以学校数学为背景:研究地区决策中有关数学的论述

IF 3.4 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Phi Nguyen
{"title":"以学校数学为背景:研究地区决策中有关数学的论述","authors":"Phi Nguyen","doi":"10.1007/s10649-024-10348-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>School subjects differ in their histories, epistemologies, and relations to state and federal policies. Though educational policymaking is shaped by how education leaders view school mathematics—what mathematics is, how mathematics is learned, and what counts as equitable and high-quality mathematics education—policy research often takes a subject-neutral perspective, ignoring the ways in which policymaking is rooted in the subject-matter. In this article, I report the ways in which systems of meaning or <i>discourses</i> about school mathematics penetrate the policymaking of two school districts. Based on a discourse analysis of interviews, observations, and artifacts, I found five main discourses about school mathematics reflected in district policymaking: (1) mathematics is a <i>core</i> school subject; (2) mathematics is <i>sequential</i>, where mastery of prior learning is necessary for future learning; (3) mathematics is <i>well-defined</i>, with agreement over the content; (4) there are competing perspectives of high-quality mathematics pedagogy, between conceptually-oriented instruction and direct instruction focused on procedures; and (5) equity in mathematics is access and achievement. These discourses about school mathematics were written in formal policy texts, institutionalized in district-wide practices for assessment, intervention, and tracking, and reflected in leaders’ personal views and social narratives from teachers, parents, and the community. By making visible the taken-for-granted meanings about school mathematics shaping educational policymaking, it becomes possible to interrupt and challenge them with alternative discourses.</p>","PeriodicalId":48107,"journal":{"name":"Educational Studies in Mathematics","volume":"75 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"School mathematics as context: examining discourses about the subject in district policymaking\",\"authors\":\"Phi Nguyen\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10649-024-10348-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>School subjects differ in their histories, epistemologies, and relations to state and federal policies. Though educational policymaking is shaped by how education leaders view school mathematics—what mathematics is, how mathematics is learned, and what counts as equitable and high-quality mathematics education—policy research often takes a subject-neutral perspective, ignoring the ways in which policymaking is rooted in the subject-matter. In this article, I report the ways in which systems of meaning or <i>discourses</i> about school mathematics penetrate the policymaking of two school districts. Based on a discourse analysis of interviews, observations, and artifacts, I found five main discourses about school mathematics reflected in district policymaking: (1) mathematics is a <i>core</i> school subject; (2) mathematics is <i>sequential</i>, where mastery of prior learning is necessary for future learning; (3) mathematics is <i>well-defined</i>, with agreement over the content; (4) there are competing perspectives of high-quality mathematics pedagogy, between conceptually-oriented instruction and direct instruction focused on procedures; and (5) equity in mathematics is access and achievement. These discourses about school mathematics were written in formal policy texts, institutionalized in district-wide practices for assessment, intervention, and tracking, and reflected in leaders’ personal views and social narratives from teachers, parents, and the community. By making visible the taken-for-granted meanings about school mathematics shaping educational policymaking, it becomes possible to interrupt and challenge them with alternative discourses.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48107,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Educational Studies in Mathematics\",\"volume\":\"75 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Educational Studies in Mathematics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"100\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-024-10348-y\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Studies in Mathematics","FirstCategoryId":"100","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-024-10348-y","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

学校学科的历史、认识论以及与州和联邦政策的关系各不相同。虽然教育政策的制定受教育领导者对学校数学的看法所左右--数学是什么、数学是如何学习的、什么才是公平和高质量的数学教育--但政策研究往往采取一种主体中立的视角,而忽略了政策制定是如何植根于主题的。在本文中,我报告了有关学校数学的意义系统或话语如何渗透到两个学区的政策制定中。基于对访谈、观察和人工制品的论述分析,我发现学区决策中反映了五种关于学校数学的主要论述:(1)数学是学校的核心科目;(2)数学是有顺序的,掌握先前的学习是未来学习的必要条件;(3)数学是定义明确的,对内容有一致的看法;(4)在以概念为导向的教学和以程序为重点的直接教学之间,存在着高质量数学教学法的竞争观点;以及(5)数学中的公平就是获得和成就。这些关于学校数学的论述被写入正式的政策文本,在全区范围内的评估、干预和跟踪实践中被制度化,并反映在领导者的个人观点以及来自教师、家长和社区的社会叙事中。通过揭示影响教育决策的关于学校数学的既定含义,就有可能用其他的话语来打断和挑战它们。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

School mathematics as context: examining discourses about the subject in district policymaking

School mathematics as context: examining discourses about the subject in district policymaking

School subjects differ in their histories, epistemologies, and relations to state and federal policies. Though educational policymaking is shaped by how education leaders view school mathematics—what mathematics is, how mathematics is learned, and what counts as equitable and high-quality mathematics education—policy research often takes a subject-neutral perspective, ignoring the ways in which policymaking is rooted in the subject-matter. In this article, I report the ways in which systems of meaning or discourses about school mathematics penetrate the policymaking of two school districts. Based on a discourse analysis of interviews, observations, and artifacts, I found five main discourses about school mathematics reflected in district policymaking: (1) mathematics is a core school subject; (2) mathematics is sequential, where mastery of prior learning is necessary for future learning; (3) mathematics is well-defined, with agreement over the content; (4) there are competing perspectives of high-quality mathematics pedagogy, between conceptually-oriented instruction and direct instruction focused on procedures; and (5) equity in mathematics is access and achievement. These discourses about school mathematics were written in formal policy texts, institutionalized in district-wide practices for assessment, intervention, and tracking, and reflected in leaders’ personal views and social narratives from teachers, parents, and the community. By making visible the taken-for-granted meanings about school mathematics shaping educational policymaking, it becomes possible to interrupt and challenge them with alternative discourses.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Educational Studies in Mathematics
Educational Studies in Mathematics EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
9.40%
发文量
65
期刊介绍: Educational Studies in Mathematics presents new ideas and developments of major importance to those working in the field of mathematics education. It seeks to reflect both the variety of research concerns within this field and the range of methods used to study them. It deals with methodological, pedagogical/didactical, political and socio-cultural aspects of teaching and learning of mathematics, rather than with specific programmes for teaching mathematics. Within this range, Educational Studies in Mathematics is open to all research approaches. The emphasis is on high-level articles which are of more than local or national interest.? All contributions to this journal are peer reviewed.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信