Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Implementation of IBL in Europe from an Australasian perspective

  • Commentary Paper
  • Published:
ZDM Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper the situation in Australasia with respect to research, curricula and practice in inquiry-based learning in mathematics education is examined. As an organising frame the work of researchers in the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (MERGA) was examined for points of intersection with several of the papers that have arisen from the international PRIMAS project, one of several projects funded by the European Union which follow the recommendations of the Rocard Report (Rocard et al. 2007). Although MERGA services researchers in countries such as Singapore in addition to Australia and New Zealand, a survey of outputs of members showed that the latter two countries had more of a tradition of inquiry-based learning practices and research in mathematics education than did Asian countries under the MERGA umbrella such as Singapore. For this reason the focus here is on mathematics education in the schools in these two countries and the classroom research in them that extends or complements the research or issues raised in other papers in this issue of ZDM.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. MERGA is an Affiliated Organisation of the International Commission on Mathematics Instruction recognised as being a regional multi-national organisation active in mathematics education.

References

  • ABC News (2013, March 15). Super trawler ban dispute to go to trial. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-03-15/super-trawler-ban-dispute-to-go-to-trial/4575904 (Accessed 23 Sep 2013).

  • Alton-Lee, A., Hunter, R., Sinnema, C., & Pulegatoa-Diggins, C. (2011). BES Exemplar1: Developing communities of mathematical inquiry. Wellington: Ministry of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anthony, G., & Walshaw, M. (2007). Effective pedagogy in mathematics/pãngarau: Best evidence synthesis iteration [BES]. Wellington: Ministry of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Artigue, M., & Blomhøj, M. (2013). Conceptualising inquiry based education in mathematics. ZDM—The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 45(6) (this issue). doi:10.1007/s11858-013-0506-6.

  • Askew, M. (2008). Mathematical discipline knowledge requirements for prospective primary teachers, and the structure and teaching approaches of programs designed to develop that knowledge. In P. Sullivan & T. Wood (Eds.), Knowledge and beliefs in mathematics teaching and teaching development (pp. 13–35). Rotterdam: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (2013). The Australian Curriculum v5.1 Mathematics. http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/Mathematics (Accessed 23 Sep 2013).

  • Australian Education Council. (1991). A national statement on mathematics for Australian schools. Melbourne: AEC and Curriculum Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership [AITSL] (2012). Australian charter for the professional learning of teachers and school leaders. Melbourne: Education Services Australia.

  • Barnes, M. (1995). Exploring social issues through mathematics: Casting light on poverty traps. Numeracy in Focus, 1, 43–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brough, C., & Calder, N. (2012). Mathematics as it happens: student-centred inquiry learning. In J. Dindyal, L. P. Cheng, & S. W. Ng (Eds.), Mathematics education: Expanding horizons. Proceedings of 35th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (Singapore, Vol., 1, pp. 138–145). Adelaide: MERGA.

  • Brown, R. A. J., & Renshaw, D. (2000). Collective argumentation: a sociocultural approach to reframing classroom teaching and learning. In H. Cowie & G. van der Aalsvoort (Eds.), Social interaction in learning and instruction: The meaning of discourse for the construction of knowledge (pp. 52–66). Amsterdam: Pergamon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruder, R., & Prescott, A. (2013). Research evidence on the benefits of IBL. ZDM—The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 45(6) (this issue). doi:10.1007/s11858-013-0542-2.

  • Butterfield, B. (2012). An experienced teacher’s conceptual trajectory for problem solving. In J. Dindyal, L. P. Cheng, & S. W. Ng (Eds.), Mathematics education: Expanding horizons. Proceedings of 35th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (Singapore, Vol. 1, pp. 154–161). Adelaide: MERGA.

  • Clatworthy, N. (1989). Assessment at the upper secondary level. In W. Blum, J. S. Berry, R. Biehler, I. D. Huntley, G. Kaiser-Messmer, & L. Profke (Eds.), Applications and modelling in learning and teaching mathematics (pp. 60–65). Chichester, UK: Horwood.

    Google Scholar 

  • Claxon, G., & Carr, M. (1991). Understanding change: the personal perspective. SAMEpapers—1991. Auckland: Centre for Science and Mathematics Education Research/Longman Paul.

  • Cockcroft, W. H. (1982). Mathematics counts. Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Teaching of Mathematics in Schools. London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, T., & English, L. (1987). Thinking skills and problem solving. Research in Mathematics Education in Australia.

  • Doig, B., Groves, S., & Splitter, L. (2001). Primary mathematics practice: the Victorian position. In J. Bobis, B. Perry, & M. Mitchelmore (Eds.), Numeracy and Beyond. Proceedings of 24th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (Vol. 1, pp. 178–185). Sydney: MERGA.

  • Dorier, J-L., & García, F. J. (2013). Challenges and opportunities for the implementation of inquiry-based learning in day-to-day teaching. ZDM—The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 45(6) (this issue). doi:10.1007/s11858-013-0512-8.

  • Ellerton, N. F., & Clements, M. A. (1994). The national curriculum debacle. Perth: Meridan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fielding-Wells, J. (2013). Inquiry-based argumentation in primary mathematics: reflecting on evidence. In V. Steinle, L. Ball, & C. Bardini (Eds.), Mathematics education: Yesterday, today and tomorrow. Proceedings of 35th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (Melbourne, Vol. 1, pp. 290–297). Adelaide: MERGA.

  • Galbraith, P. (2011). Modelling as real world problem solving: translating rhetoric into action. In J. Clark, B. Kissane, J. Mousley, T Spencer, & S. Thornton (Eds.), Mathematics: Traditions and [New] practices. Proceedings of the AAMT-MERGA conference (Alice Springs, Vol. 2, pp. 931–938). Adelaide: AAMT & MERGA.

  • Galbraith, P., & Stillman, G. (2006). A framework for identifying student blockages during transitions in the modelling process. ZDM—The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 38(2), 143–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goos, M., Galbraith, P., & Renshaw, P. (1999). Establishing a community of practice in a secondary mathematics classroom. In L. Burton (Ed.), Learning mathematics: From hierarchies to networks (pp. 36–61). London: Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, J. (2006). Students in a mathematical community of inquiry: what do they think? In P. Grootenboer, R. Zevenbergen, & M. Chinnappan (Eds.), Identities cultures and learning spaces. Proceedings of 24th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 301–308). Sydney: MERGA.

  • Hunter, R. (2006). Structuring the talk towards mathematical inquiry. In P. Grootenboer, R. Zevenbergen, & M. Chinnappan (Eds.), Identities cultures and learning spaces. Proceedings of 24th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (Vol. 1, pp. 170–177). Sydney: MERGA.

  • Hunter, R. (2008). Facilitating communities of mathematical inquiry. In M. Goos, R. Brown, & K. Makar (Eds.), Navigating currents and charting directions. Proceedings of 31st Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (Brisbane, Vol. 1, pp. 31–39). Adelaide: MERGA.

  • Hunter, J. (2009). Developing a productive discourse community in the mathematics classroom. In R. Hunter, B. Bicknell, & T. Burgess (Eds.), Crossing ÷ divides. Proceedings of 32nd Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (Auckland, Vol. 1, pp. 249–256). Adelaide: MERGA.

  • Hunter, R. (2012). Coming to ‘know’ mathematics through being scaffolded to ‘talk and do’ mathematics. International Journal for Mathematics Teaching and Learning, 13. http://www.cimt.plymouth.ac.uk/journal (Accessed 23 Sep 2013).

  • Hunter, R., & Anthony, G. (2011). Forging mathematical relationships in inquiry-based classrooms with Pasifika students. Journal of Urban Mathematics Education, 4(1), 98–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, M. (2001). A poststructuralist analysis of mathematical inquiry in a Year 6 classroom: the rhetoric, realisation, and practical implications. In J. Bobis, B. Perry, & M. Mitchelmore (Eds.), Numeracy and beyond. Proceedings of 24th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 330–337). Sydney: MERGA.

  • Lowrie, T., Francis, R., & Rogers, G. (2000). Knowledge and strategies students employ to solve open-ended problem-solving activities. In J. Bana & A. Chapman (Eds.), Mathematics education beyond 2000. Proceedings of 23rd Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (Freemantle, Vol. 2, pp. 393–400). Sydney: MERGA.

  • Maaß, K., & Doorman, M. (2013). A model for a widespread implementation of inquiry-based learning. ZDM—The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 45(6) (this issue). doi:10.1007/s11858-013-0505-7.

  • Makar, K. (2007). “Connection levers”: developing teachers’ expertise with mathematical enquiry. In J. Watson & K. Beswick (Eds.), Mathematics: Essential research, essential practice. Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (Vol. 2, pp. 483–492). Adelaide: MERGA.

  • Makar, K. (2011). Learning over time: pedagogical change in teaching mathematical inquiry. In J. Clark, B. Kissane, J. Mousley, T. Spencer, & S. Thornton (Eds.), Mathematics: Traditions and [New] practices. Proceedings of the AAMT-MERGA conference (Alice Springs, Vol. 1, pp. 27–37). Adelaide: AAMT & MERGA.

  • Malone, J. A., Douglas, G. A., Kissane, B. V., & Mortlock, R. (1980). Measuring problem solving ability. In S. Krulik (Ed.), Problem solving in school mathematics: The 1980 Yearbook of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (pp. 204–215). Reston, VA: NCTM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maor, D., & Fraser, B. J. (1996). Use of classroom environment perceptions in evaluating inquiry-based computer-assisted learning. International Journal of Science Education, 18(4), 401–421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Education. (1992). Mathematics in the NZ curriculum. Wellington, NZ: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Education. (2007). Mathematics in the NZ curriculum. Wellington, NZ: Learning Media, Ministry of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mousoulides, N. (2013). Facilitating parental engagement in school mathematics and science through inquiry-based learning: An examination of teachers’ and parents’ beliefs. ZDM—The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 45(6) (this issue). doi:10.1007/s11858-013-0524-4.

  • Nason, R., Brett, C., & Woodruff, E. (1996). Creating and maintaining knowledge-building communities of practice during mathematical investigations. In P. C. Clarkson (Ed.), Technology in mathematics education. Proceedings of 19th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 414–421). Melbourne: MERGA.

  • OECD (2011). Greening household behaviour: Overview from the 2011 survey. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264181373-en (Accessed 23 Sep 2013).

  • Owens, K. (1998). Developing the angle concept through investigations. In C. Kane, M. Goos, & E. Warren (Eds.), Teaching mathematics in new times (pp. 436–443). Sydney: MERGA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Queensland Department of Education. (1987). Years 1 to 10 mathematics syllabus. Brisbane: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Redmond, T., Brown, R., & Sheehy, J. (2013). Exploring the relationship between modelling and classroom discourse. In G. Stillman, G. Kaiser, W. Blum, & J. Brown (Eds.), Teaching mathematical modelling: Connecting to research and practice (pp. 349–360). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rocard, M., Csermely, P., Jorde, D., Lenzen, D., Walberg-Henrikson, H., & Hemmo, V. (2007). Science education now: A renewed pedagogy for the future of Europe (EU 22845). Brussels: European Commission, Directorate-General for Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stacey, K., & Groves, S. (1984). Problem solving: people and projects in Australia. In P. Costello, S. Ferguson, K. Slinn, M. Stephens, D. Trembath, & D. Williams (Eds.), Facets of Australian mathematics education. Proceedings of the Tenth Biennial Conference of Australian Association of Mathematics Teachers (pp. 205–209). Blackburn: AAMT.

  • State of Queensland. (2002). A guide to productive pedagogies: Classroom reflection manual. Brisbane: Teaching and Learning Branch, Education Queensland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stillman, G. (1998). The emperor’s new clothes? Teaching and assessment of mathematical applications at the senior secondary level. In P. Galbraith, W. Blum, G. Booker, & I. Huntley (Eds.), Mathematical modelling: Teaching and assessment in a technology rich world (pp. 243–253). Chichester, UK: Horwood.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stillman, G. (2007). Implementation case study: sustaining curriculum change. In W. Blum, P.L. Galbraith, H-W. Henn, & M. Niss (Eds.), Modelling and applications in mathematics education: The 14th ICMI study. New York: Springer.

  • Stillman, G. A., Brown, J. P., Faragher, R., Geiger, V., & Galbraith, P. (2013). The role of textbooks in developing a socio-critical perspective on mathematical modelling in secondary classrooms. In G. Stillman, G. Kaiser, W. Blum, & J. Brown (Eds.), Teaching mathematical modelling: Connecting to research and practice (pp. 361–371). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Stillman, G., Brown, J., & Galbraith, P. (2010). Identifying challenges within transition phases of mathematical modelling activities at year 9. In R. Lesh, P. L. Galbraith, C. R. Haines, & A. Hurford (Eds.), Modeling students’ mathematical modelling competencies: ICTMA 13 (pp. 385–398). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wineburg, S., & Grossman, P. (Eds.). (2000). Interdisciplinary curriculum: Challenges to implementation. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Education Victoria, Faculty of Education, Australian Catholic University, 1200 Mair Street, Ballarat, VIC, 3350, Australia

    Gloria Ann Stillman

Authors
  1. Gloria Ann Stillman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gloria Ann Stillman.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Stillman, G.A. Implementation of IBL in Europe from an Australasian perspective. ZDM Mathematics Education 45, 911–918 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-013-0545-z

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-013-0545-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation