Abstract
Connections between research, policy and practice are often problematic as politicians and practitioners bemoan the irrelevance of research, while researchers complain that their work is misunderstood. In this chapter, the movement of research from the field of research into other fields is understood through the lens of Bernstein’s notion of recontextualisation. Examples are given from a recent project investigating changes in mathematics examinations in England, illustrating how research results may be incorporated into alternative discourses to support pre-existing positions and values. This raises questions for ethical researchers.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The research discussed in this chapter was undertaken together with Anna Sfard and Sarah Tang. The views expressed here, however, are entirely my own responsibility.
- 2.
Of course, in societies with separation of state, academic and commercial interests, critical research may well gain a voice through publication. This creates opportunities for development of alternative discourses drawing on such research in ways that may compete with official discourses.
- 3.
- 4.
Funded by the UK Economic and Social Research Council, reference: ES/1007911/1.
- 5.
Marx , Theses on Feuerbach: “Philosophers have hitherto only interpreted the world in various ways; the point is to change it.”
- 6.
It is of course very possible that Paul Dowling would contest the account of his research that I am presenting here. I am using his research for a new purpose, relating it to my own theoretical perspective and making it serve the interests of the arguments presented in this chapter.
- 7.
- 8.
Recursive depth is defined as the maximum number of decompositions that can be performed. Decomposition is possible when a unit of language (clause, phrase, or word) contains a unit of the same or higher rank. In the given examples, square brackets are used to enclose such “rank-shifted” units.
- 9.
The distinction between ritual, mundane and deep contextualization is adapted from Nabayanga (2002).
- 10.
The annual report for 2010–2011 by the government’s school inspection agency Ofsted (2011) stated “this year the fifth of schools serving the most deprived pupils were four times more likely to be found inadequate than the fifth of schools serving the least deprived pupils. Seventy-one per cent of schools serving the least deprived pupils were judged to be good or outstanding this year compared with 48 % of schools serving the most deprived.”
References
Bernstein, B. (2000). Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity: Theory, research and critique (revised ed.). Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.
Cooper, B., & Dunne, M. (2000). Assessing children’s mathematical knowledge: Social class, sex and problem solving. Buckingham: Open University Press.
DES. (1982). Mathematics Counts: Report of the committee of inquiry into the teaching of mathematics in schools under the chairmanship of Dr W. H. Cockcroft. London: HMSO.
DES/WO. (1988). Mathematics in the National Curriculum. London: HMSO.
Dowling, P. (1998). The sociology of mathematics education: Mathematical myths/pedagogic texts. London: Falmer.
Dowling, P. (2009). Sociology as method: Departures from the forensics of culture, text and knowledge. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Draper, H. (1978). Karl Marx’s theory of revolution, Volume II: The politics of social classes. New York: Monthly Review Press.
Fisher-Hoch, H., Hughes, S., & Bramley, T. (1997). What makes GCSE examination questions difficult? Outcomes of manipulating difficulty of GCSE questions. Paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Annual Conference, York. Retrieved January 15, 2016, from http://www.cambridgeassessment.org.uk/Images/109646-what-makes-gcse-examination-questions-difficult-outcomes-of-manipulating-difficulty-of-gcse-questions.pdf.
Gutstein, E. (2006). Reading and writing the world with mathematics: Towards a pedagogy for social justice. New York, NY: Routledge.
Haggarty, L., & Pepin, B. (2002). An investigation of mathematics textbooks and their use in English, French and German classrooms: Who gets an opportunity to learn what? British Educational Research Journal, 28(4), 567–590.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of language and meaning. London: Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1993). Some grammatical problems in scientific English. In M. A. K. Halliday & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Writing science: Literacy and discursive power (pp. 69–85). London: Falmer.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1998). Things and relations: Regrammaticising experience as technical knowledge. In J. R. Martin & R. Veel (Eds.), Reading science: Critical and functional perspectives on discourse of science (pp. 186–235). London: Routledge.
Lerman, S., & Tsatsaroni, A. (1998). Why children fail and what the field of mathematics education can do about it: The role of sociology. In P. Gates (Ed.), Proceedings of the First International Mathematics Education and Society Conference (pp. 26–33). Nottingham: Centre for the Study of Mathematics Education, Nottingham University.
Morgan, C. (2014). Understanding practices in mathematics education: Structure and text. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 87(2), 129–143. doi:10.1007/s10649-013-9482-6.
Morgan, C., & Sfard, A. (2016). Investigating changes in high-stakes examinations: A discursive approach. Research in Mathematics Education. doi:10.1080/14794802.2016.1176596
Morgan, C., Tang, S., & Sfard, A. (2011). Grammatical structure and mathematical activity: Comparing examination questions. Proceedings of the British Society for Research into the Learning of Mathematics, 31(3). Retrieved January 15, 2016, from http://www.bsrlm.org.uk/IPs/ip31-3/BSRLM-IP-31-3-20.pdf.
Morgan, C., Tsatsaroni, A., & Lerman, S. (2002). Mathematics teachers’ positions and practices in discourses of assessment. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 23(3), 445–461.
Nyabanyaba, T. (2002). Examining examination: The ordinary level (O level) mathematics examination in Lesotho and the impact of recent trends on Basotho students’ epistemological access. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Ofsted. (2011). The Annual Report of Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Education, Children’s Services and Skills 2010/11. London: HMSO. Retrieved January 15, 2016, from https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/hm-chief-inspector-of-education-childrens-services-and-skills-annual-report-2010-to-2011.
Pais, A., & Valero, P. (2014). Whither social theory? Educational Studies in Mathematics, 87(2), 241–248. doi:10.1007/s10649-014-9573-z.
Pollitt, A., Hughes, S., Ahmed, A., Fisher-Hoch, H., & Bramley, T. (1998). The effects of structure on the demands in GCSE and A level questions. Cambridge: OCR.
QCA. (2006). Review of standards in mathematics: GCSE 1999–2004 and A level 1998–2004. London: Qualifications and Curriculum Authority.
Royal Society/JMC Working Group. (1997). Teaching and learning algebra pre-19. London: Royal Society/Joint Mathematical Council.
Sfard, A. (2008). Thinking as communicating: Human development, the growth of discourses, and mathematizing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sfard, A. (2009). Disabling numbers: On the secret charm of numberese and why it should be resisted. In L. Black, H. Mendick, & Y. Solomon (Eds.), Mathematics relationships in education: Identities and participation (pp. 9–18). New York: Routledge.
Shorrocks-Taylor, D., & Hargreaves, M. (1999). Making it clear: A review of language issues in testing with special reference to the National Curriculum mathematics tests at Key Stage 2. Educational Research, 41(2), 123–136. doi:10.1080/0013188990410201.
Skovsmose, O. (1994). Towards a philosophy of critical mathematics education. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Slavin, R. E. (2002). Evidence-based education policies: Transforming educational practice and research. Educational Researcher, 31(7), 15–21. doi:10.3102/0013189x031007015.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Morgan, C. (2017). Communicating Research in Mathematics Education: Theoretical and Ethical Problems. In: Straehler-Pohl, H., Bohlmann, N., Pais, A. (eds) The Disorder of Mathematics Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-34006-7_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-34006-7_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-34005-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-34006-7
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)