Skip to main content

What Research Evidence Tells Us About Effective Mathematics Teaching for Children aged 6–13

  • Chapter
Proceedings of the Ninth International Congress on Mathematical Education
  • 39 Accesses

Abstract

In examining research on effective teaching it becomes clear that the ideal empirical study should combine iteratively both quantitative and qualitative methods. Small-scale mainly qualitative studies lead to insights which can be tested on a wider scale; patterns in large-scale quantitative data suggest associations which can be explored and better understood by case-studies, and so on. Quantitative studies offer the evidence for evidence-based practice that politicians are now seeking; qualitative analysis can provide the understanding of the processes involved.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Adhami, M., Johnson, D. & Shayer, M. (1998) Thinking Maths: Accelerated learning in mathematics. Oxford, Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Askew, M., Brown, M., Rhodes, V., Wiliam, D. and Johnson, D. (1997a) Effective Teachers of Numeracy. London: King’s College London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beaton, A E, Mullis, I V S, Martin, M O, Gonzalces, E J. Kelly, D L and Smith, T A (1996) Mathematics Achievement in the Middle School Years: IEA’s Third Mathematics and Science Study. Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts: Boston College.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boaler, J. (1997) Experiencing School Mathematics: Teaching styles, sex and setting. Buckingham: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boaler, J., Wiliam, D. & Brown, M. (2000) Students’ experience of ability grouping — disaffection, polarisation and experience of failure. British Educational Research Journal, 27(4).

    Google Scholar 

  • Burstein, L (1992) The IEA Study of Mathematics III: student growth and classroom processes. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cobb, P. & Bauersfeld H. (1995) The Emergence of Mathematical Meaning. Hillsdale, N.J: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Husen, T (1967a,b) International Study of Achievement in Mathematics, Vols. I & II. Stockholm/New York: Almquist & Wiksell/Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mullls, I. V. S, Martin, M. O., Beaton, A. E., Gonzalez, E. J., Kelly, D. L. & Smith, T. A. (1997) Mathematics Achievement in the Primary School Years: IEA’s Third Mathematics and Science Study. Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts: Boston College.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stigler, J. W. & Hiebert, J. (1997) Understanding and improving classroom mathematics Instruction. Phi Delta Kappan, September 1997, pp. 14–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • School Mathematics Project (SMP) (2000 -) SMP Interact Cambrigde: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • United States Department of Education, Mathematics and Science Expert Panel (1999) Exemplary PrmisingMathematics Programs. Washington: US Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2004 Kluwer Academic Publishers

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Brown, M. (2004). What Research Evidence Tells Us About Effective Mathematics Teaching for Children aged 6–13. In: Fujita, H., Hashimoto, Y., Hodgson, B.R., Lee, P.Y., Lerman, S., Sawada, T. (eds) Proceedings of the Ninth International Congress on Mathematical Education. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-9046-9_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-9046-9_11

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-7902-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-010-9046-9

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics