In a key chapter of the book Vital Directions for Mathematics Education Research edited by Jeremy Kilpatrick in 2013, Jo Boaler and colleagues spoke to the need of having more “foxes” in mathematics education (see reference, chapter attached to this post). To quote a portion of their abstract, “Mathematics education researchers have produced many important research insights into how students learn mathematics, but relatively few of these insights have influenced the practice of classrooms. This chapter takes up Kilpatrick’s call for more “foxes” in mathematics education and considers the ways the field may move to work in more “foxy” ways. (pg. 189). In their chapter Boaler et al, in describing “foxes” in mathematics education, to cite Kilpatrick’s characterization that “Hedgehogs see the world through the lens of a single idea, whereas foxes are fascinated by variety and tend to look across different ideas in order to make recommendations for change.” One of takeaways is that the “foxes” in mathematics education research work in different ways, whether that is working across disciples to make connections with other fields, or through working in partnership with teachers in the classrooms, or working with policy and decisions makers who influences national and state policies.
Back in 2012, her remark at the keynote session of PMENA conference (see reference, below) was very much in the spirit of this book chapter, where she talked about the hedgehogs and foxes of mathematics education research. She mentioned at that time we had a shortage of foxes, and some of the impact that having too few foxes in mathematics education had in advancing policy and best practices that promote equity in mathematics education, which she personally experienced (see link to her personal website). Her talk held an impact on those present, including the author of this blog post, who at that time was a graduate student studying mathematics education.
Fast forward to today, and her personal experiences have been prescient and predictive to recent developments and policy decisions we are witnesses to at the federal at state levels, impacting the students whom we teach and engage with. Especially when we look at developmental mathematics and equity, how does research support these critical areas? The three strands: mathematics education research, equity, and developmental mathematics have a high degree of intersectionality.
For example, there is abundant research that supports the best practices in developmental mathematics and equity, and how these practices promote success for our students whom we work with every day. When we look at the Standards documents of our organization in Chapter 7 of IMPACT, we talk about these best practices with respect of equity, while Chapters 3 and 6 pathways to student success are showcased, of which Developmental Mathematics is essential, and these practices are informed through our collective experience and backed by research.
As an organization, the membership of AMATYC has developed Position Statements around these topics informed by the research in the field of Mathematics Education (for example, see position statements about Student Success and Corequisites at https://amatyc.org/page/PositionStudentSuccess and https://amatyc.org/page/PositionCorequisiteMathematicsCourses and also on Equity at https://amatyc.org/page/PositionDiversityEquityInclusion ).
We hope that this blog and related discussion inspires a more “foxy” (per Boaler’s recommendation) approach to engagement in this important conversation this month in the intersectionality of research, developmental mathematics, and equity in mathematics. What can we learn from each other, and how can we move forward together as a field, for the betterment of our students and colleagues who teach mathematics? And how might we have a positive influence in educational policy within the larger ecosystem we are part of?
Our hosting team is looking forward to the discussions this month that are both timely and relevant to current issues in mathematics education, and we value and appreciate your collective perspectives and insights. Together, we can learn and grow from each other, and use both our collective classroom and research experiences to support our students. Our discussion posts will touch on two main topics this month, the first one that can be accessed here.
References
Boaler, J., Selling, S.K., Sun, K. (2013). Where Are the Foxes in Mathematics Education?. In: Leatham, K. (eds) Vital Directions for Mathematics Education Research. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-6977-3_9 (link to PDF)
Van Zoest, L.R., Lo, J. & Kratky, J.L. (2012) Proceedings of the 34th Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. Kalamazoo, MI: Western Michigan University. Available at: https://www.pmena.org/pmenaproceedings/PMENA%2034%202012%20Proceedings.pdf
IMPACT - Chapter 3 Proficiency - myAMATYC. (2016). Amatyc.org. https://my.amatyc.org/impactlive-home/standards-docs/impact-chapt03
IMPACT - Chapter 6 Student Success - myAMATYC. (2017). Amatyc.org. https://my.amatyc.org/impactlive-home/standards-docs/impact-chapt06
IMPACT - Chapter 7 Infusing Equity and Inclusion in the Mathematics Classroom - myAMATYC. (2024). Amatyc.org. https://my.amatyc.org/impactlive-home/standards-docs/impact-chapt07-2024