Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Mathematics Curricula: Issues of Access and Quality

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Sociopolitical Dimensions of Mathematics Education

Part of the book series: ICME-13 Monographs ((ICME13Mo))

Abstract

In the last forty years, it seems that discussions about inequality, power, access and identity have simultaneously become more prominent in mathematics education curricula, whilst also being subordinated to wider neo-liberal discourses of competition and accountability. In this paper, issues to do with access and quality are linked to the mechanism that determines what constitutes mathematics education for specific groups of children. Using Bernstein’s pedagogical device, it is possible to see how the control of official knowledge affects who has access to what kind of mathematics learning opportunities. At the same time, contestation about what should be official knowledge also allows alternative possibilities to be raised. The challenge for those interested in providing higher quality mathematics education to all groups of students is how to make use of the possibility for “unthinkable” knowledge.

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 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
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

Notes

  1. 1.

    In this chapter, I use the definition of curriculum from Kamens and Benavot (1991), “Throughout this article the term “curriculum” refers to the official subject matter that has been transmitted by national educational administrators or system-level authorities to be taught in local schools” (p. 174).

References

  • Angus, L. (2004). Globalization and educational change: Bringing about the reshaping and re-norming of practice. Journal of Education Policy, 19(1), 23–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Apple, M. W. (1995). Education and power. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atweh, B., & Clarkson, P. (2002a). Globalized curriculum or global approach to curriculum reform in mathematics education. Asia Pacific Education Review, 3(2), 160–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atweh, B., & Clarkson, P. (2002b). Globalisation and mathematics education: From above and below. In Problematic Futures: Educational Research in an Era of Uncertainty: Proceeding of the Australian Association of Research in Education Conference. Conference held December 1–5, 2002. University of Queensland. Available from: http://www.aare.edu.au/publications-database.php/3372/globalisation-and-mathematics-education-from-above-and-below.

  • Atweh, B., Clarkson, P., & Nebres, B. (2003). Mathematics education in international and global contexts. In A. J. Bishop, M. A. Clements, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick, & F. K. S. Leung (Eds.), Second international handbook of mathematics education (pp. 185–229). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Au, W. W. (2008). Devising inequality: A Bernsteinian analysis of high-stakes testing and social reproduction in education. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 29(6), 639–651.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Autio, T. (2014). Internationalization of curriculum research. In W. F. Pinar (Ed.), International handbook of curriculum research (pp. 17–31). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, J. (1999). Makeover or takeover? The strange death of educational autonomy in neo-liberal England. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 20(2), 223–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, B. B. (1971). On the classification and framing of educational knowledge. In M. F. D. Young (Ed.), Knowledge and control (pp. 47–69). London: Collier-Macmillan Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, B. (1990). The structuring of pedagogic discourse. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, B. (2000). Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity: Theory, research, critique (rev ed.). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blakers, A. L. (1978). Change in mathematics education since the late 1950’s-ideas and realisation Australia. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 9(2), 147–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonnor, C., & Shepherd, B. (2014). School equity since Gonski: Since bad became worse. Unknown: Need to succeed alliance. Available from: http://needtosucceed.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/School-equity-since-Gonski-1.pdf.

  • Cuban, L. (2007). Hugging in the middle. Teaching in an era of testing and accountability, 1980–2005. Education Policy Analysis Archive, 15(1). Available from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v15n1/.

  • Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing discourse: Textual analysis for social research. London, UK: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fey, J. T. (1978). Change in mathematics education since the late 1950’s—Ideas and realisation USA. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 9(3), 339–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gee, J. (1996). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourses (2nd ed.). Bristol, PA: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodson, I. F. (1989). “Chariots of Fire”: Etymologies, epistemologies and the emergence of curriculum. In G. Milburn, I. F. Goodson, & R. J. Clark (Eds.), Re-interpreting curriculum research: Images and arguments (pp. 13–25). London: Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Government of Nepal. (2016). School sector development plan 2016–2023. Kathmandu: Ministry of Education, Government of Nepal.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gravemeijer, K., & Terwel, J. (2000). Hans Freudenthal: A mathematician on didactics and curriculum theory. Journal of curriculum studies, 32(6), 777–796.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howson, G. (1974). Mathematics: The fight for recognition. Mathematics in School, 3(6), 7–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howson, A. G. (1978). Change in mathematics education since the late 1950’s-ideas and realisation Great Britain. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 9(2), 183–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jahnke, A. (2012). The process of developing a syllabus: Reflections of a syllabus developer. Paper to be delivered at the 12th International Congress of Mathematics Education, Seoul, July 8–15, 2012. Available from: http://www.icme12.org/sub/tsg/tsg_last_view.asp?tsg_param=32.

  • Kamens, D. H., & Benavot, A. (1991). Elite knowledge for the masses: The origins and spread of mathematics and science education in national curricula. American Journal of Education, 99(2), 137–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kanes, C., Morgan, C., & Tsatsaroni, A. (2014). The PISA mathematics regime: Knowledge structures and practices of the self. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 87(2), 145–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein, D. (2003). A brief history of American K–12 mathematics education in the 20th century. In J. Royer (Ed.), Mathematical cognition: A volume in current perspectives on cognition, learning, and instruction (pp. 175–225). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kollosche, D. (2014). Mathematics and power: An alliance in the foundations of mathematics and its teaching. ZDM Mathematics Education, 46(7), 1061–1072.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lange, T., & Meaney, T. (2012). The tail wagging the dog? The effect of national testing on teachers’ agency. In C. Bergsten, E. Jablonka, & M. R. Sundström (Eds.), Evaluation and comparison of mathematical achievement: Dimensions and perspectives: Proceedings from MADIF 8 (pp. 131–140). Linköping: Svensk Förening för Matmematikdidaktisk Forskning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lange, T., & Meaney, T. (2014). It’s just as well kids don’t vote: The positioning of children through public discourse around national testing. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 26(2), 377–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lange, T., & Meaney, T. (2017). The production of “common sense” in the media about more mathematics in early childhood education. In M. Jurdak & R. Vithal (Eds.), Social and political dimensions of mathematics education. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawton, D. (1984). Curriculum and culture. In M. Skilbeck (Ed.), Readings in school-based curriculum development (pp. 275–289). London: Paul Chapman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lingard, B. (2010). Policy borrowing, policy learning: Testing times in Australian schooling. Critical Studies in Education, 51(2), 129–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Llewellyn, A. (2017). Technologies of (re)production in mathematics education research: Performance of progress. In H. Straehler-Pohl, N. Bohlman, & A. Pais (Eds.), The disorder of mathematics education: Challenging the socio-political dimensions of research (pp. 153–169). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Loughland, T., & Sriprakash, A. (2016). Bernstein revisited: The recontextualisation of equity in contemporary Australian school education. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 37(2), 230–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McConney, A., & Perry, L. B. (2010). Science and mathematics achievement in Australia: The role of school socioeconomic composition in educational equity and effectiveness. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(3), 429–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McMurchy-Pilkington, C., Trinick, T., & Meaney, T. (2013). Mathematics curriculum development and Indigenous language revitalisation: Contested spaces. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 25(3), 341–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, D. B., Gholson, M. L., & Leonard, J. (2010). Mathematics as gatekeeper: Power and privilege in the production of power. Journal of Urban Mathematics Education, 3(2), 12–24. Available from: http://education.gsu.edu/JUME.

  • Meaney, T. (2000). The process of valuing in mathematics education. Paper presented at International Congress of Mathematics Education 9, Working Group—Social Justice in Mathematics Education, July 2000. Tokyo, Japan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meaney, T. (2014). Back to the future? Children living in poverty, early childhood centres and mathematics education. ZDM Mathematics Education, 46(7), 999–1011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meaney, T., & Lange, T. (2012). Knowing mathematics to be a teacher. Mathematics Teacher Education and Development, 14(2), 50–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montessori, M. (1912). The Montessori method (A. E. George, Trans.). New York: Frederick A. Stokes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, C., & Xu, G. R. (2011, July). Reconceptualising ‘obstacles’ to teacher implementation of curriculum reform: Beyond beliefs. Paper given at Mathematics Education and Contemporary Theory Conference. Manchester Metropolitan University, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nakawa, N. (2013). Current situations in pre-primary and primary mathematics in Kathmandu, Nepal. Tokoyo Future University Research Bulletin, 6, 121–139. Available from: http://www.tokyomirai.ac.jp/info/research/bulletin/06.html.

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

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2010). PISA 2009 results. Learning trends: Changes in student performance since 2000 (Vol. 5). Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2013). PISA 2012 results: Excellence through equity: giving every student the chance to succeed (Vol. II). Paris: OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264201132-en.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2015). Improving schools in Sweden: An OECD perspective. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2016). Country note, Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), results from PISA 2015: Sweden. Paris: OECD. Available from: https://www.oecd.org/pisa/PISA-2015-Sweden.pdf.

  • Otterstad, A. M., & Braathe, H. J. (2016). Travelling inscriptions of neo-liberalism in Nordic early childhood: Repositioning professionals’ for teaching and learnability. Global Studies of Childhood, 6(1), 80–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ozga, J., & Jones, R. (2006). Travelling and embedded policy: The case of knowledge transfer. Journal of Education Policy, 21(1), 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Östh, J., Andersson, E., & Malmberg, B. (2013). School choice and increasing performance difference: A counterfactual approach. Urban Studies, 50(2), 407–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pais, A. (2014). Economy: The absent centre of mathematics education. ZDM Mathematics Education, 46(7), 1085–1093.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Print, M. (1993). Curriculum development and design. Sydney: Allen & Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Román, H., Hallsén, S., Nordin, A., & Ringarp, J. (2015). Who governs the Swedish school? Local school policy research from a historical and transnational curriculum theory perspective. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 2015(1). Available from: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.3402/nstep.v1.27009.

  • Romberg, T. A. (1993). How one comes to know: Models and theories of the learning of mathematics. In M. Niss (Ed.), Investigations into assessment in mathematics education (pp. 97–111). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Schoenfeld, A. H. (2002). Making mathematics work for all children: Issues of standards, testing, and equity. Educational Researcher, 31(1), 13–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Secada, W. G. (1989). Agenda setting, enlightened self-interest, and equity in mathematics education. Peabody Journal of Education, 66(2), 22–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shrestha, M. M., Tuladhar, B. M., & Koirala, S. P. (2012). National framework for mathematics: Pres-school to grade 12 (proposed). Kathmandu: Council for Mathematics Education, Nepal Mathematics Society, Nepal Mathematics Centre.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, M. (2008). Balancing globalisation and local identity in the reform of education in Romania. In B. Atweh, M. Borba, A. Barton, D. Clark, N. Gough, C. Keitel, C. Vistro-Yu, and R. Vithal (Eds.), Internationalisation and Globalisation in Mathematics and Science Education (pp. 365–382). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sirotnik, K. A. (1988). What goes on in classrooms? Is this the way we want it? In L. E. Beyer & M. W. Apple (Eds.), The curriculum: Problems, politics and possibilities (pp. 56–76). New York: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sleeter, C. (2008). Equity, democracy, and neoliberal assaults on teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(8), 1947–1957.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, C., & Morgan, C. (2016). Curricular orientations to real-world contexts in mathematics. The Curriculum Journal, 27(1), 24–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tatto, M. T., Peck, R., Schwille, J., Bankov, K., Senk, S. L., Rodriguez, M., … & Rowley, G. (2012). Policy, practice, and readiness to teach primary and secondary mathematics in 17 Countries: Findings from the IEA teacher education and development study in mathematics (TEDS-M). Amsterdam: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, G., Shepard, L., Kinner, F., & Rosenthal, J. (2003). A survey of teachers’ perspectives on high-stakes testing in Colorado: What gets taught, what gets lost. Santa Cruz: University of California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, R. W. (1987). The five most significant curriculum events in the twentieth century. Educational Leadership, 44(4), 36–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wake, G. D., & Burkhardt, H. (2013). Understanding the European policy landscape and its impact on change in mathematics and science pedagogies. ZDM Mathematics Education, 45(6), 851–861.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, D. F. (1971). A naturalistic model for curriculum development. School Review, 80(1), 51–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valero, P., & Meaney, T. (2014). Trends in researching the socioeconomic influences on mathematical achievement. ZDM Mathematics Education, 46(7), 977–986.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Western Norway University of Applied Science, Bergen, Norway

    Tamsin Meaney

Authors
  1. Tamsin Meaney
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tamsin Meaney .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Education, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon

    Murad Jurdak

  2. School of Education, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa

    Renuka Vithal

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Meaney, T. (2018). Mathematics Curricula: Issues of Access and Quality. In: Jurdak, M., Vithal, R. (eds) Sociopolitical Dimensions of Mathematics Education. ICME-13 Monographs. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-72610-6_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-72610-6_10

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-72609-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-72610-6

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation