MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3215992467

Perspectives On The Mathematics Curriculum: Between Curriculum Evaluation, Contribution Of Developmental Psychology And Teachers Practice.

2013· article· en· W3215992467 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Natacha Duroisin, Sabine Soetewey, Fabrice Huin

Bibliographic record

VenueORBi UMONS · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Research and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumMathematics educationPedagogyCurriculum-based measurementPsychologyEmergent curriculumCurriculum developmentCurriculum mapping
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

After having analyzed and compared current curricula in mathematics between several French speaking countries (Belgium, France, Canada), we can observe that several key concepts in geometry are set aside from cursus programmes. These concepts rejection occurred despite recommendations previously made by many researchers (e.g. Colmez, 1977; Fey, 1979). More than twenty-five years ago, Bishop (1982) lamented over the fact that arithmetic has too often overshadowed geometry. Years later, in 2002, a similar observation was made in the 'Report on the implementation of school success' stating that 'numbers were clearly favoured over geometry, shapes and sizes (...)'. And yet, researchers know the importance of teaching geometric concepts to promote, afterwards, better learning in mathematics. In the current perspective, it may be necessary to rewrite curricula, so that they become less overloaded (content depending on the number of hours per week), or coherent and consistent (Duroisin & Soetewey, 2011), as it is actually the case in Belgium. However, authors want to show that it is also very important to take into account the acquisition of basic prerequisite, coming from more simple learning (as geometry) at an early stage, and the developmental psychology of children and adolescents to promote, thereafter, more complex acquisition concepts in mathematics (as arithmetic, calculations and proportions...). Through the cross-perspective of two researchers and one teacher on a curriculum, the aim of this paper is, first, to highlight that the withdrawal of some geometric contents in mathematics curricula can be observed into several countries curriculum. The second goal is to show that the suppression of those geometric contents is problematic for both teachers and learners. On the one hand, teachers are required to provide the cursus in mathematics without being able to rely on all the necessary students' prerequisites. On the other hand, removals create gaps in the progression and continuity of geometry learning, placing students into difficulties that may affect the rest of their career (Unesco, 1987 ; Bishop, 1983, p.152).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.689
Threshold uncertainty score0.305

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.345 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueORBi UMONSSame topicEducational Research and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207