Understanding the European policy landscape and its impact on change in mathematics and science pedagogies

ZDM - International Journal on Mathematics Education

Volumn 45, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 851-861

  Wake, Geoffrey David ^a   Burkhardt, Hugh ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NOTTINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Assessment; Inquiry; Pedagogy; Policy; Professional development

Indexed keywords

EID: 84887334449     PISSN: 18639690     EISSN: 18639704     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11858-013-0513-7     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Ball, S. (2008). The education debate. Bristol: Policy Press.
2. Brousseau, G. (1997). Theory of didactical situations in mathematics: Didactiques des mathematiques, 1970-1990. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
3. Burkhardt, H. (1992). Classroom observation in courseware development. International Journal of Educational Research, 17, 87-98.
4. Burkhardt, H. (2013). Curriculum design and systemic change. In Y. Lee & G. Lappan (Eds.), Mathematics curriculum in school education. Berlin: Springer.
5. Chevallard, Y. (1985). La transposition didactique-Du savoir savant au savoir enseigné. Grenoble: La Pensée Sauvage.
6. Chevallard, Y. (1992). Fundamental concepts in didactics: Perspectives provided by an anthropological approach. Research in Didactics of Mathematics (Selected papers), Special issue, 131-167.
7. Dale, R. (2009). Contexts, constraints and resources in the development of European Education Space and European Education Policy. In R. Dale & S. Robertson (Eds.), Globalisation and Europeanisation in education (pp. 23-43). Oxford: Symposium Books.
8. Dorier, J.-L. (2010). International synthesis report comparing national contexts, pointing out differences, commonalities, and interesting resources and initiatives proper to be adapted to an international use. http://www. primas-project. eu/servlet/supportBinaryFiles?referenceId=3&supportId=1297. Accessed 10 May 2013.
9. Dorier, J.-L., & Garcia, F. J. (2013). Challenges and opportunities for the implementation of inquiry-based learning in day-to-day teaching. ZDM-The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 45(6), this issue. doi: 10. 1007/s11858-013-0512-8.
10. EACEA/Eurydice. (2011a). Mathematics education in Europe: Common challenges and national policies. Brussels: Eurydice.
11. EACEA/Eurydice. (2011b). Science education in Europe: National policies, practices and research. Brussels: Eurydice.
12. Elmore, R. (2011). The (only) three ways to improve performance in schools. http://www. uknow. gse. harvard. edu/leadership/leadership001a. html. Accessed 10 May 2013.
13. Engestrom, Y. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14(1), 133-156. doi: 10. 1080/13639080020028747.
14. European Commission. (2004). Europe needs more scientists: Report by the high level group on increasing human resources for science and technology. European Commission: Brussels.
15. European Union. (2000). Lisbon European Council, Presidency conclusions. Brussels: EU Parliament.
16. European Union (2006). European Union: consolidated versions of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty Establishing the European Community. Official Journal of the European Union, 29 December. http://www. ecb. int/ecb/legal/pdf/ce32120061229en00010331. pdf. Accessed 14 June 2013.
17. Grek, S. (2009). Governing by numbers: The PISA 'effect' in Europe. Journal of Education Policy, 24(1), 23-37. doi: 10. 1080/02680930802412669.
18. Maastricht Treaty (1992). Provisions amending the treaty establishing the European Economic Community with a view to establishing the European Community. http://www. eurotreaties. com/maastrichtec. pdf. Accessed 17 May 2013.
19. Neumann, K., Fischer, H. E., & Kauertz, A. (2010). From PISA to educational standards: The impact of large-scale assessments on science education in Germany. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(3), 545-563. doi: 10. 1007/s10763-010-9206-7.
20. Noyes, A., Drake, P., Wake, G., & Murphy, R. (2010). Evaluating mathematics pathways. Research Report DFE-RR143. London: Department for Education.
21. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). (2003). The PISA 2003 assessment framework-mathematics, reading, science and problem solving knowledge and skills. Paris: OECD.
22. Robertson, R. (1995). Glocalization: Time-space and homogeneity-heterogeneity. In M. Featherstone, S. Lash, & R. Robertson (Eds.), Global modernities (pp. 25-44). London: Sage.
23. Rocard, M. (2007). EUR22845-Science education now: A renewed pedagogy for the future of Europe. http://www. eesc. europa. eu/resources/docs/rapportrocardfinal. pdf. Accessed 10 May 2013.
24. Schoenfeld, A. H. (2010). How we think: A theory of goal-oriented decision making and its educational applications. New York: Routledge.
25. Wake, G. (2011a). Policy: Contextualising the European policy space in support of inquiry-based learning in mathematics and science. http://www. primas-project. eu/servlet/supportBinaryFiles?referenceId=11&supportId=1247. Accessed 10 May 2013.
26. Wake, G. (2011b). Introduction to the Special Issue: Deepening engagement in mathematics in pre-university education. Research in Mathematics Education, 13(2), 109-118. doi: 10. 1080/14794802. 2011. 585822.
27. Wierzbicka, A. (1999). German 'cultural scripts': Public signs as a key to social attitudes and cultural values. Discourse and Society, 9(2), 241-282. doi: 10. 1177/0957926598009002006.