Search

In this paper, motivated by the desire to understand which forms of parent-initiated activity are productively implicated in young children's mathematics learning, we present a methodological critique of recent research. Many such studies, based on assumptions that parent-initiated activities can be categorised as formal or informal, direct or indirect, or advanced or basic, exploit surveys to elicit how frequently parents engage their children in various predetermined activities. While such survey data have the potential to yield important insights, the analytical procedures typically employed prevent them. Studies involving factor analyses yield uninterpretable factors, which are then used to create summative variables based on the scores of individual activities. Other studies, drawing on untested preconceptions, simply create summative variables. In all cases, these summative variables are based on such a wide range of qualitatively different activities that labels like formal or informal become arbitrary and the potential of individual activities to support learning gets lost beneath colleagues' desires for statistical significance. In closing, we ask colleagues, albeit somewhat rhetorically, what is the purpose of such research? Is it to identify those activities that support learning or to offer statistically robust factors, which, due to the diversity of activities embedded within them, offer few useful insights? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Finnish students' success on all three content domains of each of the four cycles of the OECD's Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) has created much international interest. It has also prompted Finnish academics to offer systemic explanations typically linked to the structural qualities of Finnish schooling and teacher education. Less well-known has been the modest mathematics performance of Finnish grade 8 students on the two Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) in which Finland has participated, which, when compared with its PISA successes, has created something of an enigma. In this paper, we attempt to shed light on this enigma through analyses of Finnish mathematics classroom practice that draw on two extant data sets-interviews with Finnish teacher educators and video-recordings of sequences of lessons taught on standard topics. Due to the international interest in Finnish PISA success, the analyses focus primarily on the resonance between classroom practice and the mathematical literacy component of the PISA assessment framework. The analyses indicate that Finnish mathematics didactics are more likely to explain the modest TIMSS achievements than PISA successes and allude to several factors thought to be unique to the Finns, which, unrelated to mathematics teaching practices, may be contributory to the repeated Finnish PISA successes. Some implications for policy-borrowing are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]