Neither a borrower nor a lender be: exploring ‘teaching for mastery’ policy borrowing

Abstract

This paper examines an instance of policy borrowing, specifically, the borrowing of 'mathematics mastery'. In doing so, it considers some of the implications of parachuting policy from one setting into another. The process of borrowing mastery is examined not only as a policy technology, but also as a culturally located artefact embedded in the 'high performing' education systems of Shanghai and Singapore. Drawing on empirical evidence, the paper maps how teachers working in the East Midlands region of England borrowed, and enacted, mastery. Data suggests that the cultural 'baggage' implicit in mastery rendered it, at times, in conflict with structures inherent the English education system. The paper concludes by suggesting that the teachers' attempts to enact mastery reported here, reveal some of the fundamental consequences inherent in policy borrowing. Consequences with, in this case at least, significant implications for the English education system at both the micro and macro levels.

PISA and policy-borrowing: A philosophical perspective on their interplay in mathematics education

“…It is unsurprising, therefore, that East Asian mathematics education policies and practices have attracted considerable interest from education policymakers in England. The PISA mathematics performance of East Asian regions has been a significant factor in motivating English policymakers to 'borrow' mathematics education policies from these high performing jurisdictions (Clapham & Vickers, 2018).…”

“…Whilst the aims of mastery teaching are very laudable, its operationalisation in England conflicted with significant aspects of the prevailing sociocultural context. For example, primary mathematics is taught by subject specialists in East Asian regions but by generalists in England, and this is further exacerbated by significant differences in the structures of the school day and attitudes to using textbook-based exercises between England and East Asian jurisdictions (Clapham & Vickers, 2018). Furthermore, Clapham and Vickers (2018) suggested that the implementation of mastery teaching in England was compromised by differences between the learning cultures of England and East Asia, in terms of the 7 commitment and work ethic of students.…”

“…For example, primary mathematics is taught by subject specialists in East Asian regions but by generalists in England, and this is further exacerbated by significant differences in the structures of the school day and attitudes to using textbook-based exercises between England and East Asian jurisdictions (Clapham & Vickers, 2018). Furthermore, Clapham and Vickers (2018) suggested that the implementation of mastery teaching in England was compromised by differences between the learning cultures of England and East Asia, in terms of the 7 commitment and work ethic of students. Worryingly, Clapham and Vickers (2018) also noted concerns about weaker students being left behind in the English implementation of mastery teaching.…”

“…Furthermore, Clapham and Vickers (2018) suggested that the implementation of mastery teaching in England was compromised by differences between the learning cultures of England and East Asia, in terms of the 7 commitment and work ethic of students. Worryingly, Clapham and Vickers (2018) also noted concerns about weaker students being left behind in the English implementation of mastery teaching. This problem is further compounded by a lack of time within the school day for teachers in England to provide additional support for struggling students, and a lower emphasis on home tutoring as a form of remedial support in England compared to East Asian regions.…”

“…In an attempt to improve a country's international standing, its mathematics education policymakers may borrow policies which were developed, and perceived to be effective, in other nations without due regard for the contexts in which the policies were initially operating (Nguyen, Elliott, Terlouw, & Pilot, 2009;Winstanley, 2012). Limited cognisance may be taken of the support structures that ensured the success of the policies, the 5 different cultural contexts in which they were situated, the effect of policy borrowing on the coherence of existing mathematics education provision (Clapham & Vickers, 2018), or the power of PISA scores to predict students' future mathematical behaviour. The propensity of some countries to borrow mathematics education policies from high-performing jurisdictions in PISA is exemplified by England's recent preoccupation with mathematical education in East Asian regions, such as Shanghai and Singapore.…”