Abstract
Much has been written about the 2008 National Mathematics Advisory Panel Report released in the United States. Although this report addresses mathematics education in the US, one cannot ignore its ramifications for research and policy development in other nations. Of particular concern is the Panel’s adoption of a narrow and strict definition of scientific rigour, and the almost exclusive endorsement of quantitative methods at the expense of qualitative research.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Boaler, J. (2008). When politics took the place of inquiry: A response to the National Mathematics Advisory Panel’s Review of Instructional practices. Educational Researcher, 37(9), 588–594.
Kelly, A. E. (2008). Reflections on the National Mathematics Advisory Panel Final Report. Educational Researcher, 37(9), 561–564.
National Mathematics Advisory Panel (2008). Foundations for Success: The Final Report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
English, L.D. (2010). Preface to Part V. In: Sriraman, B., English, L. (eds) Theories of Mathematics Education. Advances in Mathematics Education. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-00742-2_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-00742-2_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-00741-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-00742-2
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)