Abstract
This chapter gives an overview of the current state of the art related to frameworks and principles for task design so as to provide a better understanding of the design process and the various interfaces between teaching, researching, and designing. In so doing, it aims at developing new insights and identifying areas related to task design that are in need of further study. The chapter consists of three main sections. The first main section begins with a historical overview, followed by a conceptualization of current frameworks for task design in mathematics education and a description of the characteristics of the design principles offered by these frames. The second main section presents a set of cases that illustrate the relations between frameworks for task design and the nature of the tasks that are designed within a given framework. Because theoretical frameworks and principles do not account for all aspects of the process of task design, the third main section addresses additional factors that influence task design, as well as the diversity of design approaches across various professional communities in mathematics education. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the progress made in the area of task design within mathematics education over the past several decades and includes some overall recommendations with respect to frameworks and principles for task design and for future design-related research.
Keywords
The natural sciences are concerned with how things are.
Design, on the other hand, is concerned with how things might be.
(Herbert. A. Simon, 1969)
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Notes
References
Ainley, J., & Pratt, D. (2005). The significance of task design in mathematics education: Examples from proportional reasoning. In H. L. Chick & J. L. Vincent (Eds.), Proceedings of the 29th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, pp. 103–108). Melbourne: PME.
Aizikovitsh-Udi, E., Clarke, D., & Kuntze, S. (2013). Hybrid tasks: Promoting statistical thinking and critical thinking through the same mathematical activities. In C. Margolinas (Ed.), Task design in mathematics education (Proceedings of ICMI Study 22, pp. 451–460). Available from hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00834054
Anderson, J. R. (1995/2000). Learning and memory. New York: Wiley.
Arcavi, A., Kessel, C., Meira, L., & Smith, J. P. (1998). Teaching mathematical problem solving: An analysis of an emergent classroom community. Research in Collegiate Mathematics Education III, 7, 1–70.
Artigue, M. (1992). Didactical engineering. In R. Douady & A. Mercier (Eds.), Recherches en Didactique des Mathématiques, Selected papers (pp. 41–70). Grenoble: La Pensée Sauvage.
Artigue, M. (2009). Didactical design in mathematics education. In C. Winslow (Ed.), Nordic research in mathematics education: Proceedings from NORMA08 in Copenhagen (pp. 7–16). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Artigue, M., Cerulli, M., Haspekian, M., & Maracci, M. (2009). Connecting and integrating theoretical frames: The TELMA contribution. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 14, 217–240.
Artigue, M., & Mariotti, M. A. (2014). Networking theoretical frames: The ReMath enterprise. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 85, 329–355.
Arzarello, F., & Sabena, C. (2011). Semiotic and theoretic control in argumentation and proof activities. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 77, 189–206. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-010-9280-3.
Barquero, B., & Bosch, M. (2015). Didactic engineering as a research methodology: From fundamental situations to study and research paths. In A. Watson & M. Ohtani (Eds.), Task design in mathematics education: An ICMI Study 22. New York: Springer.
Bartolini Bussi, M. (1991). Social interaction and mathematical knowledge. In F. Furinghetti (Ed.), Proceedings of the 15th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. I, pp. 1–16). Assisi: PME.
Bell, A. W. (1979). Research on teaching methods in secondary mathematics. In D. Tall (Ed.), Proceedings of the Third Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 4–12). Warwick: PME.
Bell, A. (1993a). Guest editorial. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 24, 1–4.
Bell, A. (1993b). Principles for the design of teaching. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 24, 5–34.
Bishop, A. J. (1979). Visual abilities and mathematics learning. In D. Tall (Ed.), Proceedings of the Third Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 17–28). Warwick: PME.
Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2003). Assessment for learning: Putting it into practice. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(2), 139–148. Also available from: http://weaeducation.typepad.co.uk/files/blackbox-1.pdf
Boer, W., et al. (Eds.). (2004). Moderne wiskunde (edite 8), vwo B1 deel 2. Groningen: Wolters-Noordhoff.
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (1999). How people learn. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Brousseau, G. (1997). Theory of didactical situations in mathematics (N. Balacheff, M. Cooper, R. Sutherland, & V. Warfield, Eds. & Trans.). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141–178.
Burkhardt, H. (2014). Curriculum design and systemic change. In Y. Li & G. Lappen (Eds.), Mathematics curriculum in school education (pp. 13–34). New York: Springer.
Burkhardt, H., & Swan, M. (2013). Task design for systemic improvement: principles and frameworks. In C. Margolinas (Ed.), Task design in mathematics education (Proceedings of ICMI Study 22, pp. 431–440). Available from hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00834054
Cheng, E. C., & Lo, M. L. (2013). Learning study: Its origins, operationalisation, and implications (OECD Education Working Papers, No. 94). Paris: OECD Publishing. Available from doi:https://doi.org/10.1787/5k3wjp0s959p-en
Chevallard, Y. (1999). L’analyse des pratiques enseignantes en théorie anthropologique du didactique. Recherches en Didactique des Mathématiques, 19, 221–266.
Chevallard, Y. (2012). Teaching mathematics in tomorrow’s society: A case for an oncoming counterparadigm. Plenary at ICME 12. Retrieved from http://www.icme12.org/upload/submission/1985_F.pdf
Clark, K., & Holquist, M. (1986). Mikhail Bakhtin. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Clements, D. H., & Battista, M. T. (1992). Geometry and spatial reasoning. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 420–464). New York: Macmillan.
Cobb, P. (2007). Putting philosophy to work: Coping with multiple theoretical perspectives. In F. K. Lester Jr. (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 3–67). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 9–13.
Cobb, P., & Gravemeijer, K. (2008). Experimenting to support and understand learning processes. In A. E. Kelly, R. A. Lesh, & J. Y. Baek (Eds.), Handbook of design research methods in education (pp. 68–95). London: Routledge.
Cobb, P., & Steffe, L. P. (1983). The constructivist researcher as teacher and model builder. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 14, 83–95.
Cobb, P., & Yackel, E. (1996). Constructivist, emergent, and sociocultural perspectives in the context of developmental research. Educational Psychologist, 31, 175–190.
Collins, A. (1992). Toward a design science of education. In E. Scanlon & T. O’Shea (Eds.), New directions in educational technology (pp. 15–22). Berlin: Springer.
Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the craft of reading, writing, and mathematics. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Collins, A., Joseph, D., & Bielaczyc, K. (2004). Design research: Theoretical and methodological issues. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13, 15–42.
Collopy, F. (2009). Lessons learned – Why the failure of systems thinking should inform the future of design thinking. Fast Company blog. http://www.fastcompany.com/1291598/lessons-learned-why-failure-systems-thinking-should-inform-future-design-thinking
Corey, D. L., Peterson, B. E., Lewis, B. M., & Bukarau, J. (2010). Are there any places that students use their heads? Principles of high-quality Japanese mathematics instruction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 41, 438–478.
Cross, N. (2001). Designerly ways of knowing: Design discipline versus design science. Design Issues, 17(3), 49–55.
de Lange, J. (1979). Exponenten en logaritmen. Utrecht: I.O.W.O.
de Lange, J. (1987). Mathematics, insight, and meaning: Teaching, learning and testing of mathematics for the life and social sciences. Utrecht: OW & OC.
de Lange, J. (2012). Dichotomy in design: And other problems from the swamp. Plenary address at ISDDE. Utrecht: Freudenthal Institute.
de Lange, J. (2013). There is, probably, no need for this presentation. Plenary presentation at the ICMI Study-22 Conference, The University of Oxford. http://www.mathunion.org/icmi/digital-library/icmi-study-conferences/icmi-study-22-conference/
de Lange, J., & Kindt, M. (1984). Groei, (Een produktie ten behoove van de experiment in het kader van de Herverkaveling Eindexamenprogramma’s Wiskunde I en II VWO, 1e herziene versie). Utrecht: OW & OC.
Ding, L., Jones, K., & Pepin, B. (2013). Task design in a school-based professional development programme. In C. Margolinas (Ed.), Task design in mathematics education (Proceedings of ICMI Study 22, pp. 441–450). Available from hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00834054
Ding, L., Jones, K., Pepin, B., & Sikko, S. A. (2014). How a primary mathematics teacher in Shanghai improved her lessons: A case study of ‘angle measurement’. In S. Pope (Ed.), Proceedings of the 8th British Congress of Mathematics Education (pp. 113–120). Nottingham: BCME.
Doig, B., Groves, S., & Fujii, T. (2011). The critical role of task development in lesson study. In L. C. Hart, A. Alston, & A. Murata (Eds.), Lesson study research and practice in mathematics education. Learning together (pp. 181–199). New York: Springer.
Doorman, L. M., & Gravemeijer, K. P. E. (2009). Emergent modeling: Discrete graphs to support the understanding of change and velocity. ZDM: The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 41(1), 199–211.
Duval, R. (2006). Les conditions cognitives de l’apprentissage de la géométrie: développement de la visualisation, différenciation des raisonnements et coordination de leur fonctionnement [Cognitive conditions of learning geometry: development of visualization, differentiation of reasoning and coordination of its functioning]. Annales de Didactique et de Sciences Cognitives, 10, 5–53.
Ernest, P. (1991). Philosophy of mathematics education. London: Falmer Press.
Fernandez, C., & Yoshida, M. (2004). Lesson study: A Japanese approach to improving mathematics teaching and learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Filloy, E., & Rojano, T. (1989). Solving equations: The transition from arithmetic to algebra. For the Learning of Mathematics, 9(2), 19–25.
Fisk, A. D., & Gallini, J. K. (1989). Training consistent components of tasks: Developing an instructional system based on automatic-controlled processing principles. Human Factors, 31, 453–463.
Freudenthal, H. (1973). Mathematics as an educational task. Dordrecht: Reidel.
Freudenthal, H. (1978). Weeding and sowing. Dordrecht: Reidel.
Freudenthal, H. (1979). How does reflective thinking develop? In D. Tall (Ed.), Proceedings of the Third Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 92–107). Warwick: PME.
Freudenthal, H. (1983). Didactical phenomenology of mathematical structures. Dordrecht: Reidel.
Freudenthal, H. (1991). Revisiting mathematics education. China lectures. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Fujii, T. (2013, July). The critical role of task design in lesson study. Plenary paper presented at the ICMI Study 22 Conference on Task Design in Mathematics Education, Oxford. http://www.mathunion.org/icmi/digital-library/icmi-study-conferences/icmi-study-22-conference/
Gagné, R. M. (1965). The conditions of learning. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
García, F. J., & Ruiz-Higueras, L. (2013). Task design within the Anthropological Theory of the Didactics: Study and research courses for pre-school. In C. Margolinas (Ed.), Task design in mathematics education (Proceedings of ICMI Study 22, pp. 421–430). Available from hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00834054
Glaser, R. (1976). Components of a psychology of instruction: Toward a science of design. Review of Educational Research, 46(1), 1–24.
Goddijn, A. (2008). Polygons, triangles and capes: Designing a one-day team task for senior high school. In ICME-11 – Topic Study Group 34: Research and development in task design and analysis. Available from http://tsg.icme11.org/tsg/show/35
Goldenberg, E. P. (2008). Task Design: How? In ICME-11 – Topic Study Group 34: Research and development in task design and analysis. Available from http://tsg.icme11.org/tsg/show/35
Goris, T. (2006). Math B day, Olympiad and a few words of Japanese. Nieuwe Wiskurant, 26(2), 4–5.
Gravemeijer, K. (1994). Educational development and developmental research. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 25, 443–471.
Gravemeijer, K. (1998). Developmental research as a research method. In J. Kilpatrick & A. Sierpinska (Eds.), What is research in mathematics education and what are its results? (Vol. 2, pp. 277–295). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Gravemeijer, K., & Cobb, P. (2006). Design research from a learning design perspective. In J. van den Akker, K. Gravemeijer, S. McKenney, & N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational design research (pp. 45–85). Available from http://www.fisme.science.uu.nl/publicaties/literatuur/EducationalDesignResearch.pdf
Gravemeijer, K., & Cobb, P. (2013). Design research from the learning design perspective. In T. Plomp & N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational design research (pp. 72–113). London: Routledge.
Gravemeijer, K., & Stephan, M. (2002). Emergent models as an instructional design heuristic. In K. P. E. Gravemeijer, R. Lehrer, B. V. Oers, & L. Verschaffel (Eds.), Symbolizing, modeling and tool use in mathematics education (pp. 145–169). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Gravemeijer, K., van Galen, F., & Keijzer, R. (2005). Designing instruction on proportional reasoning with average speed. In H. L. Chick & J. L. Vincent (Eds.), Proceedings of the 29th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, pp. 103–108). Melbourne: PME.
Hadas, N., Hershkowitz, R., & Schwarz, B. B. (2001). The role of surprise and uncertainty in promoting the need to prove in computerized environment. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 44, 127–150.
Hart, L., Alston, A., & Murata, A. (Eds.). (2011). Lesson study research and practice in mathematics education: Learning together. New York: Springer.
Hershkowitz, R. (1990). Psychological aspects of geometry learning – Research and practice. In P. Nesher & J. Kilpatrick (Eds.), Mathematics and cognition (pp. 70–95). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hilton, P. (1976). Education in mathematics and science today: The spread of false dichotomies. In H. Athen & H. Kunle (Eds.), Proceedings of the Third International Congress on Mathematical Education (pp. 75–97). Karlsruhe, FRG: University of Karlsruhe.
Huang, R., & Bao, J. (2006). Towards a model for teacher professional development in China: Introducing Keli. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 9, 279–298.
Jacobs, J. K., & Morita, E. (2002). Japanese and American teachers’ evaluations of videotaped mathematics lessons. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 33, 154–175.
Janvier, C. (1979). The use of situations for the development of mathematical concepts. In D. Tall (Ed.), Proceedings of the Third Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 135–143). Warwick: PME.
Johnson, D. C. (1980). The research process. In R. J. Shumway (Ed.), Research in mathematics education (pp. 29–46). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Kali, Y. (2008). The design principles database as a means for promoting design-based research. In A. E. Kelly, R. A. Lesh, & J. Y. Baek (Eds.), Handbook of design research methods in education (pp. 423–438). London: Routledge.
Kalmykova, Z. I. (1966). Methods of scientific research in the psychology of instruction. Soviet Education, 8(6), 13–23.
Kelly, A. E., Lesh, R. A., & Baek, J. Y. (Eds.). (2008). Handbook of design research methods in education. London: Routledge.
Kieran, C., & Drijvers, P. (2006). The co-emergence of machine techniques, paper-and-pencil techniques, and theoretical reflection: A study of CAS use in secondary school algebra. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 11, 205–263.
Kieran, C., Krainer, K., & Shaughnessy, J. M. (2013). Linking research to practice: Teachers as key stakeholders in mathematics education research. In M. A. Clements, A. Bishop, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick, & F. Leung (Eds.), Third international handbook of mathematics education (pp. 361–392). New York: Springer.
Kilpatrick, J. (1992). A history of research in mathematics education. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 3–38). New York: Macmillan.
Koedinger, K. R. (2002). Toward evidence for instructional design principles: Examples from Cognitive Tutor Math 6. In D. S. Mewborn, et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 24th Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, pp. 1–20). Columbus, OH: ERIC Clearinghouse for Science, Mathematics, and Environmental Education.
Koichu, B. (2013). Variation theory as a research tool for identifying learning in the design of tasks. Plenary panel at the ICMI Study-22 Conference, The University of Oxford. http://www.mathunion.org/icmi/digital-library/icmi-study-conferences/icmi-study-22-conference/
Koichu, B., Zaslavsky, O., & Dolev, L. (2013). Effects of variations in task design using different representations of mathematical objects on learning: A case of a sorting task. In C. Margolinas (Ed.), Task design in mathematics education (Proceedings of ICMI Study 22, pp. 461–470). Available from: hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00834054
Komatsu, K., & Tsujiyama, Y. (2013). Principles of task design to foster proofs and refutations in mathematical learning: Proof problem with diagram. In C. Margolinas (Ed.), Task design in mathematics education (Proceedings of ICMI Study 22, pp. 471–480). Available from hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00834054
Komatsu, K., Tsujiyama, Y., Sakamaki, A., & Koike, N. (2014). Proof problems with diagrams: An opportunity for experiencing proofs and refutations. For the Learning of Mathematics, 34(1), 36–42.
Krainer, K. (2011). Teachers as stakeholders in mathematics education research. In B. Ubuz (Ed.), Proceedings of the 35th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, pp. 47–62). Ankara: PME.
Lakatos, I. (1976). Proofs and refutations: The logic of mathematical discovery. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Leikin, R. (2013). On the relationships between mathematical creativity, excellence and giftedness. In S. Oesterle & D. Allen (Eds.), Proceedings of 2013 Annual Meeting of the Canadian Mathematics Education Study Group/Groupe Canadien d’Étude en Didactique des Mathématiques (pp. 3–17). Burnaby, BC: CMESG/GCEDM.
Lerman, S. (1996). Intersubjectivity in mathematics learning: A challenge to the radical constructivist paradigm? Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27, 133–150.
Lerman, S., Xu, G., & Tsatsaroni, A. (2002). Developing theories of mathematics education research: The ESM story. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 51, 23–40.
Lesh, R. A. (2002). Research design in mathematics education: Focusing on design experiments. In L. English (Ed.), Handbook of international research in mathematics education (pp. 27–50). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Lesh, R., Hoover, M., Hole, B., Kelly, A., & Post, T. (2000). Principles for developing thought-revealing activities for students and teachers. In A. E. Kelly & R. A. Lesh (Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 591–645). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Levav-Waynberg, A., & Leikin, R. (2009). Multiple solutions for a problem: A tool for evaluation of mathematical thinking in geometry. In V. Durand-Guerrier, S. Soury-Lavergne, & F. Arzarello (Eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 776–785). Lyon, FR: CERME6.
Lewis, C. (2002). Lesson study: A handbook of teacher-led instructional change. Philadelphia, PA: Research for Better Schools.
Limón, M. (2001). On the cognitive conflict as an instructional strategy for conceptual change. Learning & Instruction, 11, 357–380. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(00)00037-2.
Lin, F.-L., Yang, K.-L., Lee, K.-H., Tabach, M., & Stylianides, G. (2012). Principles of task design for conjecturing and proving. In G. Hanna & M. de Villiers (Eds.), Proof and proving in mathematics education (pp. 305–325). New York: Springer.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Margolinas, C. (Ed.). (2013). Task design in mathematics education (Proceedings of ICMI Study 22). Available from hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00834054
Martinez, M. V., & Castro Superfine, A. (2012). Integrating algebra and proof in high school: Students’ work with multiple variables and a single parameter in a proof context. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 14, 120–148.
Marton, F., Runesson, U., & Tsui, B. M. (2004). The space of learning. In F. Marton & A. B. Tsui (Eds.), Classroom discourse and the space of learning (pp. 3–40). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Mathematics Assessment Resource Service (MARS). (2012). Estimating: Counting trees (p. T-2). Nottingham: Shell Centre. Available from http://map.mathshell.org
McKenney, S., & Reeves, T. (2012). Conducting educational design research. London: Routledge.
Menchinskaya, N. A. (1969). Fifty years of Soviet instructional psychology. In J. Kilpatrick & I. Wirszup (Eds.), Soviet studies in the psychology of learning and teaching mathematics (Vol. 1, pp. 5–27). Stanford, CA: School Mathematics Study Group.
Morselli, F. (2013). The “Language and argumentation” project: researchers and teachers collaborating in task design. In C. Margolinas (Ed.), Task design in mathematics education (Proceedings of ICMI Study 22, pp. 481–490). Available from hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00834054
Movshovitz-Hadar, N., & Edri, Y. (2013). Enabling education for values with mathematics teaching. In C. Margolinas (Ed.), Task design in mathematics education (Proceedings of ICMI Study 22, pp. 377–388). Available from hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00834054
Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Ni, Y., & Zhou, Y.-D. (2005). Teaching and learning fraction and rational numbers: The origins and implications of whole number bias. Educational Psychologist, 40(1), 27–52.
Ohtani, M. (2011). Teachers’ learning and lesson study: Content, community, and context. In B. Ubuz (Ed.), Proceedings of the 35th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, pp. 63–66). Ankara: PME.
Okamoto, K., Koseki, K., Morisugi, K., Sasaki, T., et al. (2012). Mathematics for the future. Osaka: Keirinkan (in Japanese).
Piaget, J. (1971). Genetic epistemology. New York: W.W. Norton.
Pirie, S., & Kieren, T. E. (1994). Growth in mathematical understanding: How can we characterize it and how can we represent it? Educational Studies in Mathematics, 26, 61–86.
Pólya, G. (1945/1957). How to solve it: A new aspect of mathematical method. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Ponte, J. P., Mata-Pereira, J., Henriques, A. C., & Quaresma, M. (2013). Designing and using exploratory tasks. In C. Margolinas (Ed.), Task design in mathematics education (Proceedings of ICMI Study 22, pp. 491–500). Available from hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00834054
Prediger, S., Bikner-Ahsbahs, A., & Arzarello, F. (2008). Networking strategies and methods for connecting theoretical approaches: First steps towards a conceptual framework. ZDM: The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 40, 165–178.
Prusak, N., Hershkowitz, R., & Schwarz, B. B. (2013). Conceptual learning in a principled design problem solving environment. Research in Mathematics Education. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/14794802.2013.836379
Radford, L. (2003). Gestures, speech, and the sprouting of signs: A semiotic-cultural approach to students’ types of generalization. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 5(1), 37–70.
Runesson, U. (2005). Beyond discourse and interaction. Variation: A critical aspect for teaching and learning mathematics. The Cambridge Journal of Education, 35(1), 69–87.
Ruthven, K., Laborde, C., Leach, J., & Tiberghien, A. (2009). Design tools in didactical research: Instrumenting the epistemological and the cognitive aspects of the design of teaching sequences. Educational Researcher, 38, 329–342.
Sawada, T., & Sakai, Y. (Eds.). (2013). Elementary mathematics 2 (Part 1). Tokyo: Kyoiku Shuppan (in Japanese).
Schein, E. (1972). Professional education: Some new directions. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Schoenfeld, A. H. (1985). Mathematical problem solving. New York: Academic.
Schoenfeld, A. H. (1994). Reflections on doing and teaching mathematics. In A. H. Schoenfeld (Ed.), Mathematical thinking and problem solving (pp. 53–69). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Schoenfeld, A. H. (1999). Looking toward the 21st century: Challenge of educational theory and practice. Educational Researcher, 28(7), 4–14.
Schoenfeld, A. H. (2009). Bridging the cultures of educational research and design. Educational Designer, 1(2). http://www.educationaldesigner.org/ed/volume1/issue2/article5/pdf/ed_1_2_schoenfeld_09.pdf
Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. London: Basic Books.
Schunn, C. (2008). Engineering educational design. Educational Designer, 1(1).http://www.educationaldesigner.org/ed/volume1/issue1/article2/index.htm
Sfard, A. (1991). On the dual nature of mathematical conceptions: Reflections on processes and objects as different sides of the same coin. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 22, 1–36.
Sfard, A. (2008). Thinking as communicating. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Shimizu, S. (1981). Characteristics of “problem” in mathematics education (II). Epsilon: Bulletin of Department of Mathematics Education, Aichi University of Education, 23, 29–43 (in Japanese).
Sierpinska, A. (2003). Research in mathematics education: Through a keyhole. In E. Simmt & B. Davis (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2003 Annual Meeting of the Canadian Mathematics Education Study Group/Groupe Canadien d’Étude en Didactique des Mathématiques (pp. 11–35). Edmonton, AB: CMESG/GCEDM.
Simon, H. A. (1969). The sciences of the artificial. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Simon, M. (2013). Developing theory for design of mathematical task sequences: Conceptual learning as abstraction. In C. Margolinas (Ed.), Task design in mathematics education (Proceedings of ICMI Study 22, pp. 501–508). Available from hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00834054
Simon, M. A., Saldanha, L., McClintock, E., Karagoz Akar, G., Watanabe, T., & Ozgur Zembat, I. (2010). A developing approach to studying students’ learning through their mathematical activity. Cognition and Instruction, 28, 70–112.
Skemp, R. R. (1979). Goals of learning and qualities of understanding. In D. Tall (Ed.), Proceedings of the Third Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 250–261). Warwick: PME.
Steffe, L. P., & Kieren, T. E. (1994). Radical constructivism and mathematics education. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 25, 711–733.
Stephan, M., & Akyuz, D. (2012). A proposed instructional theory for integer addition and subtraction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 43, 428–464.
Stephan, M., & Akyuz, D. (2013). An instructional design collaborative in one middle school. In C. Margolinas (Ed.), Task design in mathematics education (Proceedings of ICMI Study 22, pp. 509–518). Available from hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00834054
Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (1999). The teaching gap. New York: Free Press.
Stokes, D. E. (1997). Pasteur’s quadrant: Basic science and technical innovation. Washington, DC: Brookings.
Streefland, L. (1990). Fractions in realistic mathematics education, a paradigm of developmental research. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Streefland, L. (1993). The design of a mathematics course. A theoretical reflection. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 25(1–2), 109–135.
Swan, M. (2008). The design of multiple representation tasks to foster conceptual development. In ICME-11 – Topic Study Group 34: Research and development in task design and analysis. Available from http://tsg.icme11.org/tsg/show/35
Swan, M., & Burkhardt, H. (2012). Designing assessment of performance in mathematics. Educational Designer, 2(5). Available from http://www.educationaldesigner.org/ed/volume2/issue5/article19/
Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. G. W. C. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10, 251–296.
Tejima, K. (1987). How many children in a line?: Task on ordinal numbers (video). Tokyo: Tosho Bunka Shya (in Japanese).
Treffers, A. (1987). Three dimensions: A model of goal and theory description in mathematics instruction – The Wiskobas project. Dordrecht: Reidel.
Vamvakoussi, X., & Vosniadou, S. (2012). Bridging the gap between the dense and the discrete. The number line and the “rubber line” bridging analogy. Mathematical Thinking & Learning, 14(4), 265–284.
Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M. (2003). The didactical use of models in realistic mathematics education: An example from a longitudinal trajectory on percentage. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 54(1), 9–35.
Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M., & Drijvers, P. (2013). Realistic mathematics education. In S. Lerman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of mathematics education (pp. 521–525). New York: Springer.
Van Dooren, W., Vamvakoussi, X., & Verschaffel, L. (2013). Mind the gap – Task design principles to achieve conceptual change in rational number understanding. In C. Margolinas (Ed.), Task design in mathematics education (Proceedings of ICMI Study 22, pp. 519–527). Available from: hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00834054
van Merriënboer, J. J. G., Clark, R. E., & de Croock, M. B. M. (2002). Blueprints for complex learning: The 4C/ID-model. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(2), 39–64.
van Nes, F. T., & Doorman, L. M. (2011). Fostering young children’s spatial structuring ability. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 6(1), 27–39.
von Glasersfeld, E. (1987). Learning as a constructive activity. In C. Janvier (Ed.), Problems of representation in the teaching and learning of mathematics (pp. 3–17). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Vosniadou, S., Vamvakoussi, X., & Skopeliti, I. (2008). The framework theory approach to conceptual change. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 3–34). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Watson, A., & Mason, J. (2006). Seeing an exercise as a single mathematical object: Using variation to structure sense-making. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 8(2), 91–111.
Watson, A., et al. (2013). Introduction. In C. Margolinas (Ed.), Task design in mathematics education (Proceedings of ICMI Study 22, pp. 7–14). Available from: hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00834054
Wittmann, E. (1984). Teaching units as the integrating core of mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 15, 25–36.
Wittmann, E. C. (1995). Mathematics education as a ‘design science’. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 29, 355–374.
Yang, Y., & Ricks, T. E. (2013). Chinese lesson study: Developing classroom instruction through collaborations in school-based teaching research group activities. In Y. Li & R. Huang (Eds.), How Chinese teach mathematics and improve teaching (pp. 51–65). London: Routledge.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Open Access This book was originally published with exclusive rights reserved by the Publisher in 2015 and was licensed as an open access publication in March 2021 under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this book may be included in the book's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material or in the Correction Note appended to the book. For details on rights and licenses please read the Correction https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09629-2_13. If material is not included in the book's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.
Copyright information
© 2015 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kieran, C., Doorman, M., Ohtani, M. (2015). Frameworks and Principles for Task Design. In: Watson, A., Ohtani, M. (eds) Task Design In Mathematics Education. New ICMI Study Series. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09629-2_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09629-2_2
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-09628-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-09629-2
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)