Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Policy Implications of Developing Mathematics Education Research

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Third International Handbook of Mathematics Education

Part of the book series: Springer International Handbooks of Education ((SIHE,volume 27))

  • 6782 Accesses

Abstract

Researchers often pursue their own interesting and specific mathematics education research questions without engaging with the practical and policy issues that may have considerable bearing on mathematics education. The final chapter of this section deals with this situation by considering three interrelated themes: developments in education policy that have implications for mathematics education research; the potential for engaging the mathematics education community in pursuing research questions that have implications for policy; and the relevance, utility, and accumulation of mathematics education research findings to support policy and practice. In particular, questions are raised about the role of standards in the specifics of mathematics teaching and learning, and the challenges of making research professionally and publicly available in ways that might be used to inform the decisions and the practices of policy makers and teachers.

The second-named author is now at the National Science Foundation. This work was based in part on work supported by the National Science Foundation.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 709.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 899.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 899.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Abrantes, P. (2001). Mathematical competence for all: Options, implications and obstacles. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 47(2), 125–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beaton, A. E., & Robitaille, D. E. (1999). An overview of the Third International Mathematics and Science Study. In G. Kaiser, E. Luna, & I. Huntley (Eds.), International comparisons in mathematics education (pp. 19–29). Philadelphia, PA: Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, D. J., Grossman, P. L., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2009). Teacher preparation and student achievement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 31(4), 416–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cobb, P., & Jackson, K. (In press). Educational policies as designs for supporting learning. The Journal of Learning Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, D. (2003). International comparative research in mathematics education. In A. J. Bishop, M. A. Clements, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick, & F. K. S. Leung (Eds.), Second international handbook of mathematics education (pp. 143–184). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Confrey, J. (2010, May). Implications of the Common Core State Standards for mathematics. Presentation at the North Carolina Council of Teachers of Mathematics Annual Conference, Greensboro, North Carolina. Retrieved from http://gismo.fi.ncsu.edu/confrey2010ncctm.pdf.

  • DeBoer, G. E. (2011). Introduction to the policy terrain in science education. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donovan, M. S., Wigdor, A. K., & Snow, C. E. (Eds.). (2003). Strategic education research partnership. Washington, DC: Committee on a Strategic Education Research Partnership. National Research Council, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrini-Mundy, J. (2004). What does it mean to be standards-based? Issues in conceptualizing, measuring, and studying alignment with standards. In F. K. Lester Jr. & J. Ferrini-Mundy (Eds.), Proceedings of the NCTM Research Catalyst Conference (pp. 25–32). Reston, VA: NCTM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrini-Mundy, J., & Floden, R. E. (2007). Educational policy research and mathematics education. In F. K. Lester Jr. (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 1247–1279). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finnigan, K., Daly, A., & Che, J., (2012, April). The acquisition and use of evidence district-wide. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Education Research Association, Vancouver, BC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fowler, F. C. (2009). Policy studies for educational leaders: An introduction. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Allyn & Bacon/Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuhrman, S. H. (2001). From the Capitol to the classroom: Standards-based reform in the States. Chicago, IL: National Society for the Study of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gates, P., & Vistro-Yu, C. (2003). Is mathematics for all? In A. J. Bishop, M. A. Clements, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick, & F. K. S. Leung (Eds.), Second international handbook of mathematics education (pp. 31–73). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gouseti, A., Noss, R., Potter, J., & Selwyn, N. (2011). Assessing the impact and sustainability of networks stimulated and supported by the NCETM. London, UK: Institute of Education, University of London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodgen, J., Pepper, D., Sturman, L., & Ruddock, G. (2010). Is the UK an outlier? An international comparison of upper secondary mathematics education. London, UK: Nuffield Foundation.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Honig, M. I., & Coburn, C. (2008). Evidence-based decision making in school district central offices: Toward a policy and research agenda. Educational Policy, 22(4), 578–608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoyles, C. (2009). Understanding maths learning. Better: Evidence-Based Education, 2(1), 12–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoyles, C., & Lagrange, J.-B. (Eds.). (2009). Mathematics education and technology—Rethinking the terrain. New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Independent Review of Mathematics Teaching in Early Years Settings and Primary Schools by Sir Peter Williams. (2008). London, UK: Department for Children, Schools and Families.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobsen, R. (2009). The voice of the people in education policy. In G. Sykes, B. Schneider, D. N. Plank, & T. G. Ford (Eds.), Handbook of education policy research (pp. 307–318). New York, NY: Routledge and AERA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, D., Braams, B. J., Parker, T., Quirk, W., Schmid, W., & Wilson, W. S. (2005). The state of state math standards: 2005. Washington, DC: Thomas B. Fordham Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, D., Askey, R., Milgram, M. J., Wu, H.-H., Scharlemann, M., & Tsang, B. (1999, November). An open letter to United States Secretary of Education, Richard Riley. Retrieved from http://www.mathematicallycorrect.com/riley.htm.

  • Krainer, K. (2011). Teachers as stakeholders in mathematics education research. In B. Ubuz (Ed.), Proceedings of the 35th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, pp. 47–62). Ankara, Turkey: International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lester, F. K., Jr., & Wiliam, D. (2002). On the purpose of mathematics education research: Making productive contributions to policy and practice. In L. D. English (Ed.), Handbook of international research in mathematics education (pp. 489–506). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Making Mathematics Count: The report of Professor Adrian Smith’s Inquiry into Post-14 mathematics education. (2004). London, UK: The Stationery Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDonnell, L. M. (2009). Repositioning politics in education’s circle of knowledge. Educational Researcher, 38(6), 417–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLeod, D. B., Stake, R. E., Schappelle, B. P., Mellissinos, M., & Gierl, M. J. (1996). Setting the standards: NCTM’s role in the reform of mathematics education. In S. A. Raizen & E. D. Britton (Eds.), Bold ventures: U.S. innovations in science and mathematics education. Vol. 3: Cases in mathematics education (pp. 13–132). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Academy of Sciences. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: Center for Science, Mathematics, and Engineering Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, & Institute of Medicine. (2007). Rising above the gathering storm: Energizing and employing America for a brighter economic future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1991). Professional standards for teaching mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1995). Assessment standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). Foundations for success: The final report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. Washington, DC: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (1999). Improving student learning: A strategic plan for education research and its utilization. Committee on a Feasibility Study for a Strategic Educational Research Program. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. Available online http://books.nap.edu/books/0309064899/html/R1.html#pagetop.

  • National Research Council. (2010). Preparing teachers: Building evidence for sound policy. Committee on the Study of Teacher Preparation Programs in the United States, Center for Education. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (2011). Successful K – 12 stem education: Identifying effective approaches in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • NCES. (n.d.-a). Numbers and types of public elementary and secondary local education agencies from the common core of data: School year 2009–10. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2011/pesagencies09/findings.asp.

  • NCES. (n.d.-b). Numbers and types of public elementary and secondary schools from the common core of data: School year 2009-10. Retrieved November 20, 2011 from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2011/pesschools09/findings.asp.

  • Nelson, S. R., Leffler, J. C., & Hansen, B. A. (2009). Toward a research agenda for understanding and improving the use of research evidence. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. Retrieved from http://educationnorthwest.org/webfm_send/311.

  • Noss, R., & Hoyles, C. (1996). Windows on mathematical meanings: Learning cultures and computers. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). (2011). Establishing a framework for evaluation and teacher incentives: Considerations for Mexico: Author. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264094406-en.

  • Osborne, J. (2011). Science education policy and its relationship with research and practice. In G. E. DeBoer (Ed.), The role of public policy in K-12 science education (pp. 13–46). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palinkas, L. A., Finno, M., Fuentes, D., Garcia, A., & Holloway, I. W. (2011, August). Evaluating dissemination of research evidence in public youth-serving systems. Paper presented at the National Child Welfare Evaluation Summit, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, J. (2011). How can science educators influence legislation at the State and Federal levels? The case of the National Science Teachers Association. In G. E. DeBoer (Ed.), The role of public policy in K-12 science education (pp. 241–274). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prosperity for all in the global economy: World class skills: The Leitch review of skills. (2006). London, UK: Department for Employment and Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, W. H., McKnight, C. C., & Raizen, S. A. (Eds.). (1997). A splintered vision: An investigation of U.S. mathematics and science education. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, W. H., McKnight, C. C., Valverde, G. A., Houang, R. T., & Wiley, D. E. (1997). Many visions, many aims: Vol. 1. A cross-national investigation of curricular intentions in school mathematics. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheffield Hallam University. (2010). Mathematics for a stronger society: A review of the work of the NCETM in relation to the priorities of the Government. Sheffield, UK: Centre for Education and Inclusion Research, Sheffield Hallam University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M. S., & O’Day, J. (1991). Systemic school reform. In S. H. Fuhrman & B. Malen (Eds.), The politics of curriculum and testing: The 1990 yearbook of the Politics of Education Association (pp. 233–267). London, UK: Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M. S., & Smith, M. L. (2009). Research in the policy process. In G. Sykes, B. Schneider, D. N. Plank, & T. G. Ford (Eds.), Handbook of education policy research (pp. 1–14). New York, NY: Routledge and AERA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sykes, G., Schneider, B., & Ford, T. (2009). Introduction. In G. Sykes, B. Schneider, D. N. Plank, & T. G. Ford (Eds.), Handbook of education policy research (pp. 1–14). New York, NY: Routledge and AERA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tatto, M. T., Schwille, J., Senk, S., Ingvarson, L., Peck, R., & Rowley, G. (2008). Teacher Education and Development Study in Mathematics (TEDS-M): Policy, practice and readiness to teach primary and secondary mathematics. Conceptual framework. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tseng, V. (2010). Learning about the use of research to inform evidence-based policy and practice: Early lessons and future directions. William T. Grant Foundation 2009 Annual Report (pp. 12–17). New York, NY: William T. Grant Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.wtgrantfdn.org/File%20Library/Annual%20Reports/2009%20AR%20essay%20Learning%20about%20the%20Use%20of%20Research.pdf.

  • Tseng, V., Granger, R. C., Seidman, E., Maynard, R. A., Weisner, T. S., & Wilcox., B. L. (2008). Studying the use of research evidence in policy and practice. William T. Grant Foundation 2007 Annual Report (pp. 12–17). New York, NY: William T. Grant Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.wtgrantfdn.org/File%20Library/Annual%20Reports/2007%20AR%20essay%20Studying%20the%20Use%20of%20Research%20Evidence.pdf.

  • U.S. Department of Education. (n.d.). U.S. Department of Education exemplary mathematics programs. Retrieved from http://www.k12academics.com/education-reform/us-department-education-exemplary-mathematics-programs.

  • Welch, W. W. (1979). Twenty years of science curriculum development: A look back. Review of Research in Education, 7, 282–306.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wikipedia. (n.d.). Education policy. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_policy.

  • William T. Grant Foundation. (2011). Request for research proposals: Understanding the acquisition, interpretation, and use of research evidence in policy and practice. Retrieved from http://www.wtgrantfdn.org/funding_opportunities/research_grants/rfp_for_the_use_of_research_evidence.

  • Wilson, S. M. (2003). California dreaming: Reforming mathematics education. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

Joan Ferrini-Mundy thanks Ed Corcoran and Eryn Stehr for their assistance in the preparation and development of the part of this manuscript concerned with US policy.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Education, University of London, London, UK

    Celia Hoyles

  2. Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA

    Joan Ferrini-Mundy

Authors
  1. Celia Hoyles
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Joan Ferrini-Mundy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Celia Hoyles .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Illinois State University, n/a, Normal, 61790-4520, Illinois, USA

    M.A. (Ken) Clements

  2. Fac. Education, Centre for Science, Mathematics &, Monash University, Clayton, 3800, Victoria, Australia

    Alan J. Bishop

  3. FB Erziehungswissenschaft und, Psychologie, FU Berlin, Habelschwerdter Allee 45, Berlin, 14195, Germany

    Christine Keitel

  4. Dept. Mathematics Education, University of Georgia, Aderhold Hall 105, Athens, 30602-7124, Georgia, USA

    Jeremy Kilpatrick

  5. Fac. Education, University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR

    Frederick K.S. Leung

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hoyles, C., Ferrini-Mundy, J. (2012). Policy Implications of Developing Mathematics Education Research. In: Clements, M., Bishop, A., Keitel, C., Kilpatrick, J., Leung, F. (eds) Third International Handbook of Mathematics Education. Springer International Handbooks of Education, vol 27. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-4684-2_16

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation