Forming conjectures within a spreadsheet environment

This paper is concerned with the use of spreadsheets within mathematical investigational tasks. Considering the learning of both children and pre-service teaching students, it examines how mathematical phenomena can be seen as a function of the pedagogical media through which they are encountered. In particular, it shows how pedagogical apparatus influence patterns of social interaction, and how this interaction shapes the mathematical ideas that are engaged with. Notions of conjecture, along with the particular faculty of the spreadsheet setting, are considered with regard to the facilitation of mathematical thinking. Employing an interpretive perspective, a key focus is on how alternative pedagogical media and associated discursive networks influence the way that students form and test informal conjectures

The choice for EU theorists: Establishing a common framework for analysis

European Union (EU) studies have entered a highly contentious and, arguably, creative phase. A range of theoretical perspectives, seemingly quite highly differentiated from one another, now compete for influence and lsquospacersquo. However, the questions remain: is EU studies developing theories which are truly competing theories? Or is it developing theories that do not compete so much as they aim to explain distinctly different pieces of the EU puzzle? This paper responds directly to these two questions, while reviewing recent literature on EU governance. It argues, first, that we lack theories of EU governance that are true rivals; and, second, that leading models explain different outcomes at different levels in a multi-level system of governance. The result is somewhat phoney debates between compatible theories masquerading as rivals, and between lsquocomparative politicsrsquo and lsquointernational relationsrsquo approaches. Above all, perhaps, we find middle range theories posing as general or lsquometa-theoriesrsquo. In the absence of a plausible general theory of EU governance, theorists must choose precisely which type of outcome theywish to explain

Strengthening ‘the foundations’ of the primary school curriculum

This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Education 3-13 on 21 May 2016, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/03004279.2016.1185137.The low status of the foundation subjects (e.g. Music and Physical Education (PE)) in English primary schools is well documented. Using PE as an illustrative example, a thematic analysis of 51 PE trainee students’ assignments, based on their perceptions of a two-week experience in a primary school, highlighted a number of areas of concern (e.g. limited/inadequate preparation; insufficient teacher knowledge/confidence; variable/limited subject leadership and non-qualified teachers delivering the curriculum). The possibility of teachers, coaches and other external specialists learning collaboratively with and from each other within a community of practice/learning is proposed as one way of strengthening the foundation subjects within the primary school curriculum

Means versus ends in opaque institutional fields: Trading off compliance and achievement in sustainability standard adoption

__Abstract__ The long-standing discussion on decoupling has recently moved from adopters not implementing the agreed-upon policies to compliant adopters not achieving the goals intended by institutional entrepreneurs. This “means-ends decoupling” prevails especially in highly opaque fields, where practices, causality, and performance are hard to understand and chart. I conceptualize the conditions under which the adoption of institutions in relatively opaque fields leads to the achievement of the envisaged goals. Voluntary sustainability standards governing socioenvironmental issues illustrate these arguments. I argue that the lack of field transparency drives institutional entrepreneurs to create and maintain concrete and uniform rules, apply strong incentives, and disseminate “best practices” to ensure substantive adopter compliance. However, such rigid institutions are ill-equipped to deal with the causal complexity and practice multiplicity underlying opacity while they smother adopter agency. The ensuing tension between substantive compliance and goal achievement leads to an inherent trade-off: institutional entrepreneurs who remedy the policy-practice decoupling may enhance the disparity between means and ends, and vice versa. While sustainability standards and other institutions in highly opaque fields can, therefore, not fully achieve the envisaged goals, the trade-off can be reduced through systemically designed institutions that promote goal internalization and contain niche institutions