Gustafsson, Lars

Valero, Paola

Wedege, Tine

English

lifelong mathematics education (2): EmPower, disempower, counterpower?Paola Valero1, Lars Gustafsson2, Tine Wedege31Aalborg University, Denmark; NCM, Sweden; Malmö University, SwedenTheme D: Mathematics for all: why? what? when?MotivationMathematics education is a central part of the lifelong learning strategies in the Nordic countries. Besides economic justifications for this (see “Lifelong mathematics education (1): Needs and constraints”), one of the main arguments supporting the provision of mathematics education for all students and at all levels is connected to the idea that mathematics is a powerful resource for social action and that through the learning of mathematics citizens will acquire that powerful resource. The power of mathematics and mathematics education is clearly assumed from policy documents in educational systems, to teachers’ practices, and research in the teaching and learning of mathematics (Skovsmose and Valero, 2002). However, it is not clear what is really meant by the terms “power” and “mathematics” (Valero, 2006), particularly when it is being used differently by the multiple actors involved in giving meaning to the practices of the teaching and learning of mathematics in society (Christensen, Stentoft & Valero, 2007a,b). Furthermore, from our research we have seen that in practice the realization of whatever might be meant by the power of mathematics and mathematics education leads researchers, teacher and students to a variety of situations. Sometimes those situations may seem powerful and empowering since learners are able to participate and influence working or everyday life processes through the use of mathematical resources. However, more often than not teaching and learning situations in mathematics are rather disempowering since they lead to the complete rejection of the learners’ possibilities to develop mathematical competence (Wedege, 2000). Still, it could be desirable –but it happens less often in practice– to have counterempowering situations where learners are able to question the power of mathematics and mathematics education and take a critical distance to it, its unfolding in society, and its influence on their lives (Gustafsson & Mouwitz, 2007). In other words, the meaning of the term power in relation to mathematics and mathematics education deserves a more detailed examination.Questions for discussionThe two main questions below invite to providing clarification of the meaning of the term “power” in relation to mathematics and mathematics education, and to linking those meanings with their implications. The questions are:1. Which notions of power are connected to mathematics and mathematics education?2. What are the consequences for research and for practice of these notions of power?organisation of the sessionIn the session we will invite participants to explore these two questions based on a very short motivation for discussion. Conference participants will be invited to send an indication of their interest to participate in this discussion group session and send to the organisers their own papers/articles dealing with the issue of needs and constraints in mathematics education. Based on participants’ interests, we will plan a more detailed agenda for the discussion balancing between our motivation and the participants’ interests in the group.For the participants also going to theme group “Lifelong mathematics education (1)” it will be possible to draw on this discussion too.REFERENCESChristensen, O. R., Stentoft, D., & Valero, P. (2007). Power Distribution in the Network of Mathematics Education Practices. In K. Nolan & E. De Freitas (Eds.), Opening the Research Text: Critical Insights and In(ter)ventions into Mathematics Education (pp. 131-146). New York: Springer.Christensen, O. R., Stentoft, D., & Valero, P. (2007). A Landscape of Power Distribution. In K. Nolan & E. De Freitas (Eds.), Opening the Research Text: Critical Insights and In(ter)ventions into Mathematics Education (pp. 147-154). New York: Springer.Gustafsson, L. & Mouwitz, L. (2007). Validering av vuxnas matematikkunnande. Göteborg: NCM. Available at: http://www.valideringsdelegationen.se/pdf/Rapporter/NCM_validering.pdfValero, P. (2006). Diskurser om magt i matematikdidaktisk forskning: Begreber og handlemuligheder. In M. Blomhøj & O. Skovsmose (Eds.), Kunne det tænkes? - om matematiklæring (pp. 296-311). Albertslund (Denmark): Malling Beck.Skovsmose, O., & Valero, P. (2002). Democratic access to powerful mathematical ideas. In L. D. English (Ed.), Handbook of international research in mathematics education. Directions for the 21st Century. (pp. 383-407). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Wedege, T. (2000). Technology, Competences and Mathematics. In Coben, D.; FitzSimons, G.; O’Donoghue, J. (Eds.), Perspectives on Adults Learning Mathematics: Research and Practice. (pp.192-209) Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Lifelong mathematics education (2): Empower, disempower, counterpower?

https://vbn.aau.dk/ws/files/14944200/Valero_et_al

Lifelong mathematics education (2): Empower, disempower, counterpower?

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

VBN