Commentary on Theories of Mathematics Education

Knowing More Than We Can Tell 611
out, taking their rightful place in a broader theorising of the covert. Moreover, using
the term ‘covert’ brings out a certain hidden (even possibly duplicitous) nature of
the aesthetic in relation to mathematics.
References
Arzarello, F., Paola, D., Robutti, O., & Sabena, C. (2009). Gestures as semiotic resources in the
mathematics classroom. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 70, 97–109.
Ball, D. (1993). With an eye on the mathematical horizon: Dilemmas of teaching elementary school
mathematics. Elementary School Journal, 93(4), 373–397.
Bishop, A. (1991). Mathematical Enculturation: A Cultural Perspective on Mathematics Education.
Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Bouleau, N. (2002). La Règle, le Compas et le Divan: Plaisirs et Passions Mathématiques. Paris:
Editions du Seuil.
Burton, L. (1999). Why is intuition so important to mathematicians but missing from mathematics
education? For the Learning of Mathematics, 19(3), 27–32.
Burton, L. (2004). Mathematicians as Enquirers: Learning about Learning Mathematics. Dordrecht:
Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Châtelet, G. (1993). Les enjeux du mobile. Paris: Seuil. (Engl. transl., by R. Shore & M. Zagha:
Figuring Space: Philosophy, Mathematics and Physics, Kluwer Academy Press, 2000.)
Csiszar, A. (2003). Stylizing rigor; or, why mathematicians write so well. Configurations, 11(2),
239–268.
Dewey, J. (1930). Qualitative thought. Symposium, 1, 5–32.
Dyson, F. (1982). Manchester and Athens. In D. Curtin (Ed.), The Aesthetic Dimension of Science
(pp. 41–62). New York, NY: Philosophical Library.
Ernest, P. (1999). Forms of knowledge in mathematics and mathematics education. In D. Tirosh
(Ed.), Forms of Mathematical Knowledge: Learning and Teaching with Understanding (pp.
67–84). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Fischbein, E. (1999). Intuitions and schemata in mathematical reasoning. Educational Studies in
Mathematics, 38, 11–50.
Goldin-Meadow, S. (2003). Gesture: How Our Hands Help Us Think. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Harris, M. (2008). Why mathematics? You might ask. In T. Gowers, J. Barrow-Green, & I. Leader
(Eds.), The Princeton Companion to Mathematics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Inglis, M., Mejia-Ramos, J., & Simpson, A. (2007). Modelling mathematical argumentation: The
importance of qualification. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 66(1), 3–21.
Lachterman, D. (1989). The Ethics of Geometry: A Genealogy of Modernity. London: Routledge.
Lakoff, G., & Núñez, R. (2000). Where Mathematics Comes from: How the Embodied Mind Brings
Mathematics into Being. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Le Lionnais, F. (1948/1986). La beauté en mathématiques. In F. Le Lionnais (Ed.), Les grands
Courants de la Pensée mathématiqueI (pp. 437–465). Paris: Editions Rivages.
Liljedahl, P. (2008). The AHA! Experience: Mathematical Contexts, Pedagogical Implications.
Saarbrücken, Germany: VDM Verlag.
Maher, P. (1994). Potential space and mathematical reality. In P. Ernest (Ed.), Constructing Mathematical
Knowledge: Epistemology and Mathematical Education (pp. 134–140). London:
Falmer Press.
Mullins, P. (2002). Peirce’s Abduction and Polanyi’s Tacit Knowledge. The Journal of Speculative
Philosophy, 16(3), 198–224.
Nimier, J. (1976). Mathématique et affectivité. Paris: Stock.
Nimier, J. (1993). Defense mechanisms against mathematics. For the learning of mathematics,
13(1), 30–34.