Mathematics Curriculum Evaluation

Osta, Iman

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-15789-0_168

Cited by 2 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These ideas can be used to argue for different activities in relation to mathematics curricula. Competency frameworks may not argue directly for curricular practice, but they are included in international assessments (Osta, 2020), influencing policy and curricula, which is why they are included as a concept in this logos category. An overview of policy debates in the USA and the UK, for example, the debate between traditional and progressive approaches, may be viewed as an idea of this category, a historical insight into when and why different approaches are valued (Ernest, 2020).…”

Section: Knowledge Of Curriculum As a Didactic Praxeologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Mathematical knowledge for teaching as a didactic praxeology

Pansell

2023

Front. Educ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is widely acknowledged that teachers' work has both practical and theoretical dimensions, both praxis and logos, and that teacher education should address both dimensions. However, as argued in this article, existing discourses for describing the mathematical knowledge of teachers and what it takes to become competent in it are not always clear to what extent these discourses address knowledge about the practices of mathematics teaching or theories that provide arguments for the practices. Specifically, I argue for the coordination of the framework of mathematical knowledge for teaching (MKT) with the analytical distinction of logos and praxis combined in teaching practices. Moreover, I have backed this argument with examples of the proposed categories of the adjusted framework from the existing body of work in mathematics education. Each category of the proposed framework, whether concerning a teaching method or a theoretical consideration, was indeed exemplified by some concept, approach, or perspective from the field of mathematics education. The framework, I believe, would prove useful in engaging mathematics teacher education discursively, for instance, in analyzing teacher education materials to determine the extent to which they offer mere methods, theoretical arguments, or a combination of both.

show abstract

Section: Knowledge Of Curriculum As a Didactic Praxeologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Mathematical knowledge for teaching as a didactic praxeology

Pansell

2023

Front. Educ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Tests are a relied-upon and regular part of teachers' assessment practices (Nieminen & Atjonen, 2022;Senk et al, 1997;Stiggins & Bridgeford, 1985) and might be conceived of as the implemented (experiential and learned) curriculum (Osta, 2020). Nortvedt and Buchholtz (2018) address the existence of teachers' testing practices that emphasize continuous assessment of students' procedural, as opposed to problem-solving, skills.…”

Section: Testsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…What they have in common is that they communicate goals for student learning and are used for educational evaluation and development. Teacher-constructed tests might well serve as a method for this evaluation and development, as well as for coordination of the intended (ideal and formal), the implemented (perceived and operational), and the attained (experiential and learned) curriculum (Osta, 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

When teachers construct tests for assessing students’ competencies: a taxonomy

Becevic

2023

Educ Stud Math

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Little is known about how teachers construct tests. For that reason, this study addresses the use of teacher-constructed tests for assessing educational goals, expressed in terms of student mathematical competencies. The focus is on meanings that upper secondary school mathematics teachers assign to their own test construction practices for assessing educational goals, expressed in terms of mathematical competencies in the curriculum. The methodological approach of grounded theory, underlined by symbolic interactionism, is applied to semi-structured interviews with teachers. The core category, the emerging taxonomy, is derived by revealing distinctions in degree of paying attention to competencies: no attention, superficial attention, and qualitative attention, as well as two different phases of the assessment: constructional and marking. Finally, a couple of possible implications for developing and improving test construction are offered. This includes collaborative work, inside and outside of schools, with both prospective and in-service teachers, for improvement of competence implementation in regular teaching and learning in alignment with mathematical content.

show abstract

Mathematics Curriculum Evaluation

Cited by 2 publications

References 8 publications

Mathematical knowledge for teaching as a didactic praxeology

Mathematical knowledge for teaching as a didactic praxeology

When teachers construct tests for assessing students’ competencies: a taxonomy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About