TY - JOUR
T1 - Learning research in a laboratory classroom
T2 - a reflection on complementarity and commensurability among multiple analytical accounts
AU - with the Social Unit of Learning project team
AU - Chan, Man Ching Esther
AU - Moate, Josephine
AU - Clarke, David
AU - Cunnington, Ross
AU - Díez-Palomar, Javier
AU - Friesen, Marita
AU - Haataja, Eeva
AU - Hošpesová, Alena
AU - Kuntze, Sebastian
AU - Nieminen, Juuso
AU - Novotná, Jarmila
AU - Ochoa, Xavier
AU - Sherwell, Chase
AU - Tran, Dung
AU - Tuohilamp, Laura
N1 - Funding Information:
We would like to thank the students, parents, teachers, and school staff in Australia and China for their invaluable support of the project. Particular thanks to Sebastian Kuntze, Marita Friesen, and Anna Sfard for their critical feedback on earlier versions of the manuscript. We would also like sincerely to acknowledge Professor David Clarke’s vision and leadership in conceptualising and implementing this international research project, and the valuable contributions from the extended project team. The Social Unit of Learning project team : David Clarke (Project Leader), Man Ching Esther Chan (Project Manager), Ross Cunnington, Javier Díez-Palomar, Marita Friesen, Eeva Haataja, Alena Hošpesová, Sebastian Kuntze, Josephine Moate, Juuso Nieminen, Jarmila Novotná, Xavier Ochoa, Chase Sherwell, Dung Tran, and Laura Tuohilampi.
Funding Information:
Open Access funding enabled and organized by CAUL and its Member Institutions. This research is supported under the Australian Research Council’s Discovery Projects funding scheme (Project number DP170102541).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022, The Author(s).
PY - 2022/5
Y1 - 2022/5
N2 - With the myriad theories generated through research over the years, a continuing challenge for researchers is to navigate the multitude of theories in order to communicate their research, integrate empirical results, and make progress as a field by building upon empirical research. The Social Unit of Learning project was purposefully designed so that researchers from multiple disciplines with different theoretical perspectives could work together to examine the complexity of the mathematics classroom. In this paper, we reflect on the multiple analytical accounts generated from the project, drawing from the notions of complementarity and commensurability. Two parallel analyses, applying the commognitive framework and the theory of representations respectively, are used as illustrative examples for discussion regarding complementarity and commensurability. The paper addresses two focal questions, as follows: in what ways do divergence or contradiction in incommensurable analytical accounts reflect methodological discrepancies or fundamental differences in the underpinning theories? Furthermore, in what ways do the accounts generated by the parallel analyses predicated on different theories lead to differences in instructional advocacy? The answers to these questions provide empirically-grounded insights into the consideration of incommensurability in educational research, and suggest ways in which researchers and practitioners might apply the notion of complementarity to reconcile or exploit incommensurable analytical accounts that have resulted in different instructional advocacies.
AB - With the myriad theories generated through research over the years, a continuing challenge for researchers is to navigate the multitude of theories in order to communicate their research, integrate empirical results, and make progress as a field by building upon empirical research. The Social Unit of Learning project was purposefully designed so that researchers from multiple disciplines with different theoretical perspectives could work together to examine the complexity of the mathematics classroom. In this paper, we reflect on the multiple analytical accounts generated from the project, drawing from the notions of complementarity and commensurability. Two parallel analyses, applying the commognitive framework and the theory of representations respectively, are used as illustrative examples for discussion regarding complementarity and commensurability. The paper addresses two focal questions, as follows: in what ways do divergence or contradiction in incommensurable analytical accounts reflect methodological discrepancies or fundamental differences in the underpinning theories? Furthermore, in what ways do the accounts generated by the parallel analyses predicated on different theories lead to differences in instructional advocacy? The answers to these questions provide empirically-grounded insights into the consideration of incommensurability in educational research, and suggest ways in which researchers and practitioners might apply the notion of complementarity to reconcile or exploit incommensurable analytical accounts that have resulted in different instructional advocacies.
KW - Collaborative problem solving
KW - Complementarity and commensurability
KW - Instructional advocacies
KW - Multi-theoretic research design
KW - Video research
KW - Year 7 students
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85124763348&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85124763348&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s11858-022-01330-0
DO - 10.1007/s11858-022-01330-0
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85124763348
SN - 1863-9690
VL - 54
SP - 317
EP - 329
JO - ZDM - International Journal on Mathematics Education
JF - ZDM - International Journal on Mathematics Education
IS - 2
ER -