This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Lobato, J. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

On Learning Processes and the National Mathematics Advisory Panel Report

JOANNE LOBATO is a professor of mathematics education in the Department of Mathematics and Statistics and at the Center for Research in Mathematics and Science Education, San Diego State University, 6475 Alvarado Road, Suite 206, San Diego, CA, 92120; lobato{at}math.sdsu.edu. Her research focuses on the transfer of learning, algebraic reasoning, school-based research at the middle and high school levels, and the role of "noticing" in the teaching and learning of mathematics

This article is a response to Foundations for Success: The Final Report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel (2008) and to one of the task group reports on which it was based, the report of the Task Group on Learning Processes. The author uses Maxwell’s two views of causality—regularity and process—to explore three major issues raised in the report: the nature of what is learned, how learning occurs, and the transfer of learning. She proposes alternative recommendations to those offered by the Panel, by drawing upon the mathematics education literature, which was largely excluded from the reviewed research. Furthermore, by neglecting research grounded in a process view of causality, the report excludes perspectives and findings that would have illuminated what it means to develop conceptual understanding in mathematics—one of three valued outcomes cited by the Panel.

Key Words: learning processes and strategies • mathematics education • policy • transfer

Educational Researcher, Vol. 37, No. 9, 595-601 (2008)
DOI: 10.3102/0013189X08327999


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				C. P. Benbow and L. R. Faulkner Rejoinder to the Critiques of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel Final Report Educational Researcher, December 1, 2008; 37(9): 645 - 648. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]