Body and movement in Mathematics Education. Par- adigms and contexts of learning in Italy and Australia

Journal title CADMO
Author/s Alessandra Boscolo
Publishing Year 2022 Issue 2022/1 Language Italian
Pages 26 P. 37-62 File size 268 KB
DOI 10.3280/CAD2022-001004
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

The implementation of educational innovations and research findings is significantly influenced by cultural and contextual factors. In this paper, we will present a study carried out in Italy and Australia on the introduction at school of Mathematics active, bodily experience learning activities. Com paring two different teaching cultures, we revealed the presence of specific contextual features and cross-cultural characteristics, which can lead to a better understanding of those activities and their possible implementation. Thanks to indepth interviews of a number of experts in Mathematics edu- cation in both countries, it was possible to observe emerging differences in how those activities are conceived and could be declined in school practice in the two different contexts. Some cultural dissimilarities stemming from the Mathematics and Mathematics education cultural traditions of the two states under consideration, which also figured in their educational policies, are also discussed.

Keywords: laboratorio di matematica, enactive learning, hands-on math- ematics, implementation, embodied cognition.

  1. de Freitas, E., Sinclair, N. (2014), Mathematics and the body: Material entanglement in the classroom. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press.
  2. d’Ambrósio, U. (2006), Ethnomathematics: Link between traditions and modernity. Rotterdam: Sense Publishing.
  3. Abrahamson, D., Dutton, E., Bakker, A (2022), Towards an enactivist mathematics pedagogy. In S.A. Stolz (Ed), The body, embodiment, and education: An interdi- sciplinary approach. London: Routledge, pp. 156-182.
  4. Artigue, M., Blomhøj, M. (2013), “Conceptualizing inquiry-based education in ma- thematics”, ZDM, 45 (6), pp. 797-810.
  5. Atweh, B., Goos, M. (2011), “The Australian mathematics curriculum: A move forward or back to the future?”, Australian Journal of Education, 55 (3), pp. 214-228.
  6. ACARA – Australian Curriculum, Assessment, and Reporting Authority (2020), Au- stralian Curriculum, --
  7. Baccaglini-Frank, A. (2015), Preventing low achievement in arithmetic through the didactical materials of the PerContare project. In X. Sun, B. Kaur, J. Novotnà (Eds), ICMI study 23 conference proceedings, Macau (China): University of Ma- cau, pp. 169-176.
  8. Baccaglini-Frank, A., Maracci, M. (2015), “Multi-touch technology and preschoo- lers’ development of number-sense”, Digital Experiences in Mathematics Edu- cation, 1 (1), pp. 7-27.
  9. Bartolini Bussi, M.G., Taimina, D., Isoda, M. (2010), “Concrete models and dyna- mic instruments as early technology tools in classrooms at the dawn of ICMI: from Felix Klein to present applications in mathematics classrooms in different parts of the world”, ZDM, 42 (1), pp. 19-31.
  10. Barton, B. (2008), The language of mathematics: Telling mathematical tales. New York: Springer, vol. 44.
  11. Bianconi, A.M. (2019), Aritmetica manuale. Idee montessoriane per insegnanti di scuola comune. Roma: Opera Nazionale Montessori.
  12. Bishop, A.J. (1988), “Mathematics education in its cultural context”, Educational studies in mathematics, 19 (2), pp. 179-191.
  13. Bussi, M.G.B., Maschietto, M. (2006), Macchine matematiche: dalla storia alla scuola. Milano: Springer, Collana UMI Convergenze.
  14. Bussi, M.B., Mariotti, M.A. (2008), Semiotic mediation in the mathematics classro- om: Artifacts and signs after a Vygotskian perspective. In L. English (Ed), Handbook of international research in mathematics education, New Tork: Routledge, 2nd ed., pp. 746-783.
  15. Cai, J., Mok, I.A., Reddy, V., Stacey, K. (2016), International comparative studies in mathematics: Lessons for improving students’ learning. New York: Springer Nature.
  16. Callingham, R., Watson, J., Oates, G. (2021), “Learning progressions and the Au- stralian curriculum mathematics: The case of statistics and probability”, Austra- lian Journal of Education, 65 (3), pp. 329-342.
  17. Carotenuto, G., Mellone, M., Sabena, C., Lattaro, P. (2020), “Un progetto di educa- zione matematica informale per prevenire la dispersione scolastica”, Matematica, Cultura e Società – Rivista dell’Unione Matematica Italiana, Serie 1, 5 (2), pp. 157-172.
  18. Castelnuovo, E. (1963), Didattica della matematica. Firenze: La Nuova Italia. Century, J., Cassata, A. (2014), Conceptual foundations for measuring the implementation of educational innovations. In L.M. Hagermoser Sanetti, T.R. Krato- chwill (Eds), Treatment integrity: A foundation for evidence-based practice in applied psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, pp. 81-108.
  19. Century, J., Cassata., A. (2016), “Implementation research: Finding common ground on what, how, why, where, and who”, Review of Research in Education, 40 (1), pp. 169-215.
  20. Common Core State Standards Initiative (2020), Common Core Standards for Ma- thematics, -- retrieved from
  21. Denzin, N.K. (2009), The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, 3rd ed.
  22. Geisler, C., & Swarts, J. (2019), Coding streams of language: Techniques for the systematic coding of text, talk, and other verbal data. Ft. Collins, CO: WAC Clearinghouse.
  23. Giacardi, L. (2011), L’emergere dell’idea di laboratorio di matematica agli inizi del Novecento. Atti del Convegno Di.Fi.Ma. Torino: Kim Williams Books, pp. 55-66. Huang, L., Doorman, M., van Joolingen, W. (2020), “Inquiry-Based Learning Practices in Lower-Secondary Mathematics Education Reported by Students from China and the Netherlands”, International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 19 (7), pp. 1505-1521.
  24. Krippendorff, K. (2004), Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 2nd ed.
  25. Lakoff, G., Núñez, R. (2000), Where mathematics comes from. New York: Basic Books.
  26. Lowrie, T., Logan, T., Scriven, B. (2012), Perspectives on geometry and measure- ment in the Australian Curriculum: Mathematics. In B. Atweh, M. Goos, R. Jor- gensen, D. Siemon (Eds), Engaging the Australian National Curriculum: Mathe- matics. Perspectives from the field, online Publication, Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, pp. 71-88.
  27. Mantovani, S., Kanizsa, S. (1998), La ricerca sul campo in educazione. I metodi qualitativi. Milano: Bruno Mondadori.
  28. Maschietto, M. (2015), Teachers, students and resources in mathematics laboratory. In Selected regular lectures from the 12th international congress on mathemati- cal education. Cham: Springer, pp. 527-546.
  29. Ministry of Education Singapore (2012), Mathematics syllabus: Primary one to six. Curriculum Planning and Development Division, -- labus_primary_1_to_6.pdf.
  30. MIUR – Ministero dell’Istruzione dell’Università e della Ricerca (2012), Indicazio- ni nazionali per il curricolo della scuola dell’infanzia e del primo ciclo d’istruzio- ne [National Guidelines for the curriculum of Pre-primary school and First cycle of education], Annali della Pubblica Istruzione, 88.
  31. MIUR – Ministero dell’Istruzione dell’Università e della Ricerca (2018), Nota prot. n. 3645 del 1 marzo 2018. Indicazioni nazionali e nuovi scenari.
  32. Montessori, M. (1934), Psicoaritmética. Barcelona: Casa Editorial Araluce.
  33. Montessori, M. (2011), Maria Montessori Psicogeometria, Dattiloscritto inedito a cura di Benedetto Scoppola. Roma: Opera Nazionale Montessori.
  34. NESA – NSW Education Standards Authority (2019), NSW Syllabus for the Austra- lian Curriculum: Mathematics K-10 Syllabus (2012), --
  35. OECD (2009), Creating effective teaching and learning environments. First Results from TALIS. Paris: OECD Publications.
  36. OECD (2016), PISA 2015 Results, vol. II: Policies and Practices for Successful Schools. Paris: OECD Publishing.
  37. OECD (2019), TALIS 2018 Results, vol. I: Teachers and School Leaders as Lifelong Learners. Paris: OECD Publishing.
  38. Palys, T.S., Atchison, C. (2014), Research decisions: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed method approaches. Toronto: Nelson, 5th ed.
  39. Patton, M.Q.(2002), Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
  40. Quigley, M.T. (2021), “Concrete Materials in Primary Classrooms: Teachers’ Beliefs and Practices about how and why they are used”, Mathematics Teacher Educa- tion and Development, 23 (2), pp. 59-78.
  41. Radford, L., Arzarello, F., Edwards, L., Sabena, C. (2017), The multimodal material mind: embodiment in mathematics education. In J. Cai (Ed), Compendium for research in mathematics education. Reston: NCTM, pp. 700-721.
  42. Syed, M., Nelson, S.C. (2015), “Guidelines for establishing reliability when coding narrative data”, Emerging Adulthood, 3 (6), pp. 375-387.
  43. Trinchero, R. (2002), Manuale di ricerca educativa. Milano: Franco Angeli, pp. 1-432.
  44. Varela, F.J. Thompson, E., Rosch, E. (1991), The embodied mind: Cognitive science and human experience. Cambridge (MA): MIT Press.

Alessandra Boscolo, Corpo e movimento nella didattica della matematica. Paradigmi e contesti di apprendimento in Italia e Australia in "CADMO" 1/2022, pp 37-62, DOI: 10.3280/CAD2022-001004