{ "type": "Article", "authors": [ { "type": "Person", "familyNames": [ "Sánchez", "Aguilar" ], "givenNames": [ "Mario" ] }, { "type": "Person", "familyNames": [ "Ahl" ], "givenNames": [ "Linda", "Marie" ] }, { "type": "Person", "familyNames": [ "Misfeldt" ], "givenNames": [ "Morten" ] }, { "type": "Person", "familyNames": [ "Koichu" ], "givenNames": [ "Boris" ] } ], "identifiers": [], "references": [ { "type": "Article", "id": "bib-bib1", "authors": [], "title": "\nJ. Century and A. Cassata,\nImplementation research: Finding common ground on what, how, why, where, and who.\nRev. Res. Educ. 40, 169–215 (2016)\n" }, { "type": "Article", "id": "bib-bib2", "authors": [], "title": "\nT. Dreyfus,\nWhat are solid findings in mathematics education?\nIn: Proceedings of the tenth congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (CERME10), DCU Institute of Education and ERME, 57–62 (2017)\n" }, { "type": "Article", "id": "bib-bib3", "authors": [], "title": "\nF. Gregorio, P. Di Martino and P. Iannone,\nThe secondary-tertiary transition in mathematics. Successful students in crisis.\nEur. Math. Soc. Newsl. 113, 45–47 (2019)\n" }, { "type": "Article", "id": "bib-bib4", "authors": [], "title": "\nB. Koichu, M. S. Aguilar and M. Misfeldt,\nImplementation-related research in mathematics education: the search for identity.\nZDM Math. Educ. 53, 975–989 (2021)\n" }, { "type": "Article", "id": "bib-bib5", "authors": [], "title": "\nB. Koichu and A. Pinto,\nThe secondary-tertiary transition in mathematics. What are our current challenges and what can we do about them?\nEur. Math. Soc. Newsl. 112, 34–35 (2019)\n" }, { "type": "Article", "id": "bib-bib6", "authors": [], "title": "\nE. M. Rogers,\nDiffusion of innovations.\nThe Free Press of Glencoe Division of The Macmillan Co., New York (1962)\n" }, { "type": "Article", "id": "bib-bib7", "authors": [], "title": "\nM. K. Stein, J. Remillard and M. S. Smith,\nHow curriculum influences student learning.\nIn Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning,\nNational Council of Teachers of Mathematics, 319–369 (2007)\n" } ], "title": "ERME column", "meta": {}, "content": [ { "type": "Paragraph", "id": "p1", "content": [ "regularly presented by Jason Cooper and Frode Rønning" ] }, { "type": "Paragraph", "id": "p2", "content": [ "In this issue, with a contribution by Mario Sánchez Aguilar, Linda Marie Ahl, Morten Misfeldt and Boris Koichu\n" ] }, { "type": "Heading", "id": "Sx1", "depth": 1, "content": [ "CERME Thematic Working Groups" ] }, { "type": "Paragraph", "id": "Sx1.p1", "content": [ "We continue the initiative of introducing the CERME working groups, which we began in the September 2017 issue, focusing on ways in which European research in the field of mathematics education may be interesting or relevant for people working in pure and applied mathematics.\nOur aim is to enrich the ERME community with new participants, who may benefit from hearing about research methods and findings and contribute to future CERMEs." ] }, { "type": "Heading", "id": "Sx2", "depth": 1, "content": [ "Introducing CERME Thematic Working Group 23 – Implementation\nof Research Findings in Mathematics Education" ] }, { "type": "Paragraph", "id": "Sx2.p1", "content": [ "Mario Sánchez Aguilar, Linda Marie Ahl, Morten Misfeldt and Boris Koichu" ] }, { "type": "Paragraph", "id": "Sx2.p2", "content": [ "Over five decades, the field of mathematics education research has\ngenerated a wealth of innovations aimed at improving the teaching and\nlearning of mathematics. However, while mathematics education research\nhas produced solid findings related to fundamental phenomena in teaching\nand learning mathematics (see Dreyfus [", { "type": "Cite", "target": "bib-bib2", "content": [ "2" ] }, "] for an overview of solid\nfindings published on the pages of the EMS Newsletter), has constructed\nelaborate theoretical frameworks to investigate and analyze teaching and\nlearning, and has developed rich and consistent suggestions for didactic\ndesign, the effect of all these on teaching on a large scale has\nnevertheless been weak. How the innovations that work well in a research\nlaboratory could be applied in practice remains an open and challenging\nproblem to solve. Addressing this problem, Thematic Working Group 23\n“Implementation of Research Findings in Mathematics Education” (TWG23)\nis a forum dedicated to presenting and discussing studies focused on\nelucidating the enablers and general conditions that favor or inhibit\nthe implementation in practice of research findings and innovations\ngenerated in our research field." ] }, { "type": "Paragraph", "id": "Sx2.p3", "content": [ "There are obvious reasons for focusing on implementation and\nimplementability in mathematics education. Indeed, many researchers and\npractitioners have identified issues related to scaling up and making\nwork and results of mathematics education research available to a larger\naudience. Even though these issues are omnipresent in mathematics\nteaching, they are rarely addressed as a stand-alone issue. This\ndisparity was the outset of establishing TWG23 in 2017. Hence TWG23\nelevates covert concerns about mathematics education research as being\n“usable” and “making a difference in practice” to a more overt\nphenomenon named “implementation.”" ] }, { "type": "Paragraph", "id": "Sx2.p4", "content": [ "The papers presented in TWG23 illustrate experiences of implementation\nof research findings in practice – either small or large scale – where\nthe object of the implementation and the implementation process are\nclearly identified. For instance, there are studies informing how\nparticular treatments, interventions, or didactic designs work in\ndifferent contexts and with different populations. Likewise, theoretical\npapers addressing diverse characterizations of implementation in\nmathematics education have been presented. Overall, the discussions in\nthe group have evolved around the question: how can we bring the\naccumulated research knowledge into practice?" ] }, { "type": "Paragraph", "id": "Sx2.p5", "content": [ "We posit that the work of the TWG23 is relevant to the readers of the\nEMS Magazine – particularly those mathematicians involved in tertiary\nmathematics education and in projects aimed at enhancing teaching\nmathematics at school level – because of the difficulties that students,\nincluding high-achievers, experience in moving from secondary to\ntertiary education. Such a transition has been identified as a major\nissue for mathematics departments across Europe and their students\n(Koichu–Pinto [", { "type": "Cite", "target": "bib-bib5", "content": [ "5" ] }, "]), and described as an educational crisis\n(Gregorio et al. [", { "type": "Cite", "target": "bib-bib3", "content": [ "3" ] }, "]). This situation suggests a reconsideration and\nreform of both school and university mathematics teaching practices.\nFamiliarity with research findings on implementation of educational\ninnovations, and even participation in mathematics education\nimplementation research, may be instrumental for mathematics departments\nand university mathematics teachers interested in improving their\nstudents’ educational experiences. The interest in\nimplementing innovations in mathematics teaching at the tertiary level, and reporting the results in mathematics didactic journals, can be seen\nin an ongoing systematic review of the field of implementation research.\n(The systematic review is done in the project ", { "type": "Emphasis", "content": [ "Implementation research as an emerging field of mathematics education," ] }, " financed by the ", { "type": "Emphasis", "content": [ "Swedish Research Council" ] }, ".)\nPreliminary results show that the studies that address the tertiary\nlevel are few, but that most have been written in recent years, which we\ninterpret as increased interest." ] }, { "type": "Heading", "id": "Sx3", "depth": 1, "content": [ "Evolution of TWG23" ] }, { "type": "Paragraph", "id": "Sx3.p1", "content": [ "TWG23 is one of the newest thematic working groups of the CERME\ncongress. Its first appearance was at the CERME10 congress (2017), led\nby Uffe Thomas Jankvist (Aarhus University, Denmark), Mario Sánchez\nAguilar (National Polytechnic Institute, Mexico), Jonas Bergman Ärlebäck\n(Linköping University, Sweden) and Kjersti Wæge (Norwegian University of\nScience and Technology, Norway). At CERME10, the working group undertook\ninitial attempts to make sense of “implementation” as a phenomenon. In\nthe call for papers for TWG23 at CERME10, the construct “implementation\nresearch” was considered rather broadly, as systematic exploration of\ndifferent kinds of didactical design, from task design, lesson design,\nteaching modules, and courses, to the design of entire programs at all\neducational levels. Furthermore, “implementation research” was\ninclusively operationalized as research on aspects of developmental\nprojects, intervention projects, as well as research on aspects of the\ndevelopment and use of educational media (e.g., textbooks, software, and\ncomputer-enhanced learning platforms). Fourteen papers and one poster\nwere presented in TWG23 at CERME10. Most of them reported on small-scale\nstudies addressing aspects of how adapted research results and findings\ncan inform practices in schools or other educational settings." ] }, { "type": "Paragraph", "id": "Sx3.p2", "content": [ "For CERME11, held in 2019, the focus of TWG23 drifted from discussing\nparticular small-scale projects to an effort to articulate what\nimplementation research in mathematics education actually is or can be.\nTwelve papers and two posters were presented and served as a basis for\ntheorizing implementation research. At this point in the development of\nthe TWG, several bibliographical references were put forward for\nclarifying and organizing the key notions related to implementation\nresearch in mathematics education. In particular, the work of Rogers [", { "type": "Cite", "target": "bib-bib6", "content": [ "6" ] }, "]\non diffusion of innovations, of Century and Cassata [", { "type": "Cite", "target": "bib-bib1", "content": [ "1" ] }, "] on conceptualizing implementation of innovations, and of Stein et al. [", { "type": "Cite", "target": "bib-bib7", "content": [ "7" ] }, "] on stages of implementation were brought to the center of the discussion. A first collective attempt within TWG23 to formulate a chain\nof definitions of the key concepts of “innovation,” “implementation”\nand “implementation research in mathematics education” was undertaken.\nAt the end of this collective discussion, the group formulated the\nfollowing definition:" ] }, { "type": "Paragraph", "id": "Sx3.p3", "content": [ { "type": "Emphasis", "content": [ "Implementation" ] }, " is a change-oriented process of adapting and\nenacting a particular resource (e.g., an idea, a tool, an innovation, a\nframework, a theory, an action plan, a curriculum, a policy) that occurs\nin partnership of two communities, ", { "type": "Emphasis", "content": [ "a community of the resource\nproponents" ] }, " (CRP) and ", { "type": "Emphasis", "content": [ "a community of the resource adapters" ] }, " (CRA).\nThese communities differ but can intersect. At the beginning of the\nprocess, the CRP has the ultimate agency over the resource. The process\nof adapting a resource by CRA includes some of the following: (1)\nconstructing an agency over the resource, (2) changes in ways of\ncommunicating, and (3) changes in practice. Accordingly,\n", { "type": "Emphasis", "content": [ "implementation research in mathematics education" ] }, " is research that\nfocuses on aspects of implementation, as specified above, in the context\nof mathematics education." ] }, { "type": "Paragraph", "id": "Sx3.p4", "content": [ "After the CERME11 congress, Uffe Thomas Jankvist and Jonas Bergman\nÄrlebäck left their positions as TWG23 leaders, being replaced by Ana\nKuzle (University of Potsdam, Germany) and Morten Misfeldt (by this time\naffiliated to Aalborg University, Denmark). Two editorial projects\nrelated to TWG23 and led by some of its members emerged. First, a new\nresearch journal entitled ", { "type": "Emphasis", "content": [ "Implementation and Replication Studies\nin Mathematics Education" ] }, " (IRME) was established; Uffe Thomas Jankvist,\nMario Sánchez Aguilar, Morten Misfeldt, and Boris Koichu assumed the\npositions of the editors. IRME focuses on implementation and replication\nresearch that communicates and investigates initiatives aiming to\nimprove the teaching and learning of mathematics by using knowledge from\nmathematics education research and by re-implementing it in new\ncontexts. Second, the thematic issue “Implementation and\nimplementability of mathematics education research” in the research\njournal ", { "type": "Emphasis", "content": [ "ZDM – Mathematics Education" ] }, " was conceived, with Boris\nKoichu, Mario Sánchez Aguilar, and Morten Misfeldt as guest editors\n[", { "type": "Cite", "target": "bib-bib4", "content": [ "4" ] }, "]." ] }, { "type": "Paragraph", "content": [ "The most recent meeting of TWG23 took place in the online congress\nCERME12 (2022). At this stage, Ana Kuzle and Kjersti Wæge stepped down\nfrom their positions as group leaders and were replaced by Boris Koichu\n(Weizmann Institute of Science, Israel) and Rikke Maagaard Gregersen\n(Aarhus University, Denmark). Rikke Maagaard Gregersen participated in\nthe planning of TWG23 at CERME12, but was unable to participate in the\ncongress so that Linda Marie Ahl (Uppsala University, Sweden) stepped\nin. The focus of the group’s discussions was broadened\nand deepened at this online meeting, thus reflecting the fact that the\nparticipants of the TWG have gained more experience in implementation\nresearch. Notably, the occurrence of papers on large-scale projects\nincreased significantly, which paved the way for broad and deep\ndiscussions. TWG23 at CERME12 received 18 contributions (15 papers and\nthree posters). The contributions were organized in five thematic\ncategories:" ] }, { "type": "Paragraph", "content": [] }, { "type": "List", "items": [ { "type": "ListItem", "content": [ { "type": "Paragraph", "id": "Sx3.I1.i1.p1", "content": [ "Implementation of problem-solving and problem-posing approaches." ] } ] }, { "type": "ListItem", "content": [ { "type": "Paragraph", "id": "Sx3.I1.i2.p1", "content": [ "Implementation of teaching models and teachers’ perspectives on\nimplementation." ] } ] }, { "type": "ListItem", "content": [ { "type": "Paragraph", "id": "Sx3.I1.i3.p1", "content": [ "Conditions for sustainable implementations." ] } ] }, { "type": "ListItem", "content": [ { "type": "Paragraph", "id": "Sx3.I1.i4.p1", "content": [ "Diagnostics tasks, instructional sequences, and curriculum design." ] } ] }, { "type": "ListItem", "content": [ { "type": "Paragraph", "id": "Sx3.I1.i5.p1", "content": [ "Implementation of programming, computational thinking, and other\ndigital technologies." ] } ] } ], "order": "Unordered", "meta": { "listType": "bullet" } }, { "type": "Heading", "id": "Sx4", "depth": 1, "content": [ "Recent discussions in TWG23" ] }, { "type": "Paragraph", "id": "Sx4.p1", "content": [ "The most recent discussions within TWG23 focused on issues of scale and\nupscaling, particularly on the purposes that small-scale and large-scale\nimplementation-related studies can attain under a theoretical umbrella\nof implementation research. There has also been a focus on the\nconceptualization of “stakeholder” and how this notion can be used to\nrefine different types of analysis of implementation projects. Another\nrecent discussion has been related to the notion of “change” in\nimplementation research, and the need for theories of change that could\nbe used to design, understand, and evaluate implementations." ] }, { "type": "Paragraph", "id": "Sx4.p2", "content": [ "In connection to scale and upscaling, the participants of TWG23 at\nCERME12 reinforced the need for both small-scale and large-scale studies\nbecause they play different roles in the accumulation of knowledge about\nimplementation in mathematics education. The group pointed out the need\nto further discuss the strategies required to make decisions about which\ntypes of studies can provide the most useful information for different\nparts of the implementation process. Also, it is necessary to further\nclarify the concept of “stakeholders” and progress our knowledge base\nfor involving more stakeholders, including mathematics teachers,\nmathematicians and mathematics education researchers in implementation\nprojects. In relation to “change,” the TWG23 participants at CERME12\nagreed that the tension between “intended change” and “achieved\nchange” in an implementation project is a delicate question of interest\nfor our research field. We thus see a continuing need to discuss the\nquestion of how program theory and theory of change can be used to\ndesign, understand, and evaluate implementations." ] }, { "type": "Paragraph", "id": "Sx4.p3", "content": [ "These discussions about the notions of scale, stakeholder, and change\nwill hopefully continue when TWG23 meets again at CERME13 in Budapest in\n2023. We are expecting to have rich discussions in this new meeting of\nthe TWG23 which could allow us to further develop key notions of\nimplementation research and broaden our knowledge about the factors that\ninfluence the implementation of educational innovations based on\nmathematics education research. We invite everyone with an interest in\nimplementation research to contribute their ideas to this vibrant and\ncontinually developing thematic working group." ] }, { "type": "Paragraph", "id": "authorinfo", "content": [ "\nMario Sánchez Aguilar is associate professor of mathematics education at\nthe Instituto Politécnico Nacional of Mexico. His research interests\ninclude the processes of implementing research findings from the field\nof mathematics education. He serves as associate editor of the research\njournals ", { "type": "Emphasis", "content": [ "Implementation and Replication Studies in Mathematics Education" ] }, "\nand ", { "type": "Emphasis", "content": [ "Educación Matemática" ] }, ".\n", { "type": "Link", "target": "mailto:mosanchez@ipn.mx", "content": [ "mosanchez@ipn.mx" ] }, "\nLinda Marie Ahl is a researcher in mathematics education at the Swedish\nNational Center for Mathematics Education and Uppsala University. Her\nresearch interests include the implementation of innovations in teaching\npractice, the importance of language for learning and the progression of\nconcept development within the multiplicative concept field with a\nparticular focus on proportional reasoning.\n", { "type": "Link", "target": "mailto:linda.ahl@edu.uu.se", "content": [ "linda.ahl@edu.uu.se" ] }, "\nMorten Misfeldt is full professor of digital education at the Center for\nDigital Education Department of Science Education and Department of\nComputer Science, University of Copenhagen. His research interests\ninclude digital tools and mathematics teaching and implementation and\ndigitalisation in the educational sector. He serves as associate editor\nof ", { "type": "Emphasis", "content": [ "Implementation and Replication Studies in Mathematics Education" ] }, ".\n", { "type": "Link", "target": "mailto:misfeldt@ind.ku.dk", "content": [ "misfeldt@ind.ku.dk" ] }, "\nBoris Koichu is an associate professor at the Department of Science\nTeaching at the Weizmann Institute of Science. His research focus is on\nlearning for and through mathematical problem solving and problem posing\nand on developing co-learning partnerships between mathematics education\nresearchers and teachers. He serves as associate editor of\n", { "type": "Emphasis", "content": [ "Implementation and Replication Studies in Mathematics Education" ] }, "\nand ", { "type": "Emphasis", "content": [ "The Journal of Mathematical Behavior" ] }, ".\n", { "type": "Link", "target": "mailto:boris.koichu@weizmann.ac.il", "content": [ "boris.koichu@weizmann.ac.il" ] } ] } ] }