The Math Forum

Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Math Forum » Discussions » Policy and News » mathed-news

Topic: ICMI Study 22: Task Design in Maths. Education
Replies: 0  

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List  
Jerry P. Becker

Posts: 15,675
Registered: 12/3/04
ICMI Study 22: Task Design in Maths. Education
Posted: Jul 11, 2013 5:46 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

NOTE: The ICMI Study 22 on Task Design in
Mathematics Education is underway. The ICMI Study
Conference will be held in Oxford, UK, on July
22-26. The proceedings of this conference are
already available and can be accessed at
. The Introduction in the proceedings is
attached for your information.
Task Design in Mathematics Education. Proceedings of ICMI Study 22

Claire Margolinas

There has been a recent increase in interest in
task design as a focus for research and
development in mathematics education. This is
well illustrated by the success of theoretically
based long term design research projects in which
design and research over time have combined to
develop materials and approaches that have
appealed to teachers. One area of investigation
is how published tasks are appropriated by
teachers for complex purposes and influences
mathematics teaching. Tasks generate activity
which affords opportunity to encounter
mathematical concepts and also to use and develop
mathematical thinking and modes of enquiry. Tasks
also arise spontaneously in educational contexts,
with teachers or learners raising questions or
providing prompts for action by drawing on a
repertoire of past experience. We are interested
in how these are underpinned with implicit design
principles. It is important to address also the
question of sequences of tasks and the ways in
which they link aspects of conceptual knowledge.
The communities involved in task design are
naturally diverse: designers, professional
mathematicians, teacher educators, teachers,
researchers, learners, authors, publishers and
manufacturers, and individuals acting in several
of these roles. We wish to illuminate the diverse
communities and methods that lead to the
development and use of tasks.
[ ]

Margolinas, C. (Ed.). (2013). Task Design in
Mathematics Education. Proceedings of ICMI Study
22 (Vol. 1). Oxford.


Anne Watson
University of Oxford, UK

Minoru Ohtani
Kanazawa University, Japan

Janet Ainley
School of Education, University of Leicester, UK

Janete Bolite Frant

Michiel Doorman
Utrecht University, Netherlands

Carolyn Kieran
Université du Québec à Montréal, Canada

Allen Leung
Hong Kong Baptist University, Hong Kong

Claire Margolinas
Laboratoire ACTé, Université Blaise Pascal, France

Peter Sullivan
Monash University, Australia

Denisse Thompson
University of South Florida, USA

Yudong Yang
Shanghai Academy of Educational Sciences, China

The study aims to produce a state-of-the-art
summary of relevant research and to go beyond
that summary to develop new insights and new
areas of knowledge and study about task design.
In particular, we aim to develop more explicit
understanding of the difficulties involved in
designing and implementing tasks, and of the
interfaces between the teaching, researching, and
designing roles - recognising that these might be
undertaken by the same person, or by completely
separate teams.


Ainley, J., Bills, L., & Wilson, K. (2004).
Algebra for a Purpose: using spreadsheets KS2 &
3. Derby: ATM Publications.

Ainley, J., Bills, L., & Wilson, K. (2005).
Designing Spreadsheet-Based Tasks for Purposeful
Algebra. International Journal of Computers for
Mathematical Learning, 10(3), 191-215.

Anderson, J. R., & Schunn, C. D. (2000).
Implications of the ACT-R learning theory: No
magic bullets. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in
instructional psychology: Educational design and
cognitive science (Vol. 5, pp. 1-34). Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Artigue, M., & Perrin-Glorian, M.-J. (1991).
Didactic engineering, research and development
tool: some theoretical problems linked to this
duality. For the learning of Mathematics 11(1),

ATM (various dates). Points of departure 1,2,3,4.
Derby, UK: Association of Teachers of Mathematics.

Becker, J. P., & Shimada, S. (1997). The
open-ended approach: A new proposal for teaching
mathematics. Reston, Virginia: National Council
of Teachers of Mathematics.

Brousseau, G. (1997). Theory of didactical
situations in mathematics. Dordrecht: Kluwer
Academic Publishers.

Brousseau, G., Brousseau, N., & Warfield, V.
(2004). Rationals and decimals as required in the
school curriculum. Part 1: Rationals as
measurement. Journal of Mathematical Behavior,
20, 363 - 411.

Brousseau, G., Brousseau, N., & Warfield, V.
(2007). Rationals and decimals as required in the
curriculum: Part 2: From rationals to decimals.
The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 26(4),

Brousseau, G., Brousseau, N., & Warfield, V.
(2008). Rationals and decimals as required in the
school curriculum: Part 3. Rationals and decimals
as linear functions. The Journal of Mathematical
Behavior, 27(3), 153-176.

Brousseau, G., Brousseau, N., & Warfield, V.
(2009). Rationals and decimals as required in the
school curriculum: Part 4: Problem solving,
composed mappings and division. The Journal of
Mathematical Behavior, 28(2-3), 79-118.

Chevallard, Y. (1999). L'analyse des pratiques
enseignantes en théorie anthropologique du
didactique. Recherches en Didactique des
Mathématiques, 19(2), 221-266.

Choppin, J. (2011). The impact of professional
noticing on teachers' adaptations of challenging
tasks. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 13(3),

Christiansen, B., & Walter, G. (1986). Task and
activity. In B. Christiansen, A. G. Howson & M.
Otte (Eds.), Perspectives on mathematics
education: Papers submitted by members of the
Bacomet Group (pp. 243- 307). Dordrecht: D.

Corey, D. L., Peterson, B. E., Lewis, B. M., &
Bukarau, J. (2010). Are there any places that
students use their heads? Principles of
high-quality Japanese mathematics instruction.
Journal for Research in Mathematical Education,
41, 438-478.

De Lange, J. (1996). Using and applying
mathematics in education. In A. Bishop, K.
Clements, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick & C. Laborde
(Eds.), International Handbook of Mathematics
Education (pp. 49-98). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic

Gravemeijer, K. (1999). How emergent models may
foster the constitution of formal mathematics?
Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 1(2), 155-177.

Gueudet, G., & Trouche, L. (2009). Towards new
documentation systems for mathematics teachers?
Educational Studies in Mathematics, 71, 199-218.

Gueudet, G., & Trouche, L. (2011). Teachers' work
with resources: Documentational geneses and
professional geneses. In G. Gueudet, B. Pepin &
L. Trouche (Eds.), From Text to 'Lived'
Resources. New York: Springer.

Henningsen, M., & Stein, M. K. (1997).
Mathematical tasks and student cognition:
classroom-based factors that support and inhibit
high-level mathematical thinking and reasoning.
Journal of Research in Mathematics Education,
28(5), 524-549.

Huang, R., & Bao, J. (2006). Towards a model for
teacher professional development in China:
Introducing Keli. Journal of Mathematics Teacher
Education, 9, 279-298.

Kieran, C., Tanguay, D., & Solares, A. (2011).
Researcher-designed resources and their
adaptation within classroom teaching practice:
Shaping both the implicit and the explicit. In G.
Gueudet, B. Pepin & L. Trouche (Eds.), From Text
to 'Lived' Resources (pp. 189-213). New York:

Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J., & Findell, B.
(2011). Adding It Up: Helping Children Learn
Mathematics. Washington, DC: National Academy

Lagrange, J.-B. (2002). Etudier les mathématiques
avec les calculatrices symboliques. Quelle place
pour les techniques? In D. Guin & L. Trouche
(Eds.), Calculatrices symboliques. Transformer un
outil en un instrument du travail mathématique :
un problème didactique (pp. 151-185). Grenoble:
La Pensée Sauvage.

Lappan, G., & Phillips, E. (2009). A Designer
Speaks. Educational Designer, 1(3).

Leont'ev, A. (1975). Dieyatelinocti, soznaine, i
lichynosti [Activity, consciousness, and
personality]. Moskva: Politizdat.

Margolinas, C., Abboud-Blanchard, M.,
Bueno-Ravel, L., Douek, N., Fluckiger, A., Gibel,
P., Vandebrouck, F., & Wozniak, F. (Eds.).
(2011). En amont et en aval des ingénieries
didactiques. Grenoble: La pensée sauvage.

Mason, J., & Johnston-Wilder, S. (2006).
Designing and using mathematical tasks. York, UK:
QED Press.

Renkl, A. (2005). The worked-out-example
principle in multimedia learning. In R. Mayer
(Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia
learning (pp. 229-246). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
University Press.

Runesson, U. (2005). Beyond discourse and
interaction. Variation: a critical aspect for
teaching and learning mathematics. The Cambridge
Journal of Education, 35(1), 69-87.

Schoenfeld, A. H. (1980). On useful research
reports. Journal for Research in Mathematical
Education, 11(5), 389-391.

Schoenfeld, A. H. (2009). Bridging the cultures
of educational research ad design, Educational
Designer, 1(2).

Sierpinska, A. (2003). Research in Mathematics
Education: Through a Keyhole. In E. Simmt & B.
Davis (Eds.), Proceedings of the Annual Meeting
of Canadian Mathematics Education Study Group:
Acadia University.

Sullivan, P. (1999). Seeking a rationale for
particular classroom tasks and activities. In J.
M. Truran & K. N. Truran (Eds.), Making the
difference. Proceedings of the 21st Conference of
the Mathematics Educational Research Group of
Australasia (pp. 15-29). Adelaide: MERGA.

Sullivan, P., Zevenbergen, R., & Mousley, J.
(2006). Teacher actions to maximise mathematics
learning opportunities in heterogeneous
classrooms. International Journal in Science and
Mathematics Teaching, 4, 117-143.

Tirosh, D., & Wood, T. (Eds.). (2009). The
International Handbook of Mathematics Teacher
Education (Vol. 2). Rotterdam: Sense publishers.

Tzur, R., Sullivan, P., & Zaslavsky, O. (2008).
Examining Teachers' Use of (Non-Routine)
Mathematical Tasks in Classrooms from three
Complementary Perspectives: Teacher, Teacher
Educator, Researcher. In O. Figueras & A.
Sepúlveda (Eds.), Proceedings of the Joint
Meeting of the 32nd Conference of the
International Group for the Psychology of
Mathematics Education, and the 30th North
American Chapter (Vol. 1, pp. 133-137). México:

Valverde, G. A., Bianchi, L. J., Wolfe, R. G.,
Schmidt, W. H., & Houang, R. T. (2002). According
to the Book. Using TIMSS to investigate the
translation of policy into practice through the
world of textbooks. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic

Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M. (2003). The
didactical use of models in realistic mathematics
education: an example from a longitudinal
trajectory on percentage. Educational Studies in
Mathematics, 54, 9-35.

Vergnaud, G. (1982). Cognitive and developmental
psychology and research in mathematics education:
some theoretical and methodological issues. For
the Learning of Mathematics, 3(2), 31-41.

Watson, A., & Mason, J. (2006). Seeing an
Exercise as a Single Mathematical Object: Using
Variation to Structure Sense-Making. Mathematical
Thinking and Learning, 8(2), 91-111.

Wittmann, E. (1995). Mathematics Education as a
'Design Science'. Educational Studies in
Mathematics, 29(4), 355-374.

Yoshida, M. (1999). Lesson study: A case study of
a Japanese approach to improving instruction
through school-based teacher development.
Doctoral dissertation, The University of Chicago,
Chicago, IL.

Zaslavsky, O., & Sullivan, P. (Eds.). (2011).
Constructing Knowledge for Teaching Secondary
Mathematics Task to Enhance Prospective and
Practicing Teacher Learning. New-York: Springer.

Jerry P. Becker
Dept. of Curriculum & Instruction
Southern Illinois University
625 Wham Drive
Mail Code 4610
Carbondale, IL 62901-4610
Phone: (618) 453-4241 [O]
(618) 457-8903 [H]
Fax: (618) 453-4244

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum at NCTM 1994-2017. All Rights Reserved.