Advertisement

The Enacted School Mathematics Curriculum

  • Yew Hoong LeongEmail author
  • Berinderjeet Kaur
Chapter
Part of the Mathematics Education – An Asian Perspective book series (MATHEDUCASPER)

Abstract

This chapter comprises three sections. In the first section, we make reference to the previous chapter on “The intended school mathematics curriculum”. We broaden the discussion to the age-old question of bridging the intended–enacted curriculum gap. Here we draw on the international literature corpus to highlight how this gap is faced everywhere before coming back to the Singapore setting—with her unique challenges and affordances. In the second section, we draw on multi-sites research projects that are of scale on how mathematics is taught in Singapore classrooms and map the way mathematics is taught across a number of Singapore schools with a view of representing broadly the enacted curriculum. While these larger scale research can be seen as giving us a broad overview—the “airplane” view of Singapore mathematics teaching—the next section can be regarded as zoomed-in views of specific sites where the research focuses on how various contextual elements come into play to render the carrying out of curricular goals of teaching in actual classrooms challenging. We do this by drawing on classroom research studies of relatively small scale that reveal interesting complexities that are too fine-grained in the bigger studies. We end this section with a description of a current research project that draws upon both these lenses of looking at enactment. We conclude the chapter by reflecting on the question: Is there a distinctly “Singapore pedagogy”?

Keywords

Enacted school mathematics curriculum Mathematics classrooms Mathematics teachers Singapore 

References

  1. Brown, M. W. (2009). The teacher-tool relationship. In J. T. Remillard, B. Herbel-Eisenmann, & G. Lloyd (Eds.), Mathematics teachers at work: Connecting curriculum materials and classroom instruction (pp. 17–36). NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  2. Chang, A.S.C., Kaur, B., Koay, P.L. & Lee, N.H. (2001). An exploratory analysis of current pedagogical practices in primary mathematics classrooms. The NIE Researcher, 192, 7–8.Google Scholar
  3. Cheo, R., & Quah, E. (2005). Mothers, maids and tutors: An empirical evaluation of their effect on children’s academic grades in Singapore. Edu. Econom., 13(3), 269–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. City, E. A., Elmore, R. F., Fiarman, S. E., & Teitel, L. (2009). Instructional rounds in education: A network approach to improving teaching and learning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.Google Scholar
  5. Clarke, D. (2001). Perspectives on practice and meaning in mathematics and science classrooms. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  6. Davis, S. (2015). The Straits Times—Nexus Link tuition survey. Straits Times.Google Scholar
  7. Ho, K. F., & Hedberg, J. G. (2005). Teachers’ pedagogies and their impact on students’ mathematical problem solving. J. Math. Behavior, 24, 238–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hogan, D., Rahim, R., Chan, M., Kwek, D., & Towndrow, P. (2012). Understanding classroom talk in Secondary Three mathematics classes in Singapore. In B. Kaur & T. L. Toh (Eds.), Reasoning, communication and connections in mathematics: Yearbook 2012 of the Association of Mathematics Educators (pp. 169–198). Singapore: World Scientific.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hogan, D., Towndrow, P., Chan, M., Kwek. D. & Rahim, R.A. (2013a). CRPP Core 2 research program: Core 2 interim final report. Singapore: National Institute of Education.Google Scholar
  10. Hogan, D., Chan, M., Rahim, R., Kwek, D., Aye, K.M., Loo, S.C., Sheng, Y. Z., & Luo, W. (2013b). Assessment and the logic of instructional practice in Secondary 3 English and Mathematics classrooms in Singapore. Review of Education, 1, 57–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kaur, B. (2009). Characteristics of good mathematics teaching in Singapore Grade 8 classrooms: A juxtaposition of teachers’ practice and students’ perception. ZDM Math. Edu., 41(3), 333–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kaur, B., & Loh, H. K. (2009). Student perspective on effective mathematics pedagogy: Stimulated recall approach study. Singapore: National Institute of Education.Google Scholar
  13. Kaur, B., Tay, E. G., Toh, T. L., Leong, Y. H., & Lee, N. H. (2018). A study of school mathematics curriculum enacted by competent teachers in Singapore secondary schools. Math. Edu. Res. J., 30(1), 103–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kaur, B., & Yap, S. F. (1997). Kassel project (NIE-Exeter Joint Study) Second Phase. Singapore: National Institute of Education.Google Scholar
  15. Kaur, B., & Yap, S. F. (1998). Kassel project (NIE-Exeter Joint Study) Third Phase. Singapore: National Institute of Education.Google Scholar
  16. Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J., & Findell, B. (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. Washington: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  17. Lampert, M. (2001). Teaching problems and the problems of teaching. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Leong, Y. H. (2008, July). Singapore mathematics teachers: Sandwiched between curriculum goals and examination goals. Paper presented at the 11th International Congress on Mathematics Education. Monterrey, Mexico.Google Scholar
  19. Leong, Y. H., & Chick, H. L. (2007). An insight into the ‘balancing act’ of teaching. Math. Teacher Educ. Dev. J., 9, 51–65.Google Scholar
  20. Leong, Y. H., & Chick, H. L. (2011). Time pressure and instructional choices when teaching mathematics. Math. Edu. Res. J., 23(3), 347–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Leung, F. K. S. (2001). In search of an East Asian identity in mathematics education. Educ. Stud. Math., 47(1), 35–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. OECD. (2010). PISA 2009 Results: Overcoming social background: Equity in learning opportunities and outcomes (Vol. II). Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  23. Porter, A. C. (2002). Measuring the content of instruction: Uses in research and practice. Edu. Res., 31(7), 3–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Putnam, R., Lampert, M., & Peterson, P. (1990). Alternative perspectives on knowing mathematics in elementary schools. Rev. Res. Edu., 16(1), 57–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Seitz, P. (2017). Curriculum alignment among the intended, enacted, and assessed curricula for Grade 9 Mathematics. J. Canadian Assoc. Curriculum Stud., 15(1), 72–94.Google Scholar
  26. Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (1999). The teaching gap: Best ideas from the world’s teachers for improving education in the classroom. NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
  27. Straits Times (Parliamentary Proceedings) (2013). MPs call for closer look at private tuition industry. Singapore: Author.Google Scholar
  28. Wood, T., Cobb, P., & Yackel, E. (1995). Reflections on learning and teaching mathematics in elementary school. In L. P. Steffe & J. Gale (Eds.), Constructivism in education (pp. 401–422). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Institute of EducationSingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations