158244019871049, 2019, doi: 10.1177/2158244019871049. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019871049

M. Bursal and L. Paznokas, “Mathematics anxiety and preservice elementary teachers’ confidence to teach mathematics and science,” School Sci. Math., vol. 106, no. 4, pp. 173–180, 2006, doi: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.2006.tb18073.x. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2006.tb18073.x

K. J. Stoehr, “Mathematics anxiety: One size does not fit all,” J. Teach. Educ., vol. 68, no. 1, pp. 69–84, 2017, doi: 10.1177/0022487116676316. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487116676316

D. L. Ball, “The mathematical understandings that prospective teachers bring to teacher education,” Elem. School J., vol. 90, no. 4, pp. 449–466, 1990, doi: 10.1086/461626. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/461626

D. Walter et al., “How pre-service teachers can be supported to increase their diagnostic skills in mathematics,” Front. Educ., vol. 10, art. no. 1510828, 2025, doi: 10.3389/feduc.2025.1510828. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1510828

N. Pincheira and Á. Alsina, “Teachers’ mathematics knowledge for teaching early algebra: A systematic review from the MKT perspective,” Mathematics, vol. 9, no. 20, art. no. 2590, 2021, doi: 10.3390/math9202590. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/math9202590

S. Blömeke, U. Suhl, and G. Kaiser, “Teacher education effectiveness: Quality and equity of future primary teachers’ mathematics and mathematics pedagogical content knowledge,” J. Teach. Educ., vol. 62, no. 2, pp. 154–171, 2011, doi: 10.1177/0022487110386798. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487110386798

M. Hoover, R. Mosvold, D. L. Ball, and Y. Lai, “Making progress on mathematical knowledge for teaching,” Math. Enthus., vol. 13, no. 1–2, pp. 3–34, 2016, doi: 10.54870/1551-3440.1363. DOI: https://doi.org/10.54870/1551-3440.1363

F. Depaepe, L. Verschaffel, and G. Kelchtermans, “Pedagogical content knowledge: A systematic review of the way in which the concept has pervaded mathematics educational research,” Teach. Teach. Educ., vol. 34, pp. 12–25, 2013, doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2013.03.001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2013.03.001

K. Lynch, K. E. Gonzalez, H. C. Hill, and R. Merritt, “A meta-analysis of the experimental evidence linking mathematics and science professional development interventions to teacher knowledge, classroom instruction, and student achievement,” AERA Open, vol. 11, art. no. 23328584251335302, 2025, doi: 10.1177/23328584251335302. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/23328584251335302

E. Fennema and M. L. Franke, “Teachers’ knowledge and its impact,” in Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning, D. A. Grouws, Ed. New York, NY, USA: Macmillan, 1992, pp. 147–164. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-60752-874-620251011

D. L. Ball, H. C. Hill, and H. Bass, “Knowing mathematics for teaching: Who knows mathematics well enough to teach third grade, and how can we decide?,” Am. Educator, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 14–46, 2005. [Online]. Available: https://scispace.com/pdf/knowing-mathematics-for-teaching-who-knows-mathematics-well-2lk01jdgcn.pdf

M. T. Tatto et al., Policy, Practice, and Readiness to Teach Primary and Secondary Mathematics in 17 Countries. Amsterdam, Netherlands: IEA, 2012.

Y. Sitabkhan et al., “Understanding primary school teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching,” RTI Press Res. Rep., 2024, doi: 10.3768/rtipress.2024.rr.0052.2409. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3768/rtipress.2024.rr.0052.2409

T. Rowland, P. Huckstep, and A. Thwaites, “Elementary teachers’ mathematics subject knowledge: The knowledge quartet and the case of Naomi,” J. Math. Teach. Educ., vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 255–281, 2005, doi: 10.1007/s10857-005-0853-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-005-0853-5

A. Jakobsen, M. Kazima, and D. N. Kasoka, “Assessing prospective teachers’ development of MKT through their teacher education: A Malawian case,” in Proc. 8th NORMA Conf., Stockholm, Sweden, 2018, pp. 219–227.

C. Scheibling-Seve, E. Pasquinelli, and E. Sander, “Assessing conceptual knowledge through solving arithmetic word problems,” Educ. Stud. Math., vol. 103, no. 3, pp. 293–311, 2020, doi: 10.1007/s10649-020-09938-3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-020-09938-3

Y. Copur-Gencturk, “Teachers’ conceptual understanding of fraction operations,” Educ. Stud. Math., vol. 107, no. 3, pp. 525–545, 2021, doi: 10.1007/s10649-021-10033-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-021-10033-4

J. W. Son and N. Sinclair, “How preservice teachers interpret and respond to student geometric errors,” School Sci. Math., vol. 110, no. 1, pp. 31–46, 2010, doi: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.2009.00005.x. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2009.00005.x

S. Bas-Ader, E. Ader, and R. D. Taylan, “Supporting prospective mathematics teachers in noticing students’ proportional reasoning,” J. Math. Teach. Educ., vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 681–711, 2025, doi: 10.1007/s10857-024-09621-x. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-024-09621-x

J. N. DePiper et al., “Promoting teacher self-efficacy for supporting English learners in mathematics,” ZDM Math. Educ., vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 489–502, 2021, doi: 10.1007/s11858-021-01227-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-021-01227-4

T. F. Blanco, A. Gorgal-Romarís, C. Núñez-García, and P. G. Sequeiros, “Prospective primary teachers’ didactic-mathematical knowledge in a service-learning project for inclusion,” Mathematics, vol. 10, no. 4, art. no. 652, 2022, doi: 10.3390/math10040652. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/math10040652

M. Borenstein, L. V. Hedges, J. P. T. Higgins, and H. R. Rothstein, Introduction to Meta-Analysis, 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ, USA: Wiley, 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119558378

G. V. Glass, “Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research,” Educ. Res., vol. 5, no. 10, pp. 3–8, 1976, doi: 10.3102/0013189X005010003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1174772

M. W. Lipsey and D. B. Wilson, Practical Meta-Analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage, 2001.

H. Cooper, L. V. Hedges, and J. C. Valentine, Eds., The Handbook of Research Synthesis and Meta-Analysis, 3rd ed. New York, NY, USA: Russell Sage Foundation, 2019.

M. J. Page et al., “The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews,” BMJ, vol. 372, art. no. n71, 2021, doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71

W. Viechtbauer, “Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package,” J. Stat. Softw., vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 1–48, 2010, doi: 10.18637/jss.v036.i03. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v036.i03

J. Cohen, Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ, USA: Erlbaum, 1988.

W. R. Shadish, T. D. Cook, and D. T. Campbell, Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference. Boston, MA, USA: Houghton Mifflin, 2002.

Y. Copur-Gencturk, T. Tolar, E. Jacobson, and W. Fan, “An empirical study of the dimensionality of the mathematical knowledge for teaching construct,” J. Teach. Educ., vol. 70, no. 5, pp. 485–497, 2019, doi: 10.1177/0022487118761860. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487118761860

K. A. Alshehri and N. H. Youssef, “The influence of mathematical knowledge for teaching towards elementary teachers’ mathematical self-efficacy,” Eurasia J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ., vol. 18, no. 6, art. no. em2118, 2022, doi: 10.29333/ejmste/12086. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/12086

T. Raiula, V. Alasa, S. Takiveikata, and I. Qabale, “Quality instruction through four components of the MKT and teaching experience in Fiji,” Int. J. Instruction, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 1021–1036, 2023, doi: 10.29333/iji.2023.16156a. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2023.16156a

M. A. Kraft, D. Blazar, and D. Hogan, “The effect of teacher coaching on instruction and achievement: A meta-analysis of the causal evidence,” Rev. Educ. Res., vol. 88, no. 4, pp. 547–588, 2018, doi: 10.3102/0034654318759268. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654318759268

Association of Mathematics Teacher Educators, Standards for Preparing Teachers of Mathematics. Association of Mathematics Teacher Educators, 2017.

L. Ma, Knowing and Teaching Elementary Mathematics. Mahwah, NJ, USA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1999.

T. P. Carpenter, E. Fennema, and M. L. Franke, “Cognitively guided instruction: A knowledge base for reform in primary mathematics instruction,” Elem. School J., vol. 97, no. 1, pp. 3–20, 1996, doi: 10.1086/461846. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/461846

D. Tirosh, “Enhancing prospective teachers’ knowledge of children’s conceptions: The case of division of fractions,” J. Res. Math. Educ., vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 5–25, 2000, doi: 10.2307/749817. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/749817

D. A. Kolb, Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA: Prentice-Hall, 1984.

P. Grossman, K. Hammerness, and M. McDonald, “Redefining teaching, re-imagining teacher education,” Teachers Teach., vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 273–289, 2009, doi: 10.1080/13540600902875340. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13540600902875340

L. M. Desimone, “Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures,” Educ. Res., vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 181–199, 2009, doi: 10.3102/0013189X08331140. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X08331140

H. Timperley, A. Wilson, H. Barrar, and I. Fung, Teacher Professional Learning and Development: Best Evidence Synthesis Iteration. Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry of Education, 2007.

L. S. Vygotsky, Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA, USA: Harvard University Press, 1978.

A. H. Schoenfeld, “Reframing teacher knowledge: A research and development agenda,” ZDM Math. Educ., vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 359–376, 2020, doi: 10.1007/s11858-019-01057-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-019-01057-5