Mathematical Relationships: Curriculum
Questions from the Edinburgh seminar 8th January 2007
Do the three approaches triangulate or by pass each other?
How can a /the mathematics curriculum make a playful identity available?
Playful – includes experiment
risk
pain
subversion
safety
fun
childlike
naughtiness
emotion
1. Willfully misunderstanding objects – how do
textbooks
curriculum (maths)
teachers – feature in this
2. Assessment & gatekeeping
- value of maths in curriculum
3. Is it that curriculum is irrelevant, and assessment that is key in
shaping identities.

What is the relationship between curricula, policy discourses, & the
identities available to teachers & learners?
(& how does this change in different national contexts)?

What is the relationship between teacher subject knowledge &
their ability/ willingness to reshape / mould the curriculum?

What identities are available with different beliefs about the
purposes of education & what are the curricula that can flow from
theses?
Does cross-curricular / problem-based learning have the capacity to
change pupils mathematical identities?
How can we ‘wean’ insecure learners (and teachers) away from closed –
and towards open-ended maths, and help them develop into confident
learners of maths?
What do the three different lenses suggest about challenging the
hierarchies of the curriculum?
How determined is the path of the learner by the experiences at the
breast /early childhood experiences?

Should maths textbooks make the links with other areas of the
curriculum as well as with the so-called real world?

Is the emphasis on functionality missing the point? Neither art nor
English are functional – but they are popular subjects.