Advertisement

Freedom of Design: The Multiple Faces of Subtraction in Dutch Primary School Textbooks

Chapter
Part of the Advances in Mathematics Education book series (AME)

Abstract

Mathematics textbook series largely determine what teachers teach and consequently, what students learn. In the Netherlands, publishers have hardly any restrictions in developing and publishing textbooks. The Dutch government only prescribes the content to be taught very broadly and does not provide guidelines on how content has to be taught. In this study, the consequences of this freedom of design are investigated by carrying out a textbook analysis on the topic of subtraction up to 100. To examine the relationship between the intended curriculum and the potentially implemented curriculum, we analyzed the mathematical content and performance expectations of two Dutch textbook series. In order to get a closer view of the learning opportunities offered, the learning facilitators of the textbook series were also analyzed. The results of the analysis show that the investigated textbook series vary in their agreement with the intended curriculum with respect to content and performance expectations. The textbook series reflect divergent views on subtraction up to 100 as a mathematical topic. Furthermore, they differ in the incorporated ideas about mathematics education, as shown in the learning facilitators they provide. Consequently, the examined textbook series provide very different opportunities to students to learn subtraction up to 100.

Keywords

Textbook analysis Subtraction up to 100 Mathematical content Performance expectations Learning facilitators Intended curriculum Potentially implemented curriculum 

References

  1. Bokhove, J., Borghouts, C., Kuipers, K., & Veltman, A. (2009). Rekenrijk. Groningen: Noordhoff Uitgevers (student books for grade 2). Google Scholar
  2. De Corte, E., & Verschaffel, L. (1987). The effect of semantic structure on first graders’ strategies for solving addition and subtraction word problems. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 18(5), 363–380. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Freudenthal, H. (1983). Didactical phenomenology of mathematical structures. Dordrecht: Reidel Publishing Company. Google Scholar
  4. Fuson, K. C. (1992). Research on whole number addition and subtraction. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 243–275). New York: MacMillan. Google Scholar
  5. Hop, M. (Ed.) (2012). Balans van het reken-wiskundeonderwijs halverwege de basisschool 5. Periodieke Peiling van het Onderwijsniveau (PPON)5. [Balance of mathematics education halfway primary school. Periodic assessment of the education level (PPON) 5]. Arnhem: Cito. Google Scholar
  6. Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J., & Findell, B. (2001). Adding it up. Helping children learn mathematics. Washington: National Academy Press. Google Scholar
  7. Klein, A. S., Beishuizen, M., & Treffers, A. (1998). The empty number line in Dutch second grades: realistic versus gradual program design. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 29, 443–464. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kolovou, A., Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M., & Bakker, A. (2009). Non-routine problem solving tasks in primary school mathematics textbooks—a needle in a haystack. Mediterranean Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 8(2), 31–68. Google Scholar
  9. Meelissen, M. R. M., Netten, A., Drent, M., Punter, R. A., Droop, M., & Verhoeven, L. (2012). PIRLS en TIMSS 2011. Trends in leerprestaties in Lezen, Rekenen en Natuuronderwijs [PIRLS and TIMSS 2011. Trends in achievement in reading, mathematics and science]. Nijmegen/Enschede: Radboud University/Twente University. Google Scholar
  10. OCW (1993). Kerndoelen basisonderwijs. [Core goals primary education]. OCW: Den Haag. Google Scholar
  11. OCW (2006). Kerndoelen basisonderwijs. [Core goals primary education]. OCW: Den Haag. Google Scholar
  12. OCW (2009). Referentiekader taal en rekenen. [Reference standards language and mathematics]. OCW: Den Haag. Google Scholar
  13. Peltenburg, M., Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M., & Robitzsch, A. (2012). Special education students’ use of indirect addition in solving subtraction problems up to 100—a proof of the didactical potential of an ignored procedure. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 79, 351–369. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Reys, B. J., & Reys, R. E. (2006). The development and publication of elementary mathematics textbooks: let the buyer beware! Phi Delta Kappan, 87(5), 377–383. Google Scholar
  15. Selter, C., Prediger, S., Nührenbörger, M., & Hußmann, S. (2012). Taking away and determining the difference—a longitudinal perspective on two models of subtraction and the inverse relation to addition. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 79, 389–408. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Stein, M. K., & Smith, M. S. (2010). The influence of curriculum on students’ learning. In B. J. Reys, R. E. Reys, & R. Rubenstein (Eds.), Mathematics curriculum. Issues, trends, and future directions (pp. 351–362). Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Google Scholar
  17. Terpstra, P., & De Vries, A. (2010). Reken Zeker. Groningen: Noordhoff Uitgevers (student books for grade 2). Google Scholar
  18. Torbeyns, J., De Smedt, B., Stassens, N., Ghesquière, P., & Verschaffel, L. (2009). Solving subtraction problems by means of indirect addition. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 11, 79–91. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Usiskin, Z. (2008). The arithmetic curriculum and the real world. In D. de Bock, B. Dahl Søndergaard, B. Gómez Alfonso, & C. Litwin Cheng (Eds.), Proceedings of ICME-11-topic study group 10: research and development in the teaching and learning of number systems and arithmetic (pp. 11–16). Retrieved from https://lirias.kuleuven.be/bitstream/123456789/224765/1/879.pdf. Google Scholar
  20. Valverde, G. A., Bianchi, L. J., Wolfe, R. G., Schmidt, W. H., & Houang, R. T. (2002). According to the book. Using TIMSS to investigate the translation of policy into practice through the world of textbooks. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Google Scholar
  21. Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M. (2001). Realistic mathematics education in the Netherlands. In J. Anghileri (Ed.), Principles and practices in arithmetic teaching: innovative approaches for the primary classroom (pp. 49–63). Buckingham: Open University Press. Google Scholar
  22. Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M. (2008). Learning from “Didactikids”: an impetus for revisiting the empty number line. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 20(3), 6–31. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M. (2010). Reform under attack—forty years of working on better mathematics education thrown on the scrapheap? No way! In L. Sparrow, B. Kissane, & C. Hurst (Eds.), Shaping the future of mathematics education: proceedings of the 33rd annual conference of the mathematics education research group of Australasia (pp. 1–25). Fremantle: MERGA. Google Scholar
  24. Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M. (2012). Mathematics education research should come more often with breaking news. Lecture on the occasion of receiving the Svend Pedersen Lecture Award 2011. Retrieved from http://www.mnd.su.se/polopoly_fs/1.75423.1328790378!/menu/standard/file/svendPedersenLecture_120205.pdf.
  25. Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M., & Treffers, A. (2009). Mathe-didactical reflections on young children’s understanding and application of subtraction-related principles. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 11(1–2), 102–112. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Verschaffel, L., Greer, B., & De Corte, E. (2007). Whole number concepts and operations. In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning. Charlotte: NCTM. Google Scholar
  27. Weiss, I. R., Knapp, M. S., Hollweg, K. S., & Burill, G. (Eds.) (2002). Investigating the influence of standards. Washington: National Academic Press. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Freudenthal Institute for Science and Mathematics EducationFaculty of Science, Utrecht UniversityUtrechtThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Freudenthal Institute of Science and Mathematics Education, Faculty of Science & Faculty of Social and Behavioural SciencesUtrecht UniversityUtrechtThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations