Towards a Critical Professionalism in University Science and Mathematics Education


Descartes is often referred to as the first modern philosopher, as he introduced a new way of looking at knowledge and nature. This new way is initiated by a universal doubt that allows Descartes to question what has been presented as knowledge, regardless of what authority has claimed it to establish fundamental truths

Modernity can also be related to scientific and industrial developments by paying special attention to the fact that the so-called Scientific Revolution was followed by an Industrial Revolution. Naturally, there are no direct causal links between the two revolutions as many elements, including non-scientific ones, contributed to the Industrial Revolution. But it is still important to observe that Modernity relates to scientific and technological development, which introduces new forms of production


Mathematics Education Knowledge Production Project Work Scientific Revolution Scientific Rationality 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Ayer, A. (Ed.) (1959). Logical Positivism. New York: The Free PressGoogle Scholar
  2. Ayer, A. (1970). Language, Truth and Logic. London: Victor GollanczGoogle Scholar
  3. Bauman, Z. (1989). Modernity and the Holocaust. Cambridge: PolityGoogle Scholar
  4. Beck, U. (1992). Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. London: SageGoogle Scholar
  5. Beck, U. (1999). World Risk Society. Cambridge: PolityGoogle Scholar
  6. Beth, E.W. & Piaget, J. (1966). Mathematical Epistemology and Psychology. Dordrecht: ReidelGoogle Scholar
  7. Bourbaki, N. (1950). The Architecture of Mathematics. The American Mathematical Monthly57, 221–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bruner, J.S. (1960). The Process of Education. Cambridge: Belkapp PressGoogle Scholar
  9. Bury, J.B. (1955). The Idea of Progress: An Inquiry into its Origin and Growth. New York: DoverGoogle Scholar
  10. Carnap, R. (1937). The Logical Syntax of Language. London: Routledge and Kegan PaulGoogle Scholar
  11. Carnap, R. (1959). The Elimination of Metaphysics Through Logical Analysis of Language. In A. Ayer (Ed.), Logical Positivism (pp. 60–81). New York: The Free PressGoogle Scholar
  12. Christensen, O.R. (2003). Exploring the Borderland: A Study on Reflections in University Science Education. Ph.D. Thesis. Aalborg: Department of Education, Learning and Philosophy, Aalborg University. Available at: = 28
  13. Curry, H.B. (1951). Outlines of a Formalist Philosophy of Mathematics. Amsterdam: North-Holland PublishingGoogle Scholar
  14. Descartes, R. (1993). Meditations on First Philosophy in Focus. Edited and with an Ontroduction by Stanley Tweyman. London: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
  15. Dewey, J. (1938). The Relation of Science and Philosophy as a Basis for Education. School and Society47, 470–473. [Reprinted in R.D. Archambault (Ed.). (1964), John Dewey on Education: Selected Writing (pp. 15–19). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press]Google Scholar
  16. Dewey, J. (1963). Experience and Education. New York: MacmillanGoogle Scholar
  17. Dewey, J. (1966). Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education. New York, London: The Free Press [first published 1916]Google Scholar
  18. Dieudonné, J.A. (1970). The Work of Nicholas Bourbaki. The American Mathematical Monthly, 61, 134–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Eriksen, K.K. (2003). The Role of Reflectivity in Tertiary Chemical Education. Ph.D. Thesis. Copenhagen: The University of CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  20. Ernest, P. (1998). Social Constructivism as a Philosophy of Mathematics. Albany: State University of New York PressGoogle Scholar
  21. Feyerabend, P. (1975). Against Method. London: VersoGoogle Scholar
  22. Feyerabend, P. (1987). Farewell to Reason. London: VersoGoogle Scholar
  23. Foucault, M. (1994). The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences. New York: Vintage BooksGoogle Scholar
  24. Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P. & Trow, M. (1994): The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. London: SageGoogle Scholar
  25. Glasersfeld, E.V. (1995). Radical Constructivism: A Way of Knowing and Learning. London: Falmer PressGoogle Scholar
  26. Habermas, J. (1971). Knowledge and Human Interests. Boston: Beacon PressGoogle Scholar
  27. Hansen, T.B. (Ed.) (2002). The Role of Philosophy of Science and Ethics in University Science Education. Göteborg: NSU PressGoogle Scholar
  28. Hempel, C.G. (1959). The Empiricist Criterion of Meaning. In A. Ayer (Ed.). Logical Positivism (pp. 108–129). New York: The Free PressGoogle Scholar
  29. Hempel, C.G. (1965). Aspects of Scientific Explanation. New York: The Free PressGoogle Scholar
  30. Hume, D. (1975). Enquiries Concerning Human Understanding and Concernning the Principles of Morrals. Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  31. Jammer, M. (1957). Concepts of Force: A Study in the Foundations of Dynamics. Cambridge: Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar
  32. Kolb, D.A. (1984). Experiental Learning: Experiences as the Source of Learning and Development. Englewoord Cliffs: Prentice HallGoogle Scholar
  33. Kolmos, A., Fink, F.K., Krogh, L. (Eds.) (2004). The Aalborg PBL-Model: Progress, Diversity and Challenges. Aalborg: Aalborg University PressGoogle Scholar
  34. Kuhn, T.S. (1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
  35. Lakatos, I. (1976). Proofs and Refutations: The Logic of Mathematical Discovery. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  36. Locke, J. (1967). Two Treatises of Government. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press [first published 1689)Google Scholar
  37. Neurath, O. (1959). Protocol Sentences. In A. Ayer (Ed.), Logical Positivism (pp. 199–208). New York: The Free PressGoogle Scholar
  38. Nisbet, R.A. (1980). History of the Idea of Progress. New York: Basic BooksGoogle Scholar
  39. OEEC (1961). New Thinking in School Mathematics. Paris. OECDGoogle Scholar
  40. Popper, K.R. (1965). The Logic of Scientific Discovery. New York: Harper and RowGoogle Scholar
  41. Popper, K.R. (1972). Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. London: Routledge and Kegan PaulGoogle Scholar
  42. Skovsmose, O. (2005). Travelling Through Education: Uncertainty, Mathematics, Responsibility. Rotterdam: SenseGoogle Scholar
  43. Skovsmose, O. (2006). Challenges for Mathematics Education Research. In J. Maasz & W. Schloegelmann (Eds.), New Mathematics Education Research and Practice (pp. 33–50). Rotterdam: SenseGoogle Scholar
  44. Skovsmose, O. & Yasukawa, K. (2004). Formatting Power of ‘Mathematics in a Package’: A Challenge for Social Theorising? Philosophy of Mathematics Education Journal. Retrieved May 2008. Available at:
  45. Smith, A. (1776). An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. Retrieved May 2008. Available at:
  46. Stadler, F. (2001). The Vienna Circle: Studies in the Origins, Development and Influence of Logical Empiricim. Vienna: SpringerGoogle Scholar
  47. Stevenson, R.L. (1987). Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. New York: Signet classicGoogle Scholar
  48. Tarnas, R. (1991). The Passion of the Western Mind: Understanding the Ideas that have Shaped Our World View. New York: Random HouseGoogle Scholar
  49. Vithal, R., Christiansen, I.M. & Skovsmose, O. (1995). Project Work in University Mathematics Education: A Danish Experience: Aalborg University. Educational Studies in Mathematics29(2), 199–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Education, Learning and PhilosophyAalborg UniversityDenmark

Personalised recommendations