Abstract
This chapter investigates the future shared duties of special education pre-service teachers in mathematics and mathematics pre-service teachers for primary school to support students in need of support in mathematics. Within the Swedish context, teacher education training policy frames special education teachers in mathematics (STms) as the historians of schooling, in that they carry specific knowledge about how students in need of support have been treated earlier, and recognise that current practices and policies have been motivated by the history and culture of Swedish schools. This framing also suggests that they have the expertise in supporting students in need of special support and an understanding of specific disabilities or prerequisites for learning that these students can have. In contrast, mathematics teachers for primary school (MTPs) are framed as being responsible for the overall education taking place in classrooms, being willing to collaborate and learn from other professions involved in the students learning and development, and needing to pay attention to those other professions’ experiences and knowledge. In addition, the teacher education training policy indicates that MTPs are supposed to cooperate, listen, and reflect, whereas STms are to lead, be independent, analyse, and drive school development. Furthermore, the position, role, and authority of STms are not supported by the Swedish Education Act. This together with the sometimes contradictory roles identified by each of the profession’s goals in their degree ordinance could put MTPs’ and STms’ shared duties at risk, and creates a need for negotiation. A possible way forward, in order to counteract this risk, might be shared courses during teacher training. This could presumably prepare for future negotiations and collaborations of roles and responsibilities.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
PISA is an Organisation of Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) project that measures 15-year olds’ knowledge every third year.
- 2.
In Sweden, there are two forms of education before formal schooling: (1) a daycare form of preschool (for 1–5 year olds) and (2) a preschool-class that is part of the school system (as described in this chapter).
- 3.
For more information see https://svenskforfattningssamling.se/english.html
- 4.
In Sweden, there are specific schools for mentally disabled students with its own curricula.
- 5.
A school form in parallel with Swedish compulsory school, but with its own curricula, for children who are Sámi (the indigenous people of Sweden).
- 6.
In Sweden, there are special schools for students with certain exceptionalities (for example, autism). These schools follow the curricula of the Swedish compulsory school.
References
Bagger, A. (2016). Quality and equity in the era of national testing. The case of Sweden. In J. Allan & A. Artiles (Eds.), The Routledge yearbook of education 2017, assessment inequalities (pp. 68–88). London: Routledge.
Bachman, J. H., Votruba-Drzal, E., El Nokali, E. N., & Castle Heatly, M. (2015). Opportunities for learning math in elementary school: Implications for SES disparities in procedural and conceptual math skills. American Educational Research Journal, 52(5), 894–923.
Bagger, A. & Roos, H. (2015). How research conceptualises the student in need of special education in mathematics. In: O. Helenius, A. Engström, T. Meaney, P. Nilsson, E. Norén, J. Sayers, & M. Österholm (Eds.), Development of mathematics teaching design, scale, effects. Proceeding of MADIF 9. The Ninth Swedish Mathematics Education Research Seminar Umeå February 4–5, 2014. Konferensbidrag vid The Ninth Swedish Mathematics Education Research Seminar (MADIF9), Umeå, Sweden, February 4–5, 2014 (p. 27–36). Linköping: Svensk förening för MatematikDidaktisk Forskning - SMDF.
Bishop, A., Tan, H., & Barkatsas, T. N. (Eds.). (2015). Diversity in mathematics education – Towards inclusive practices (pp. 239–253). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Blömeke, S., Suhl, U., & Döhrmann, M. (2013). Assessing strengths and weaknesses of teacher knowledge in Asia, Eastern Europe, and Western countries: Differential item functioning in TEDS-M. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 11(4), 795–817.
Blömeke, S., Schmidt, W., & Hsieh, F. (2013). 2013 International Journal for Science and Mathematics Education Special Issue “International perspectives on mathematics and science teacher education for the future”. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 10(4), 997–999.
Bottge, B. A., Rueda, E., Serlin, R. C., Hung, Y.-H., & Kwon, J. M. (2007). Shrinking achievement differences with anchored math problems: Challenges and possibilities. Journal of Special Education, 41(1), 31–49.
Dreher, K. (2012). Tests, testing times and literacy teaching. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 35(3), 334–352.
Erdogan, N., & Stuessy, C. (2016). Examining the role of inclusive STEM schools in the college and career readiness of students in the United States: A multi-group analysis on the outcome of student achievement. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 15(6), 1517–1529.
Feucht, F. C., & Bendixen, L. D. (2010). Exploring similarities and differences in personal epistemologies of U.S. and German elementary school teachers. Cognition and Instruction, 28(1), 39–69.
Gal, H., & Linchevski, L. (2010). To see or not to see: Analyzing difficulties in geometry from the perspective of visual perception. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 74(2), 163–183.
Grek, S. (2009). Governing by numbers: The PISA ‘effect’ in Europe. Journal of Education Policy, 24(1), 23–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680930802412669
Griffin, C. D. N., Pape, S., Algina, J., Bae, J., Prosser, S., & League, B. M. (2018). Prime online: Exploring teacher professional development for creating inclusive elementary mathematics classrooms. Teacher Education and Special Education, 41(2), 121–139.
Göransson, K., Lindqvist, G., Klang, N., Magnusson, G., & Nilholm, C. (2015). Speciella yrken? En studie om specialpedagogers och speciallärares yrkesroll. Specialpedagogisk tidskrift – att undervisa, 3, 15–17.
Göransson, K., Lindqvist, G., & Nilholm, C. (2015). Voices of special educators in Sweden: A total-population study. Educational Research, 57(3), 287–304.
Göransson, K., Lindqvist, G., Möllås, G., Almqvist, L., & Nilholm, C. (2017). Ideas about occupational roles and inclusive practices among special needs educators and support teachers in Sweden. Educational Review, 69(4), 490–505.
Hinton, V., Flores, M., Burton, M., & Curtis, R. (2015). An investigation into pre-service special education teachers’ mathematical skills, self-efficacy, and teaching methodology. Issues in the Undergraduate Mathematics Preparation of School Teachers, 1, 1–13.
Heyd-Metzuyanim, E. (2013). The co-construction of learning difficulties in mathematics-teacher-student interactions and their role in the development of a disabled mathematical identity. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 83(3), 341–321.
Holgersson, I., & Wästerlid, C. (2018). Specialisering barns och elevers matematikutveckling. In B. Bruce (Ed.), Att vara speciallärare: Språk-, skriv- och läsutveckling respektive matematikutveckling (pp. 41–56). Malmö, Sweden: Gleerups.
Isaksson, C., & Larsson, A. (2017). Jurisdiction in school social workers’ and teachers’ work for pupils’ well-being. Education Inquiry, 8(3), 246–261.
Kim, J. H. (2017). The travelling of PISA: Fabricating the Korean global citizen and the reason of reforms. In T. A. Popkewitz, J. Diaz, & C. Kirchgasler (Eds.), A political sociology of educational knowledge: Studies of exclusions and difference (pp. 53–68). Taylor and Francis.
Lester, F. K. (2007). Culture, race, power, and mathematics education. In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning: A project of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (Vol. 2, pp. 405–433). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
Lewis, K. E., & Fisher, M. B. (2016). Taking stock of 40 years of research on mathematical learning disability: Methodological issues and future directions. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 47(4), 338–371.
Lincove, J., Osborne, C., Mills, N., & Bellows, L. (2015). Teacher preparation for profit or prestige: Analysis of a diverse market for teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 66(5), 415–434.
Luke, A. (2011). Generalizing across borders. Educational Researcher, 40(8), 367–377.
Martens, K., Knodel, P., & Windzio, M. (2014). Outcomes and actors’ reactions on internationalization in education policy: A theoretical approach. In K. Martens, P. Knodel, & M. Windzio (Eds.), Internationalization of education policy: A new constellation of statehood in education? (pp. 1–34). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Méndez, L., Lacasa, P., & Matusov, E. (2008). Transcending the zone of learning disability: Learning in contexts for everyday life. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 23(1), 63–73.
Moscardini, L. (2010). “I like it instead of maths”: How pupils with moderate learning difficulties in Scottish primary special schools intuitively solved mathematical word problems. British Journal of Special Education, 37(3), 130–138.
Moscardini, L. (2015). Primary special school teachers’ knowledge and beliefs about supporting learning in numeracy. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 15(1), 37–47.
Moss, P. A., Pullin, D. C., Gee, J. P., Haertel, E. H., & Young, L. J. (2008). Assessment, equity, and opportunity to learn. Cambridge University Press.
OECD. (2017). PISA 2015 assessment and analytical framework: Science, reading, mathematics, financial literacy and collaborative problem solving. Ed. by OECD Publishing. Revised edition. Paris. Url: https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264281820-en
Pettersson, D. (2008). Internationell kunskapsbedömning som inslag i nationell styrning av skolan (Doctoral thesis). Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Piasta, S. B., Logan, J. A. R., Pelatti, C. Y., Capps, J. L., & Petrill, S. A. (2015). Professional development for early childhood educators: Efforts to improve math and science learning opportunities in early childhood classrooms. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(2), 407–422.
Radford, J., Bosanquet, P., Webster, R., & Blatchford, P. (2015). Scaffolding learning for independence: Clarifying teacher and teaching assistant roles for children with special educational needs. Learning and Instruction, 36, 1–10.
Roos, H. (2015). Inclusion in mathematics in primary school: What can it be? (Licentiate thesis). Växjö: Linnaeus University.
Roos, H., & Gadler, U. (2018). Kompetensens betydelse i det didaktiska mötet – en modell för analys av möjligheter att erbjuda varje elev likvärdig utbildning enligt skolans uppdrag. Pedagogisk forskning i Sverige, 23(3–4), 290–307.
Rönnberg, L. (2011). Exploring the intersection of marketisation and central state control through Swedish national school inspection. Education Inquiry, 2(4), 695–713.
Schleicher, A. (Ed.). (2012). Preparing teachers and developing school leaders for the 21st century: Lessons from around the world. Paris: OECD Publishing. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/site/eduistp2012/49850576.pdf.
Secher Schmidt, M. C. (2016). Dyscalculia ≠ maths difficulties: An analysis of conflicting positions at a time that calls for inclusive practices. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 31(3), 407–421.
SFS (1993:100). Högskoleförordningen. [Higher Education Ordinance]. Ministry of Education and Research, Sweden.
SFS (2010:800). Skollag. [Education Act]. Department of Education, Sweden.
Shade, A. R., & Stewart, R. (2001). General education and special education preservice teachers’ attitudes toward inclusion. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 46(1), 37–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/10459880109603342
Sherer, P., Beswick, K., DeBlois, L., Healey, L., & Opitz, E. M. (2016). Assistance of students with mathematical learning difficulties: How can research support practice? ZDM: The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 48(5), 639–649.
Stobart, G. (2009). Determining validity in national curriculum assessments. Educational Research, 51(2), 161–179.
Sundqvist, C., & Ström, K. (2015). Special education teachers as consultants: Perspectives of finnish teachers. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 25(4), 1–26.
United Nations. (1989). Convention on the rights of the child. Retrieved 18th May 2019 from https://unicef.se/barnkonventionen/las-texten#full
Van Ingen, S., Eskelson, S. L., & Allsopp, D. (2016). Evidence of the need to prepare prospective teachers to engage in mathematics consultations. Mathematics Teacher Education and Development, 18(2), 73–91.
Wang, T. Y., & Tang, S. J. (2013). Profiles of opportunities to learn for TEDS-M future secondary mathematics teachers. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 11(4), 847–877.
Weiss, M. P., Pellegrino, A., Regan, K., & Mann, L. (2015). Beyond the blind date collaborative course development and co-teaching by teacher educators. Teacher Education and Special Education, 38(2), 88–104.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice. Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Wrigley, T. (2010). The testing regime of childhood: Up against the wall. In D. Kassem, L. Murphy, & E. Taylor (Eds.), Key issues in childhood and youth studies: Critical issues (pp. 136–148). New York: Routledge.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Bagger, A., Roos, H. (2020). The Shared Duty of Special Educational Support in Mathematics: Borders and Spaces in Degree Ordinances for Pre-service Teachers. In: Radakovic, N., Jao, L. (eds) Borders in Mathematics Pre-Service Teacher Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44292-7_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44292-7_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-44291-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-44292-7
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)