• 博客等级:
  • 博客积分:0
  • 博客访问:12,189
  • 关注人气:54
  • 获赠金笔:0支
  • 赠出金笔:0支
  • 荣誉徽章:
正文 字体大小:


(2011-05-07 17:35:48)


分类: KFC学术文摘

Changes in Theoretical Paradigms



Theories are like toothbrushes. . . everyone has their own and no one wants to use anyone else’s. (Campbell 2006)

理论就像牙刷,每个人拥有他们自己的,然而没有人想用其它人的。(Campbell 2006)

As several scholars have noted over the years, we have a history of shifting frequently our dominant paradigms (Berliner 2006; Calfee 2006; King and McLeod 1999).

正如几位学者多年来指出,我们在一定过去的一段时期里经常变换我们的主导性理论。(Berliner 2006; Calfee 2006; King and McLeod 1999).

Like the broad field of psychology, our discipline “can be perceived through a veil of ‘isms”’ (Alexander and Winne 2006, p. 982; Goldin 2003).


We have witnessed,among others, shifts from behaviourism, through to stage and level theories,to various forms of constructivism, to situated and distributed cognitions, and morerecently, to complexity theories and neuroscience.


 For the first couple of decades of its life, mathematics education as a discipline drew heavily on theories and methodologies from psychology as is evident in the frameworks of most papers that appeared in journals like Journal for Research in Mathematics Education (JRME) and Educational Studies in Mathematics (ESM).

在数学教育诞生最早的前二十年里,数学教育作为一个学科在理论和方法上从心理学上得到非常多的借鉴。发表在Journal for Research in Mathematics Education (JRME) and Educational Studies in Mathematics (ESM)的很多论文的结构就清晰地表现这个特征。

According to Lerman (2000), the switch to research on the social dimensions of mathematical learning towards the end of the 1980s resulted in theories that emphasized a view of mathematics as a social


Lerman (2000)所述,大约在20世纪80年代后期,研究转向数学学习的社会维度,原因在于理论上强调把数学当作一个社会加工品来看待。

Social constructivism, which draws on the seminal work of Vygotsky

and Wittgenstein (Ernest 1994) has been a dominant research paradigm for many years.

萌芽于Vygotsky and Wittgenstein的社会建构主义(Ernest 1994),在很多年的时间里成为研究的主流。

Lerman’s extensive analysis revealed that, while the predominant theories used during this period were traditional psychological and mathematics theories, an expanding range from other fields was evident especially in PME and ESM.


 Psychosocial theories, including re-emerging ones, increased in ESM and JRME.

社会心理学理论,包括那些重生的理论,在ESM and JRME杂志里不断出现。

Likewise,papers drawing on sociological and socio-cultural theories also increased in all three publications together with more papers utilizing linguistics, social linguistics, and semiotics.


Lerman’s analysis revealed very few papers capitalizing on broader fields of educational theory and research and on neighbouring disciplines such as science education and general curriculum studies.


This situation appears to be changing in recent years, with interdisciplinary studies emerging in the literature (e.g., English

2007, 2008a, 2008b, 2009; English and Mousoulides 2009) and papers that address the nascent field of neuroscience in mathematics education (Campbell 2006).

伴随着跨学科的研究出现在文献中(e.g., English2007, 2008a, 2008b, 2009; English and Mousoulides 2009),以及有关数学教育中的神经科学的研究论文的新生,使得这样的状况在最近几年来得到改变。

Numerous scholars have questioned the reasons behind these paradigm shifts.


Is it just the power of fads? Does it only occur in the United States? Is it primarily academic competitiveness (new ideas as more publishable)?


One plausible explanation is the diverging, epistemological perspectives about what constitutes mathematical knowledge.


Another possible explanation is that mathematics education,

unlike “pure” disciplines in the sciences, is heavily influenced by unpredictable cultural, social, and political forces (e.g., D’Ambrosio 1999; Secada 1995;Skovsmose and Valero 2008; Sriraman and Törner 2008).


A critical question, however, that has been posed by scholars now and in previous decades is whether our paradigm shifts are genuine.


That is, are we replacing one particular theoretical perspective with another that is more valid or more sophisticated for addressing the hard core issues we confront (Alexander and Winne 2006;King and McLeod 1999; Kuhn 1966)?


 Or, as Alexander and Winne ask, is it more the case that theoretical perspectives move in and out of favour as they go through

various transformations and updates?

或者,如Alexander Winne提出疑问,当我们经历各种范式的变化或者更新时,那些对我们有帮助的理论视角也随之一会来一会走,这样的情况会更多地出现吗?

 If so, is it the voice that speaks the loudest that gets heard?


Who gets suppressed?


The rise of constructivism in its various forms is an example of a paradigm that appeared to drown out many other theoretical voices during the 1990s (Goldin 2003).


Embodied mathematics made its appearance with the work of Lakoff and Núñez (2000), yet the bold ideas proposed in Where Does

Mathematics Come From, received very little attention from mathematics education researchers in terms of systemic follow-ups in teaching, learning and researching.

Lakoff and Núñez (2000)的著作使得“具体化”的数学出现,然而在《数学从哪里来》书中的表达出的新锐观点未能引起数学教育研究者的过多关注,在教、学、研等的方面也没有得到系统性的跟进。

Similarly, even though Lev Vygotsky’s (1978) work is cited in the vast literature in mathematics education that uses social constructivist frameworks, very little attention is paid to his cultural-historical activity theory, which has simultaneous orientation with embodied operations and the social dimensions allowing for a theorization of the intricate relationships between individual and social cognition (Roth 2007).


In essence, the question we need to consider is whether we are advancing professionally in our theory development.


Paradigms, such as constructivism, which became fashionable in mathematics education over recent decades, tended to dismiss or deny the integrity of fundamental aspects of mathematical and scientific knowledge.


In essence, the question we need to consider is whether we are advancing professionally in our theory development. We debate these issues in the next sections.



阅读 评论 收藏 转载 喜欢 打印举报/Report
  • 评论加载中,请稍候...




    新浪BLOG意见反馈留言板 电话:4000520066 提示音后按1键(按当地市话标准计费) 欢迎批评指正

    新浪简介 | About Sina | 广告服务 | 联系我们 | 招聘信息 | 网站律师 | SINA English | 会员注册 | 产品答疑

    新浪公司 版权所有