PROMOTING INCLUSIVE MATHEMATICS CLASSROOM PRACTICES IN THE SCHOOLS OF NEPAL: AN ETHNOGRAPHIC INQUIRY

Bed Raj Acharya

doi:10.29121/granthaalayah.v8.i3.2020.146

Authors

Dr. Bed Raj Acharya Professor of Mathematics Education, Central Department of Education, Tribhuvan University, Kirtipur, Nepal

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.29121/granthaalayah.v8.i3.2020.146

Keywords:

Promoting, Inclusive Practices, Diversity, Challenges, Coping

Abstract [English]

The main aim of this study is to investigate the challenges faced by teachers while conducting inclusive mathematics classroom practices and to explore the possible ways for promoting inclusive mathematics classroom practices. The design of this study was in qualitative nature within ethnographic approach. I took interview with mathematics teachers and math educators as the research tools to collect the required data. I have maintained a dairy for the purpose of recording information at the time of interview with my key respondents. Every recorded data was transcribed, coded, build themes and triangulate themes. And, finally the study concluded with the findings: disengaged curriculum, non-participatory teaching/learning practice, follow monoculture practices in multicultural mathematics classroom, lack of technology integrated pedagogy, imbalance theory and practices were major challenges for implementing inclusive mathematics classroom practices. On the top of that, engaging students in the classroom, shifting from exams to diversified assessment, group work, use of technology appropriately, encouragement students to participate the learning process, using different strategies in teaching – learning mathematics in the classroom, teaching mathematics linking with students daily life context, implementing collaborative learning, implementing equity pedagogy in the mathematics classroom , teaching mathematics through dialogical approaches and comprehensive assessment system are found as the means for good inclusive practices.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Acharya, B.R. (2015). The study on inclusive mathematics classroom practices in schools of Arghakhanchi district. Mathematics education forum, 37 (I), 36-41.

Allen, K. C. (2012). Keys to Successful Group Work: Culture, Structure, Nurture. Mathematics Teacher, 106(4), 308-312. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5951/mathteacher.106.4.0308

Balkrishnan, C. (2008). Teaching Secondary school Mathematics through storytelling. Simon Fraser University, spring.

Best, J., & Kahn, J. (1999). Research in education (7thed.). New Delhi: Prentice-Hall.

Curriculum Development Center (CDC). (2007). National curriculum framework for school education in Nepal.Sanothimi, Bhaktapur Nepal: CDC.

Dillenbourg, P., Baker, M., Blaye, A., & O’Malley, C. (1996). The evolution of research on collaborative learning. In E. Spada& P. Reiman (Eds.), Learning in humans and machine: Towards an interdisciplinary learning science (pp.189-211). Oxford: Elsevier.

EFA (2002). Education for all: national plan of action. Kathmandu: Ministry of Education and Sports.

Ernest,P. (1998). Social constructivism as a philosophy of mathematics, Albany, New York: Suny press.

Falkenberg, T., & Noyes, A. (2010). Conditions for linking school mathematics and moral education: A case study. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(4), 949-956. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.10.036

Felner, R.; Seitsinger,A.; Brand, S.; Burns,A; & Bolton, N. (2007). “Creating small learning Communities: Lessons from the Project on High-Performing Learning Communities on ‘What Works’ in Creating Productive, Developmentally Enhancing, Learning Contexts.” Educational Psychologist, 42(4), 209-221. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520701621061

Flick, U. (2009). An introduction to qualitative research. India: Sage.

Freire, P. &Shor I. (1987). A pedagogy for liberation: Dialogue of transforming education. London: macmillan education Ltd. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-18574-0

Garri, B., &Appova, A. (2012). Crossing the great divide: Teacher candidates, mathematics and social justice. Teaching and teacher education, 34, 198-213. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2012.07.004

Gardner, H. (2010). Multiple intelligences. Retrieved from

http://www.howardgardner.com/MI/mi.html

Gardner, H. & Hatch, T. (1989). Multiple Intelligences go to School: Educational Implications of the Theory of Multiple Intelligences. Educational Researcher, 18(8), pp. 4-10. American Educational Research Association. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1176460

Hoskins, M. (1995). Constructivist approaches for caree counselors (Report No. EDO-CG-95-62). Washington, DC: Office of educational research and improvement.

Johnson, D.W., & Johnson, H. (1989). Leading the cooperative school. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.

Karmacharya, R. (2015). Integration of technology in Nepali classrooms: Lessons learned and future directions. Washington DC World Bank BBL.

Koul, L. (2009). Methodology of educational research (4thEd.). New Delhi: Vikash Publishing House Pvt. Ltd.

Lynda R. Wiest (2001). The Role of computers in mathematics teaching and learning, computers in the schools: Interdisciplinary Journal of Practice, Theory, and Applied Research, 17:1-2, 41-55, DOI: 10.1300/J025v17n01_05. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1300/J025v17n01_05

Mezirow, J. (1997). Transformative learning: Theory to practices. New directions for adult and continuous education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey- Bass.

NCF (2005). National curriculum framework (pre-primary-12). Sanothimi, Baktapur: Author.

NCSNET, (1997). Quality education for all: Overcoming barriers to learning and development, report of the NCSNET, department of education. Needs in education and training (NCSNET) and National committee on education support services NCESS. Pretoria: Government Printers.

Planas, N., & Civil, M. (2009). Working with mathematics teachers and immigrant students: An empowerment perspective.Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 12, 391–409. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-009-9116-1

Sagoe. D. (2012). Precincts and prospects in the use of focus group in social and behavioral science research. The qualitative report, 17 (290, 1-16. Retrived from:

htt: // www.nova.edu/sss/QR17/sagoe.pdf.