Commentary on Theories of Mathematics Education

<strong>Commentary</strong> 3 on Re-conceptualizing Mathematics Education as a Design Science 167
to acknowledge that there are many other problems in mathematics education that
design science cannot help, and that their many be unforeseen problems and benefits
with its broad usage. The advocates of design science in mathematics education
need to take seriously just how difficult it is to do well. Given all of these challenges,
a more cautious rhetoric seems appropriate.
References
Berliner, D. C. (2002). Educational research: The hardest science of all. Educational Researcher,
31(8), 18–20.
Black, M. (1954). Models and Metaphors. Ithica, NY: Cornell.
Boote, D. N. (2004). De l’histoire et de l’avenir de la formation des maîtres au Canada Anglais:
La tradition dans la practique des formateurs de maîtres. In M. Tardif & C. Lessard (Trans.
&Eds.),La profession enseignante aujourd’hui: Evolutions, perspective at enjeux internationales.
Sainte-Nicolas, Quebec: Presses de l’Universite Laval.
Boote, D. N. (2006). Teachers’ professional discretion and the curriculum. Teachers and Teaching:
Theory and Practice, 12(4), 461–478.
Boote, D. N. (2008). Notes toward a naturalistic study of education research methodology. Interchange:
A Quarterly Review of Education, 39(3), 303–325.
Boote, D. N., & Beile, P. (2005). Scholars before researchers: On the centrality of the dissertation
literature review in research preparation. Educational Researcher, 35(6), 3–15.
Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate (n.d.). About CPED. Retrieved November 30, 2008
from http://cpedinitiative.org/about.
Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational
research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 9–13.
Collins, A., Joseph, D., & Bielaczyc, K. (2004). Design research: Theoretical and methodological
issues. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 15–42.
Design-based research collective (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational
inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5–8.
Dobbin, F., & Boychuk, T. (1999). National employment systems and job autonomy: Why job
autonomy is high in Nordic countries and low in the United States, Canada, and Australia.
Organizational Studies, 20(2), 257–291.
Ford, M., & Forman, E. A. (2006). Research on instruction and learning: Elaborating the design
approach.InC.F.Conrad&R.C.Serlin(Eds.),The Sage Handbook for Research in Education:
Engaging Ideas and Enriching Inquiry (pp. 139–155). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Fuller, S. (1988). Social Epistemology. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Fuller, S. (1998). From content to context: A social epistemology of the structure-agency craze. In
A. Sica (Ed.), What is Social Theory? The Philsophical Debates. Oxford: Blackwell.
Hoadley, C. M. (2004). Methodological alignment in design-based research. Educational Psychologist,
39(4), 203–212.
Janesick, V. J. (2000). The choreography of qualitative research design: Minuets, improvisation,
and crystallization. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research
(2nd ed., pp. 279–400). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Moore, G. E. (1903). Principia ethica. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Norman, D. A. (2002). The Design of Everyday Things. New York: Basic Books.
Power, M. (1999). The Audit Society: Rituals of Verification. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rabinow, P. (1996). Making PCR: A Story of Biotechnology. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Ryle, G. (1979). Improvisation. In G. Ryle (Ed.), On Thinking (pp. 121–130). London: Basil Blackwell.