Abstract
This chapter uses an equity lens to examine recently published national policy reports that address the improvement of mathematics instruction in the United States. We frame equity along two dimensions: the kinds of mathematical knowledge to which students have access and the opportunities for students to participate in classroom environments that support significant mathematics learning. A central finding of the analysis is that, across the policy documents, mathematics is narrowly construed and primary emphasis is placed on procedural knowledge and the accumulation of facts. Moreover, the recommendations reflect a general tendency to privilege teacher content knowledge over other forms of knowledge that would enable teachers to teach all students effectively. We concur that deep subject matter knowledge is essential in order for teachers to teach mathematics well; however, we contend that it is not sufficient for an equity agenda, as mathematics knowledge alone does not enable teachers to facilitate students’ learning.
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
Anyon, J. (1981). Social class and social knowledge. Curriculum Inquiry, 11(1), 3–42.
Ball, D. L. (2001). Teaching with respect to mathematics and students. In T. Wood, B. S. Nelson, & J. Warfield (Eds.), Beyond classical pedagogy: Teaching elementary school mathematics (pp. 11–22). Mahwah: Erlbaum.
Boaler, J. (2002). Learning from teaching: Exploring the relationship between reform curriculum and equity. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 33(4), 239–258.
Boaler, J., & Staples, M. (2008). Creating mathematical futures through an equitable teaching approach: The case of railside school. Teachers College Record, 110(3), 608–645.
Borko, H., & Whitcomb, J. A. (2008). Teachers, teaching, and teacher education: Comments on the National Mathematics Advisory Panel’s report. Educational Researcher, 37(9), 565–572.
Carnegie Corporation of New York—Institute for Advanced Studies Commission on Mathematics and Science Education. (2009). The opportunity equation: Transforming mathematics and science education for citizenship and the global economy. New York: Carnegie Corporation of New York—Institute for Advanced Studies Commission on Mathematics and Science Education. http://www.opportunityequation.org/TheOpportunityEquation.pdf. Accessed 16 June 2009.
Carpenter, T. P., & Lehrer, R. (1999). Teaching and learning mathematics with understanding. In E. Fennema & T. A. Romberg (Eds.), Mathematics classrooms that promote understanding (pp. 19–32). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Peterson, P. L., Chiang, C.-P., & Loef, M. (1989). Using knowledge of children’s mathematics thinking in classroom teaching: An experimental study. American Educational Research Journal, 26(4), 499–531.
Delpit, L. (1988). The silenced dialogue: Power and pedagogy in educating other people’s children. Harvard Educational Review, 58(3), 280–298.
Dowling, P. (1998). The sociology of mathematics education: Mathematical myths, pedagogical texts. London: Falmer.
Franke, M. L., Kazemi, E., & Battey, D. (2007). Mathematics teaching and classroom practice. In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 225–256). Greenwich: Information Age Publishing.
Gutierrez, R. (2002). Enabling the practice of mathematics teachers in context: Toward a new equity research agenda. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 4(2 & 3), 145–187.
Gutstein, E. (2006). Reading and writing the world with mathematics: Toward a pedagogy of social justice. New York: Taylor & Francis.
Haberman, M. (1991). Pedagogy of poverty versus good teaching. Phi Delta Kappan, 73(4), 290–294.
Henningsen, M., & Stein, M. K. (1997). Mathematical tasks and student cognition: Classroom-based factors that support and inhibit high-level mathematical thinking and reasoning. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28, 528–549.
Hiebert, J., & Grouws, D. A. (2007). The effects of classroom mathematics teaching on students’ learning. In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 371–404). Greenwich: Information Age Publishing.
Hiebert, J., Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Fuson, K. C., Wearne, D., Murray, H., Olivier, A., & Human, P. (1997). Making sense: Teaching and learning math with understanding. Portsmouth: Heinemann.
Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J., & Findell, B. (Eds.). (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. Washington: National Academy Press.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1997). It doesn’t add up: African American students’ mathematics achievement. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28(6), 697–708.
Lappan, G., & Wanko, J. J. (2003). The changing roles and priorities of the federal government in mathematics education in the United States. In G. M. Stanic & J. Kilpatrick (Eds.), A history of school mathematics (Vol. 2, pp. 897–930). Athens: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Lerman, S. (2000). The social turn in mathematics education research. In J. Boaler (Ed.), Multiple perspectives on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 19–44). Westport: Ablex.
Lubienski, S. T. (2000). Problem solving as a means toward mathematics for all: An exploratory look through a class lens. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31(4): 454–482.
Moses, R. P., & Cobb, C. E. (2001). Radical equations: Mathematics literacy and civil rights. Boston: Beacon.
National Council on Teacher Quality. (2008, June). No common denominator: The preparation of elementary teachers in mathematics in America’s education schools. http://www.nctq.org/p/publications/docs/nctq_ttmath_fullreport_20090603062928.pdf. Accessed 1 July 2008.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards. Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards of school mathematics. Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008, March). Foundations for success: The final report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. Washington: U.S. Department of Education. http://www.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/mathpanel/report/final-report.pdf. Accessed 1 May 2008.
National Research Council. (1989). Everybody counts: A report to the nation on the future of mathematics education. Washington: National Research Council.
Schoenfeld, A. (1998). Toward a theory of teaching-in-context. Issues in education, 4(1), 1–95.
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.
Skemp, R. R. (1978, November). Relational understanding and instrumental understanding. Arithmetic Teacher, 3, 9–15.
Spillane, J. P. (2008). Policy, politics, and the National Mathematics Advisory Panel Report: Topology, functions, and limits. Educational Researcher, 37(9), 638–644.
Stein, M. K., & Lane, S. (1996). Instructional tasks and the development of student capacity to think and reason: An analysis of the relationship between teaching and learning in a reform mathematics project. Educational Research and Evaluation, 2(1), 50–80.
Stein, M. K., Grover, B. W., & Henningsen, M. (1996). Building student capacity for mathematical thinking and reasoning: An analysis of mathematical tasks used in reform classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 33(2), 455–488.
Zevenbergen, R. (2000). “Cracking the code” of mathematics classrooms: School success as a function of linguistic, social, and cultural background. In J. Boaler (Ed.), Multiple perspectives on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 201–224). Westport: Ablex.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Bose, E., Remillard, J. (2010). Looking for Equity in Policy Recommendations for Instructional Quality. In: Atweh, B., Graven, M., Secada, W., Valero, P. (eds) Mapping Equity and Quality in Mathematics Education. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9803-0_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9803-0_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-9802-3
Online ISBN: 978-90-481-9803-0
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)