Anna Sierpinska – författare

New research in mathematics education deals with the complexity of the mathematics’ classroom. The classroom teaching situation constitutes a pertinent unit of analysis for research into the ternary didactic relationship which binds teachers, students and mathematical knowledge. The classroom is considered as a complex didactic system, which offers the researcher an opportunity to gauge the boundaries of the freedom that is left with regard to choices about the knowledge to be taught and the ways of organizing the students’ learning, while giveing rise to the study of interrelations between three main elements of the teaching process the: mathematical content to be taught and learned, management of the various time dimensions, and activity of the teacher who prepares and manages the class, to the benefit of the students' knowledge and the teachers' own experience.This volume, reprinted from Educational Studies in Mathematics, Volume 59, focuses on classroom situations as a unit of analysis, the work of the teacher, and is strongly anchored in original theoretical frameworks. The contributions are formulated from the perspective of one or more theoretical frameworks but they are tackled by means of empirical investigations.

The concept of understanding in mathematics with regard to mathematics education is considered in this volume. The main problem for mathematics teachers being how to facilitate their students' understanding of the mathematics being taught. In combining elements of maths, philosophy, logic, linguistics and the psychology of maths education from her own and European research, Dr Sierpinska considers the contributions of the social and cultural contexts to understanding. The outcome is an insight into both mathematics and understanding.

The concept of understanding in mathematics with regard to mathematics education is considered in this volume. The main problem for mathematics teachers being how to facilitate their students' understanding of the mathematics being taught. In combining elements of maths, philosophy, logic, linguistics and the psychology of maths education from her own and European research, Dr Sierpinska considers the contributions of the social and cultural contexts to understanding. The outcome is an insight into both mathematics and understanding.

In 1978, in the foreword to "Weeding and Sowing: A Preface to a Science of Mathematics Education", Hans Freudenthal wrote that his book is a preface to a science that does not exist. Almost 20 years later, does his claim still hold true? The present book is the result of the reflection of individuals in mathematics education on this and related questions. Is mathematics education a science? Is it a discipline? In what sense? What is its place within other domains of research and academic disciplines? What accounts for its specificity? In the book, the reader will find a range of possible answers to these questions, a variety of analyses of the actual directions of research in different countries, and a number of visions for the future of research in mathematics education. The book is a result of an ICMI Study, whose theme was formulated as: "What is Research in Mathematics Education and What are Its Results?".One important outcome of this study was the realization of the reasons for the difficulty of the questions that the study was posing, leading possibly to a set of other questions, better suited to the actual concerns and research practices of mathematics education researchers. The book addresses itself to researchers in mathematics education and those working in their neighbourhood who are concerned with the problems of the definition of this new scientific domain emerging at their borders.

In 1978, in the foreword to "Weeding and Sowing": a preface to a "Science of Mathematics Education", Hans Freudenthal wrote that his book is a preface to a science that does not exist. Almost 20 years later, does his claim still hold true? The present book is the result of the reflection of individuals in mathematics education on this and related questions. Is mathematics education a science? Is it a discipline? In what sense? What is its place within other domains of research and academic disciplines? What accounts for its specificity? In the book, the reader will find a range of possible answers to these questions, a variety of analyses of the actual directions of research in different countries, and a number of visions for the future of research in mathematics education. The book is a result of an ICMI study, whose theme was formulated as: "What is Research in Mathematics Education and What are Its Results?".One important outcome of this study was the realization of the reasons for the difficulty of the questions that the study was posing, leading possibly to a set of other questions, better suited to the actual concerns and research practices of mathematics education researchers. The book addresses itself to researchers in mathematics education and all those working in their neighbourhood who are concerned with the problems of the definition of this new scientific domain emerging at their borders.

New research in mathematics education deals with the complexity of the mathematics’ classroom. The classroom teaching situation constitutes a pertinent unit of analysis for research into the ternary didactic relationship which binds teachers, students and mathematical knowledge. The classroom is considered as a complex didactic system, which offers the researcher an opportunity to gauge the boundaries of the freedom that is left with regard to choices about the knowledge to be taught and the ways of organizing the students’ learning, while giveing rise to the study of interrelations between three main elements of the teaching process the: mathematical content to be taught and learned, management of the various time dimensions, and activity of the teacher who prepares and manages the class, to the benefit of the students' knowledge and the teachers' own experience.This volume, reprinted from Educational Studies in Mathematics, Volume 59, focuses on classroom situations as a unit of analysis, the work of the teacher, and is strongly anchored in original theoretical frameworks. The contributions are formulated from the perspective of one or more theoretical frameworks but they are tackled by means of empirical investigations.

No one disputes how important it is, in today's world, to prepare students to un­ derstand mathematics as well as to use and communicate mathematics in their future lives. That task is very difficult, however. Refocusing curricula on funda­ mental concepts, producing new teaching materials, and designing teaching units based on 'mathematicians' common sense' (or on logic) have not resulted in a better understanding of mathematics by more students. The failure of such efforts has raised questions suggesting that what was missing at the outset of these proposals, designs, and productions was a more profound knowledge of the phenomena of learning and teaching mathematics in socially established and culturally, politically, and economically justified institutions - namely, schools. Such knowledge cannot be built by mere juxtaposition of theories in disci­ plines such as psychology, sociology, and mathematics. Psychological theories focus on the individual learner. Theories of sociology of education look at the general laws of curriculum development, the specifics of pedagogic discourse as opposed to scientific discourse in general, the different possible pedagogic rela­ tions between the teacher and the taught, and other general problems in the inter­ face between education and society. Mathematics, aside from its theoretical contents, can be looked at from historical and epistemological points of view, clarifying the genetic development of its concepts, methods, and theories. This view can shed some light on the meaning of mathematical concepts and on the difficulties students have in teaching approaches that disregard the genetic development of these concepts.

No one disputes how important it is, in today's world, to prepare students to un­ derstand mathematics as well as to use and communicate mathematics in their future lives. That task is very difficult, however. Refocusing curricula on funda­ mental concepts, producing new teaching materials, and designing teaching units based on 'mathematicians' common sense' (or on logic) have not resulted in a better understanding of mathematics by more students. The failure of such efforts has raised questions suggesting that what was missing at the outset of these proposals, designs, and productions was a more profound knowledge of the phenomena of learning and teaching mathematics in socially established and culturally, politically, and economically justified institutions - namely, schools. Such knowledge cannot be built by mere juxtaposition of theories in disci­ plines such as psychology, sociology, and mathematics. Psychological theories focus on the individual learner. Theories of sociology of education look at the general laws of curriculum development, the specifics of pedagogic discourse as opposed to scientific discourse in general, the different possible pedagogic rela­ tions between the teacher and the taught, and other general problems in the inter­ face between education and society. Mathematics, aside from its theoretical contents, can be looked at from historical and epistemological points of view, clarifying the genetic development of its concepts, methods, and theories. This view can shed some light on the meaning of mathematical concepts and on the difficulties students have in teaching approaches that disregard the genetic development of these concepts.