No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

except for brief excerpts in connection with reviews or scholarly analysis. Use in connection with any form of information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed is forbidden. The use in this publication of trade names, trademarks, service marks, and similar terms, even if they are not identified as such, is not to be taken as an expression of opinion as to whether or not they are subject to proprietary rights.

In recent years, attention has turned to the development of evidenced-based learning progressions/trajectories as a means of identifying the likely paths learners might take in developing a deep, well-connected understanding of key aspects of mathematics. However, the extent to which this work influences what happens in mathematics classrooms varies greatly depending on the prevailing relationship between curriculum, pedagogy and assessment. This article will draw on current policy documents and the literature to challenge current assumptions at the national level about what constitutes a learning progression. It will draw briefly on the results of a recently completed, large-scale study on mathematical reasoning in the middle years of schooling to make a case for evidenced-based learning progressions/trajectories as boundary objects in reconnecting and rebalancing the curriculum, pedagogy and assessment relationship to support reform at scale.