Journal of Transformative Praxis

Journal of Transformative Praxis, Volume 5, Issue 1, 2024, 27-53, https://doi.org/10.51474/jrtp/15754

Online publication date: Jul 04, 2024

Publication date: Dec 31, 2024

Views: 214 | Downloads: 84

This article introduces the concept of motherly mathematics education, which establishes a meaningful and validating space common to the home and school environments, facilitating learners’ ability to transcend the constraints of traditional mathematics instruction. The author describes the basic features of motherly mathematics education based on his personal experiences and classroom practices. The study employs a multi-paradigmatic transformative education method that incorporates art-based (auto)ethnographic enquiry and philosophical analysis rooted in transformative learning theory. Co-generative enquiry is used as a research tool to explore both implicit and explicit aspects of learning mathematics. The overarching research question guiding the study is, how does the author conceptualise key features of motherly mathematics education in instructional practice? The study argues that a motherly mathematics pedagogy supports equity and the diversification of student interests and participation, interpreting the curriculum as the dance of a mosaic of diversity and portraying assessment as an ongoing developmental process.

Motherly Mathematics Education Dance of Mosaics Masculine Nature of Mathematics Legitimate Space Art-based (Auto)Ethnography

1. Adams, J., Luitel, B. C., Afonso, E., & Taylor, P. C. (2008). A cogenerative inquiry using postcolonial theory to envisage culturally inclusive science education. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 3(4), 999-1019.
2. Adams, T.E., Jones, S. H., & Ellis, C. (2015). Autoethnography. Oxford University Press.
3. Aurobindo, S., & Ghose, A. (1995). Essays on the Gita. Sri Aurobindo Ashram.
4. Badley, K., & Van Brummelen, H. (2012). Metaphors we teach by: How metaphors shape what we do in classrooms. Wipf & Stock.
5. Baptist, K. W. (2002). The garden as a metaphor for curriculum. Teacher Education Quarterly, 29(4), 19-37.
6. Barta, J., Eglash, R., & Barkley, C. A. (2021). Math is a verb: Activities and lessons from cultures around the world. The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Inc.
7. Bishop, A. J. (1988). Mathematics education in its cultural context. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 19 (2).179-191.
8. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2018). Classroom assessment and pedagogy. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 25(6), 551-575.
9. Boistrup, L. (2017). Assessment in mathematics education: A gatekeeping dispositive. In H. Straehler-Pohl, N. Bohlmann, & A. Pais (Eds.), The disorder of mathematics education (pp. 213–230). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-34006-7_13
10. Borrero, N., & Sanchez, G. (2017). Enacting culturally relevant pedagogy: Asset mapping in urban classrooms. Teaching Education, 28(3), 279-295.
11. Briggs, M., Woodfield, A., Martin, C., & Swatton, P. (2008). Assessment for Teaching and Learning. Learning Matters.
12. Brueggemann, W., (1982). The creative word: Canon as a model for biblical education. Fortress Press.
13. Bruno-Jofré, R. (2019). Localizing Dewey's notions of democracy and education: A journey across configurations in Latin America. Journal of the History of Ideas, 80(3), 433-453.
14. Buhagiar, M. A. (2007). Classroom assessment within the alternative assessment paradigm: Revising the territory. The Curriculum Journal, 18(1), 39-56.
15. CBS. (2024). National population and housing census 2021: Population Composition of Nepal. Government of Nepal, National Planning Commission Secretariat, Central Bureau of Statistics. Kathmandu Nepal. https://censusnepal.cbs.gov.np/results/files/result-folder/Final_Population_compostion_12_2.pdf
16. David, A. R. (2009). Gendering the divine: New forms of feminine Hindu worship. International Journal of Hindu Studies, 13(3), 337-355.
17. De Corte, E. (2004). Mainstreams and perspectives in research on learning (mathematics) from instruction. Applied Psychology, 53(2), 279-310
18. Desai, S., Safi, F., & Kurtz, B. (2021). Elevating students’ mathematical identities: A mathematics heritage project. NCTM Mathematics Teacher: Learning and Teaching PK-12, 114(5), 408-410.
19. Dewey, J. (1902). The child and the curriculum. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
20. Dewey, J. (1976). Interpretation of the savage mind. In J. A. Boydston (Ed.), John Dewey,
21. Dewey, J. (2004). Democracy and education. Project Gutenberg EBook #852 (chapter 19, section 1). Salt Lake City, UT: Project Gutenberg. http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/852
22. Directions for adult and continuing Education (No. 74). Transformative learning in action: Insights from practice (pp. 5-12). Jossey-Bass.
23. Dyk, J. V. (1997). Letters to Lisa: Conversations with a Christian Teacher. Dordt Press.
24. Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 25 (6), 551-575.
25. Ellis, C., & Bochner, A. P. (2000). Autoethnography, personal narrative, reflexivity: Researcher as subject. In Denzin, N. & Lincoln, Y. (Eds), Handbook of qualitative research (2^nd eds., pp. 733-768). Sage.
26. Ernest, P. (1991). The philosophy of mathematics education. Falmer Press.
27. Farr, S. (2010). Teaching as leadership: The highly effective teacher's guide to closing the achievement gap. John Wiley & Sons.
28. Fosnot, C. T., & Dolk, M. (2001). Young mathematicians at work. Constructing number sense, addition, and subtraction. Heinemann.
29. Fosnot, C. T., & Dolk, M. (2002). Young mathematicians at work. Constructing fractions, decimals, and percents. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
30. Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Continuum.
31. Grossi, E. (2007). Terms of engagement: A question of synergy. Learning Landscapes, 1(1), 121-137. https://doi.org/10.36510/learnland.v1i1.242
32. Hansen, D. T. (Ed.). (2006). John Dewey and our educational prospect: A critical engagement with Dewey’s democracy and education. State University of New York Press.
33. Havnes, A., & McDowell, L. (Eds.). (2007). Balancing dilemmas in assessment and learning in contemporary education. Routledge.
34. Hersh, R., 1997. What is mathematics, really? Oxford University Press
35. Holzman, L. (2009). Vygotsky at work and play. London: Routledge.
36. Janisch, C., Liu, X. and Akrofi, A. (2007). Implementing alternative assessment: Opportunities and obstacles. The Educational Forum, 71 (3), 221–230.
37. Keifer-Boyd, K. (2011). Arts-based research as social justice activism: Insight, inquiry, imagination, embodiment, relationality. International Review of Qualitative Research, 3(4), 3-19.
38. Kliebard, H.M. (1975). Metaphorical roots of curriculum design. In Pinar, W. (Ed.). Curriculum theorizing: The reconceptualists. (pp. 84-85). McCutchan.
39. Koh, K., & Yeo, J. (2011). Mastering the art of authentic assessment: From challenges to champions (Volume 2). Pearson/Prentice Hall.
40. Koichu, B., Berman, A., & Moore, M. (2007). Heuristic literacy development and its relation to mathematical achievements of middle school students. Instructional Science, 35, 99-139.
41. Ladson-Billings, G. (2013). “Stakes is high”: Educating new century students. The Journal of Negro Education, 82(2), 105-110.
42. Lamichhane, B. R., & Luitel, B. C. (2023). Postcolonial autoethnography: Healing wounded humanities. Cultural Studies↔ Critical Methodologies, 23(5), 437-446.
43. Lavy, I., & Shriki, A. (2008). Investigating changes in prospective teachers' views of a 'good teacher' while engaging in computerised project-based learning. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 11(4), 259–284.
44. Lewis, C., Enciso, P., & Moje, E. (Eds.) (2007), Reframing socio-cultural research on literacy: Identity, Agency, and Power. Lawrence Erlbaum.
45. Luitel, B. C. (2009). Culture, worldview and transformative philosophy of mathematics education in Nepal: A cultural-philosophical inquiry [Unpublished thesis]. Curtin University, Perth.
46. Luitel, B. C. (2013). Mathematics as an im/pure knowledge system: Symbiosis, (w)holism and synergy in mathematics education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 11, 65-87.
47. Luitel, B. C. (2017). A mindful inquiry into reductionism in mathematics education. In M. Powietrzyńska & K. Tobin (Eds.), Weaving complementary knowledge systems and mindfulness to educate a literate citizenry for sustainable and healthy lives (pp. 185-211). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
48. Luitel, B. C. (2019). Journeying towards a Multi-Paradigmatic Transformative Research Program: An East-West Symbiosis. In Taylor, P. C. & Luitel, B.C. (Eds.), Research As Transformative Learning for Sustainable Futures: Glocal Voices and Visions (pp. 2-19) Brill: London.
49. Luitel, B. C., & Taylor, P. C. (2010). “What is ours and what is not ours?”: Inclusive imaginings of contextualised mathematics teacher education. In D. J. Tippins, M. P. Mueller, M. v. Eijck, & J. D. Adams (Eds.), Cultural studies and environmentalism: The confluence of ecojustice, place-based (science) education, and indigenous knowledge systems (pp. 385-408). Dordrecht: Springer.
50. Luitel, B. C., Dahal, N., & Pant, B. P. (2022). Critical pedagogy: Future and hope [Editorial]. Journal of Transformative Praxis, 3(1), 1-8.
51. Luitel, B.C., & Taylor, P. C. (2012). Fractals of ‘old’ and ‘new’ logics: A post/modern proposal for transformative mathematics pedagogy. Philosophy of Mathematics Education Journal, 27, 1-31
52. Mahony, W. K. (1998). The artful universe: An introduction to the Vedic religious imagination. Sunny Press.
53. Martin, S. (2006). Where practice and theory intersect in the chemistry classroom: Using mathematics heritage project. NCTM Mathematics Teacher: Learning and Teaching PK-12, 114(5), 408-410.
54. McLaren, P. (1989). Life in Schools: An Introduction to Critical Pedagogy in the Foundations of Education. Longman.
55. Mezirow, J. (1997). Transformative learning: Theory to practice. New directions for adult and continuing education (pp. 5-12). Jossey-Bass Publishers.
56. Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning to think like an adult. Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in progress. Jossey-Bass.
57. Morey, M. W. (2012). Sri aurobindo’s lila the nature of divine play according to integral advaita. Integral Review, 8(1). http://integral-review.org/documents/Morey,%20%20Vol%208,%20No%201,%20CIIS%20Special%20Issue.pdf
58. Noddings, N. (1994). Does everybody count? Reflections on reforms in school mathematics. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 13(1), 89-104. https://doi.org/10.1016/0732-3123(94)90040-X
59. Nortvedt, G. A., & Buchholtz, N. (2018). Assessment in mathematics education: Responding to issues regarding methodology, policy, and equity. ZDM, 50(4), 555-570.
60. Palmer, P. J. (1998). The courage to teach: Exploring the inner landscape of a teacher's life. Jossey-Bass.
61. Picha, G. (2022). Conferring in the math classroom: A practical guidebook to using 5-minute conferences to grow confident mathematicians. Stenhouse Publishers.
62. Pope, N. K. L. (2005). The impact of stress in self‐and peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(1), 51-63.
63. Poudel, A. B. (2010). Exploring mathematics in motherly nature: An autoethnographic inquiry. [Unpublished dissertation for Master of Education]. Kathmandu University, Dhulikhel, Nepal.
64. Poudel, A. B. (2016). Journeying into motherly mathematics education: A muse towards transformation [Unpublished dissertation for Master of Education]. Kathmandu University, Dhulikhel, Nepal.
65. Poudel, A. B. (2016). Journeying into motherly mathematics education: A muse towards transformation [Unpublished dissertation for Master of Education]. Kathmandu University, Dhulikhel, Nepal.
66. Qualitative Method, 20, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069211014766
67. Rai, I.M., & Shyangtan, S. (2020). Integrating indigenous and non-western knowledge in higher education: Teacher Manual. Kathmandu University, School of Education: NORHED QUANTICT Project.
68. Reyes-Guerra, D., & Bogotch, I. (2011). Curriculum inquiry as a transformative leadership skill. In C. Shields (Ed.), Transformative leadership reader (pp. 137–154). Peter Lang.
69. Rhine, S., Harrington, R., & Starr, C. (2018). How students think when doing algebra. Information Age Publishing.
70. Robinson, K. (2010). *Changing education paradigms* [Video]. RSA Animate. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDZFcDGpL4U
71. Roth, W. M., & Tobin, K. (2001). The implications of coteaching/cogenerative dialogue for teacher evaluation: Learning from multiple perspectives of everyday practice. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 15, 7-29.
72. Saldaña, J. (2005). Street Rat: An Ethnodrama. Journal of Curriculum and Pedagogy, 2(1), 5-11.
73. Sameshima, P. (2008). Letters to a new teacher: A curriculum of embodied aesthetic awareness. Teacher Education Quarterly, 35(2), 29-44.
74. Sawyer, K. (Ed.) (2014). The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences. Cambridge University Press.
75. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1985). Mathematical problem solving. Academic Press.
76. Shubert, W. H. (1986). Portrayal: The curriculum field. In W. H. Shubert (Ed.), Curriculum: Perspective, paradigm, and possibility (pp. 25–34). Macmillan.
77. Sowder, L. (1988). Children's solution of story problems. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 7, 227-238.
78. Tan, K. H. (2004). Does student self‐assessment empower or discipline students?. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 29(6), 651-662.
79. Taylor, E. W. (1998). The theory and practice of transformative learning: A critical review. Information Series No. 374.
80. Taylor, P. C. (2006). Forum: Alternative perspectives on cultural hybridity and third space science classrooms. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 1(1), 189-208.
81. Taylor, P. C. (2015). Transformative science education. In R. Gunstone (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Science Education (pp. 1079–1082). Springer.
82. Taylor, P. C., Taylor, E., & Luitel, B. C. (2012). Multi-Paradigmatic transformative research as/for teacher education: An integral perspective. In B. J. Fraser, K. Tobin, & C. J. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education (pp. 373–388). Springer.
83. Thambinathan, V. S., & Kinsella, E. A. (2021). Decolonizing methodology in qualitative
84. The middle works, vol. 2. The middle works (pp. 39–52). Southern Illinois University Press. (Original work published 1902)
85. Tobin, K., Zurbano, R., Ford, A., & Carambo, C. (2003). Learning to teach through coteaching and cogenerative dialogue. Cybernetics & Human Knowing, 10(2), 51-73.
86. Trouche, L. (2005). Instrumental genesis, individual and social aspects. In D. Guin, K. Ruthven, & L. Trouche (Eds.), The didactical challenge of symbolic calculators: Turning a computational device into a mathematical instrument (pp. 197-230). Springer.
87. UNESCO. (2008). Developing culturally contextualised mathematics resource materials: Capturing local practices of tamang and gopali communities. Kathmandu: UNESCO Office in Kathmandu.
88. Van Brummelen, H. W. (2009). Walking with God in the classroom: Christian approaches to teaching and learning (3^rd ed.). Purposeful Design (ASCI)
89. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
90. Wagle, S. K. (2022). Towards participatory worldview in education and research: A philosophical inquiry on the question-why participatory? Journal of Transformative Praxis, 3(1), 9-24.
91. Whitaker, T. (2012). What great teachers do differently: 17 things that matter most. Eye on Education.
92. Wink, J. (2011). Critical pedagogy: Notes from the real world. Pearson/Allyn & Bacon.
93. Wright, P. (2012). The math wars: Tensions on the development of school mathematics Curricula. For the Learning of Mathematics 32(2), 7-13.

I thank my fellow teachers, students, and colleagues who encouraged me to craft my proposed vision for motherly mathematics education. I also express appreciation to anonymous reviewers and editors for providing valuable comments on my draft.

I have received no funding for this article.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.