Advertisement

Interchange

, Volume 44, Issue 3–4, pp 349–367 | Cite as

Sami Culture and Values: A Study of the National Mathematics Exam for the Compulsory School in Norway

  • Anne Birgitte Fyhn
Article

Abstract

Norway ratified the ILO convention 169 concerning indigenous and tribal people in independent countries in 1990. In accordance with the convention the education programs for the Sami shall address their value systems and their cultural aspirations. Our aim is to investigate the implementation of this convention. The focus is on how Sami values are reflected in the national mathematics exam for the compulsory school. In Sami traditional knowledge the term “knowledge” means knowledge as a process, not just the final outcome of a process. The tasks are analyzed with respect to four different Sami values. We present an overview of one complete exam and more profound analyses of three selected tasks. The analyses reveal that the tasks more or less reflect some Sami values. A stronger focus on modeling problems in school mathematics may open up for forms of teaching that focus on Sami values to a larger extent than today.

Keywords

Indigenous Value Sami Exam Culture Mathematics 

References

  1. Aikio, A. (2010). Olmmošhan gal birge: áššit mat ovddidit birgema. Kárášjohka: ČálliidLágadus.Google Scholar
  2. Ascher, M. (1991). Ethnomathematics. A multicultural view of mathematical ideas. Belmont: Wadsworth Inc.Google Scholar
  3. Berkes, F. (2008). Sacred ecology. Routledge: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  4. Bishop, A. J. (1988). Mathematics education in its cultural context. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 19, 179–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bishop, A. J. (2012). From culture to well-being: a partial story of values in mathematics education. ZDM, 44, 3–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blomhøj, M. (2006). Mod en didaktisk teori for matematisk modellering. In O. Skovsmose & M. Blomhøj (Eds.), Kunne det tænkes?—om matematiklæring (pp. 80–109). Albertslund: Forlaget Malling Beck A/S.Google Scholar
  7. Cai, J. (2005). US and Chinese teachers’ constructing, knowing, and evaluating representations to teach mathematics. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 7(2), 135–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cai, J., & Garber, T. (2012). Teaching values and valued teaching in the mathematics classroom: Toward a research agenda. ZDM, 44, 91–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Clarke, D. (1996). Assessment. In A. J. Bishop, K. Clements, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick, & C. Laborde (Eds.), International handbook of mathematics education (pp. 327–370). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
  10. Darnell, F., & Hoëm, A. (1996). Taken to extremes. Education in the far north. Oslo: Scandinavian University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Eriksen, T. Hylland. (1997). Kultur, kommunikasjon og makt. In T. Hylland Eriksen (Ed.), Flerkulturell forståelse (pp. 53–66). Oslo: Tano Aschehoug.Google Scholar
  12. FAD, Ministry of Government Administration, Reform and Church Affairs (2013). Sami languages. Retrieved Nov 22, 2013, from http://www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/fad/Selected-topics/Sami-policy/sami-languages.html?id=24388.
  13. Freudenthal, H. (1991). Revisiting mathematics education. China lectures. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
  14. Gaup Eira, I. M. & Nystad, K. (2005). Overføring av tradisjonell kunnskap. In Samisk språkopplæring og modulbasert opplæring. Rapport fra seminaret i Tromsø 22–23.2.05 (pp. 18–20). Sámi Allaskuvla og Fylkesmannen i Troms.Google Scholar
  15. Høgmo, A. (1989). Norske idealer og Samisk virkelighet: om skoleutvikling i det Samiske området. Oslo: Gyldendal.Google Scholar
  16. ILO, The International Labour Organisation (1989). C169 Indigenous and tribal peoples convention. Retrieved Nov 22, 2013, from http://www.ilo.org/ilolex/cgi-lex/convde.pl?C169.
  17. Kawagley, A. O. (1996). Alaska native education research requires that we reach into the profound silence of self to know. Topics in Arctic Social Sciences, 2, 29–36.Google Scholar
  18. KD, Ministry of Education and Research (2007a). KunnskapsløftetSamisk (LK06S). Retrieved Nov 22, 2013, from http://www.udir.no/Lareplaner/Kunnskapsloftet/Kunnskapsloftet-samisk/.
  19. KD, Ministry of Education and Research (2007b). Prinsipper for opplæringen i KunnskapsløftetSamisk. Retrieved Nov 22, 2013, from http://www.udir.no/upload/larerplaner/Fastsatte_lareplaner_for_Kunnskapsloeftet/Samiske/prinsipper_for_opplaringen_Samisk.pdf.
  20. KD, Ministry of Education and Research (2007c). Curricula in english. Retrieved Nov 22, 2013, from http://www.udir.no/Stottemeny/English/Curriculum-in-English/.
  21. Klausen, A. M. (1992). Kultur. Mønster og kaos. Oslo: Ad Notam Gyldendal A/S.Google Scholar
  22. KUF, Ministry of Church, Education and Research (1997). Det Samiske læreplanverket for den 10-årige grunnskolen. N: Sámi oahppahusráðði/Samisk utdanningsråd.Google Scholar
  23. Lehtola, V. P. (2013). Allmenn informasjon. Gáldu. Resource centre for the right of indigenous peoples. Retrieved Nov 22, 2013, from http://www.galdu.org/web/index.php?sladja=25&vuolitsladja=11&giella1=nor.
  24. Lindholm, T. (1997). Kultur, verdier og menneskerettigheter. In T. Hylland Eriksen (Ed.), Flerkulturell forståelse (pp. 67–89). Oslo: Tano Aschehoug.Google Scholar
  25. Lipka, J., Andrew-Ihrke, D., & Yanez, E. E. (2011). Yup’ik cosmology to school mathematics: The power of symmetry and proportional measuring. Interchange, 42(2), 157–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lipka, J., Webster, J. P., & Yanez, E. E. (2005). Factors that affect alaska native students’ mathematical performance. Journal of American Indian Education, 44(3), 1–8.Google Scholar
  27. Lovdata (1990). Lov om Sametinget og andre samiske rettsforhold (Sameloven). Chapter 3, samisk språk. (The Sami act. Chapter three, Sami language). Retrieved Nov 22, 2013, from http://www.lovdata.no/cgi-wift/wiftldles?doc=/usr/www/lovdata/all/tl-19870612-056-003.html&dep=alle&emne=samisk&.
  28. Namukasa, I. (2004). School mathematics in the era of globalization. Interchange, 35(2), 209–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Niss, M., Blum, W., & Galbraith, P. (2007). Introduction. In New ICMI study series, 1, vol. 10, modelling and applications in mathematics education, part 1 (pp. 3–32). Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  30. Nutti, Y. J. (2007). Matematiskt tankesätt inom den samiska kulturen. Utifrån samiska slöjdares och renskötares berättelser. Licentiatuppsats. Luleå University of Technology.Google Scholar
  31. Nutti, Y. J. (2013). Indigenous teachers’ experiences of the implementation of culture-based mathematics activities in Sámi School. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 25, 57–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Nystad, I. M. K. (2003). Mannen mellom myte og modernitet. Nesbru: Vett og viten. (Master thesis, University of Tromsø, Faculty of social sciences).Google Scholar
  33. Nystad K., Spein A. R. & Ingstad B. (Forthcoming) Community resilience factors among indigenous Sámi adolescents: A qualitative study in Northern Norway, Transcultural Psychiatry (Special Issue). Google Scholar
  34. Pais, A., & Valero, P. (2011). Beyond disavowing the politics of equity and quality in mathematics education. In B. Atweh, M. Graven, W. Secada, & P. Valero (Eds.), Mapping equity and quality in mathematics education (pp. 35–48). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  35. Sara, M. N. (2003). Tradisjonell Samisk kunnskap i grunnskolen. In V. Hirvonen (Ed.), Samisk skole i plan og praksis: hvordan møte utfordringene i L97S? evaluering av Reform 97 (pp. 114–130). Kautokeino: Samisk Høgskole.Google Scholar
  36. Schukajlow, S., Leiss, D., Pekrun, R., Blum, W., Müller, M., & Messner, R. (2012). Teaching methods for modelling problems and students’ task-specific enjoyment, value, interest and self-efficacy expectations. Educational studies in mathematics, 79(2), 215–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Skovsmose, O. (2005). Travelling through education. Uncertainty, Mathematics, Responsibility. Rotterdam: Sense.Google Scholar
  38. Skovsmose, O. (2011). An invitation to critical mathematics education. Rotterdam: Sense.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Star, J. R. (2005). Reconceptualising procedural knowledge. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 36(5), 404–411.Google Scholar
  40. Todal, J. (2012). Samisk språk i barnehage og skule 2011/2012. In E. G. Broderstad, M. Brustad, K. Johansen, P. I. Severeide, & J. Todal (Eds.), Samiske tall forteller. Kommentert samisk statistikk 2012. Raporta/Rapport 1, 2012 (pp. 104–116). Kautokeino: Sámi Allaskuvla/Sámi University College.Google Scholar
  41. Udir, The Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training (2009). Evaluering av matematikkeksamener vår 2009MAT0010 og REA3022. Rambøll management consulting og ILS, Institutt for lærerutdanning og skoleutvikling, University of Oslo, Norway.Google Scholar
  42. Udir, The Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training (2011). Skoleporten. Nasjonale prøver. ResultaterNasjonale prøver ungd. trinn. Retrieved Nov 22, 2013, from http://www.udir.no/Vurdering/Nasjonale-prover/.
  43. Udir, The Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training (2012). Kjennetegn på måloppnåelse. Retrieved Nov 22, 2013, from http://www.udir.no/Lareplaner/Veiledninger-til-LK06/Veiledning-i-lokalt-arbeid-med-lareplaner/Artikler/Kjennetegn-pa-maloppnaelse/.
  44. Winchester, I. (2013). On seeing our deepest intellectual, educational and practical traditions from a non-western perspective. Interchange, Online first.Google Scholar
  45. Zvorono, V. (2011). En sammenlignende studie av norske og russiske eksamensoppgaver med logaritmer. En analyse av eksamensoppgaver med kognitive kategorier som redskap. Mastergradsoppgave i matematikk, lektorutdanning (Master thesis). Univertsity of Tromsø, Faculty of Science and Technology.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ILP, Department of EducationUiT The Arctic University of NorwayTromsöNorway

Personalised recommendations