Is theoretical topic-specific research “old fashioned”? An epistemological inquiry about the ontological creativity of Mathematics Education Research

1Citations
Citations of this article
16Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

In Mathematics Education (ME), research dealing with topic-specific (TS) issues (e.g., what levels of development exist in learning fractions) produces usually local results and is considered less fashionable and attractive for innovative research projects than research dealing with context-specific (CS) issues that have more general and abstract scopes (e.g., what is mathematical instruction? what is the field of ME?) and produces middle-range or grand theories. TS- and CS-research run along separate tracks with little or no crossover, at least from the beginning of the socio-political-turn in ME, but connecting them could help to single out hidden variables in CS-research. This paper shows that TS-research creates specific mathematical objects that allow us to reduce the distance between these two lines of research. Mathematical objects specific to ME research are shown to be both a technical link between the two lines of research because they allow topic-specificity to access more abstract and general realms of research, as well as factor at stake when aspects related to the social, political, and ethical implications of the ontological creativity of TS-research are discussed in a critical postmodern approach. Discussing its impact on textbooks, teacher-training, teaching practices, further TS-research-practices, as well as on the researcher’s epistemological empowerment and on the self-referentiality of ME research, TS-research moves from the periphery to the heart of CS-research.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Asenova, M. (2024). Is theoretical topic-specific research “old fashioned”? An epistemological inquiry about the ontological creativity of Mathematics Education Research. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 36(4), 849–870. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-023-00471-z

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free