Abstract
This paper illustrates the use of curriculum mapping as a process that can support productive boundary encounters between lecturers in an initial teacher education (ITE) programme as part of curriculum review. Using mathematics as the context, lecturers in a 1-year primary graduate ITE programme developed a curriculum map to identify the mathematical thinking opportunities available to their pre-service teachers in their courses and across the programme. The coordinated approach to curriculum analysis/mapping expanded lecturers’ definition of mathematical skills and reasoning and their awareness of opportunities their students had to engage with mathematical ideas. The mapping process included collaborative discussions, document analysis and iterative development of a curriculum map. In an overcrowded curriculum, which responds to government policies and university initiatives such as embedding critical literacy, mathematical foundations and cross-disciplinary study, the mapping process has potential to meet multiple demands and agendas. In our study, the mapping process and the map offered purposeful and productive grounds for learning and development. They were central to facilitating dialogic boundary encounters between programme lecturers resulting in the re-conceptualisation of course and programme curriculum boundaries. We expect study findings will be of interest to programme leaders, lecturers and researchers facing the challenge of identifying and supporting the development of competencies and multi-literacies that span courses and programmes.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Akkerman, S. F., & Bakker, A. (2011). Boundary crossing and boundary objects. Review of Educational Research. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654311404435
Akkerman, S., & Bruining, T. (2016). Multilevel boundary crossing in a professional development school partnership. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 25(2), 240–284.
Australian Government Department of Education and Training (n.d.). Literacy and numeracy test for initial teacher education students. https://www.dese.gov.au/teaching-and-school-leadership/literacy-and-numeracy-test-initial-teacher-education-students.
Bailey, J., Cowie, B., & Cooper, B. (2020). “Maths outside of maths”: Pre-service teachers’ awareness of mathematical and statistical thinking across teachers’ professional work. Australian Journal of Teacher Education. https://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte/vol45/iss1/
Bakker, A., & Akkerman, S. F. (2014). A boundary-crossing approach to support students’ integration of statistical and work-related knowledge. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 86, 223–237. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-013-9517-z
Bath, D., Smith, C., Stein, S., & Swann, R. (2004). Beyond mapping and embedding graduate attributes: Bringing together quality assurance and action learning to create a validated and living curriculum. Higher Education Research & Development. https://doi.org/10.1080/0729436042000235427
Boaler, J., & Selling, S. K. (2017). Psychological imprisonment or intellectual freedom? A longitudinal study of contrasting school mathematics approaches and their impact on adults’ lives. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 48(1), 78–105.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Britton, M., Letassy, N., Medina, M. S., & Er, N. (2008). A curriculum review and mapping process supported by an electronic database system. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2630156/.
Carlile, P. R. (2002). A pragmatic view of knowledge and boundaries: Boundary objects in new product development. Organization Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.13.4.442.2953
Charles, R. I. (2005). Big ideas and understandings as the foundation for elementary and middle school mathematics. Journal of Mathematics Education Leadership, 7(3), 9–23.
Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 9–13.
Coben, D. (2000). Numeracy, mathematics and adult learning. Adult numeracy development: Theory, research and practice. Hampton Press.
Cochran-Smith, M. (2003). Learning and unlearning: The education of teacher educators. Teaching and Teacher Education. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(02)00091-4
Cooper, B., Cowie, B., Furness, J., Peter, M., & Bailey, J. (2017). Strengthening mathematical thinking and reasoning proficiency in primary teacher education: Leveraging the potential of a system innovation: Final Report: Teaching and Learning Research Initiative. https://www.waikato.ac.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/389398/Final-formatted-report-_Cooper-and-Cowiev34.pdf.
Cowie, B., & Cooper, B. (2017). Exploring the challenge of developing student teacher data literacy. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2016.1225668
Cuoco, A., Goldenberg, P., & Mark, J. (1996). Habits of mind: An organizing principle for mathematics curricula. Journal of Mathematical Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0732-3123(96)90023-1
Darling-Hammond, l., Flook, L., Cook-Harvey, C., Barron, B., & Osher, D. (2020). Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development. Applied Developmental Science. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2018.1537791
Department for Education (UK). (n.d). Professional skills test. http://sta.education.gov.uk/.
Education Review Office. (2017). Newly graduated teachers: Preparation and confidence to teach. http://www.ero.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/ERO-Newly-Graduated-Teachers-December-2017.pdf.
Galligan, L. (2013). A systematic approach to embedding academic numeracy at university. Higher Education Research and Development, 32(5), 734–747.
Geiger, V., Goos, M., & Forgasz, H. (2015). A rich interpretation of numeracy for the 21st century: A survey of the state of the field. ZDM Mathematics Education, 47, 531–548. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-015-0708-1
Goos, M., & Bennison, A. (2018). Boundary crossing and brokering between disciplines in pre-service mathematics teacher education. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 30, 255–275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-017-0232-4
Goos, M., Geiger, V., & Dole, S. (2012). Auditing the numeracy demands of the middle years curriculum. PNA, 6(4), 147–158.
Gutiérrez, R. (2017). Political conocimiento for teaching mathematics: Why teachers need it and how to develop it. In S. Kastberg, A. M. Tyminski, A. Lischka, & W. Sanchez (Eds.), Building support for scholarly practices in mathematics methods (pp. 11–38). Information Age.
Harden, R. M. (2001). AMEE Guide No. 21 Curriculum mapping: A tool for transparent and authentic teaching and learning. Medical Teacher. https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590120036547
Keruso, H. (2001). Boundary Encounters’ as a place for learning and development at work. Outlines, 1, 53–65.
Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment. (2014). Tertiary Education Strategy 2014–2019. Author.
Jackson, K., Rogers, A., & Yasukawa, K. (2018). Expanding and deepening the terrain: Numeracy as social practice. In K. Yasukawa, A. Rogers, K. Jackson, & B. V. Street (Eds.), Numeracy as social practice. Global and local perspectives (pp. 243–253). Routledge.
Johnson, S., Veitch, S., & Dewiyanti, S. (2015). A framework to embed communication skills across the curriculum: A design-based research approach. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 12(4), 2015.
Kertesz, J. (2015). U-map: Beyond curriculum mapping. Advances in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 2(1), 16–34.
Kubiak, C., Fenton-O’Creevy, M., Appleby, K., Kempster, M., Reed, M., Solvason, C., & Thorpe, M. (2014). Brokering boundary encounters. In E. Wenger-Trayner, M. Fenton-O’Creevy, S. Hutchinson, C. Kubiak, & B. Wenger-Trayner (Eds.), Learning in landscapes of practice: Boundaries, identity, and knowledge-ability in practice-based learning (pp. 81–95). Routledge.
Lam, B. H., & Tsui, K. T. (2016). Curriculum mapping as deliberation—examining the alignment of subject learning outcomes and course curricula. Studies in Higher Education, 41(8), 1371–1388. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2014.968539
Leder, G. C., Forgasz, H. J., Kalkhoven, N., & Geiger, V. S. (2015). Preservice teachers and numeracy in and beyond the classroom. In M. Marshman, V. Greiger, & A. Bennison (Eds.), Mathematics education in the margins: Proceedings of the 38th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (MERGA38) (pp. 349–356). Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia.
Mandinach, E. B., & Gummer, E. S. (2013). A systemic view of implementing data literacy in educator preparation. Educational Researcher. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X12459803
Ministry of Education. (2001). More than words: The New Zealand Adult Literacy Strategy. Author.
Ministry of Education. (2002). Tertiary Education Strategy 2002/07. Author.
Ministry of Education. (2007). The New Zealand Curriculum. Author.
Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment. (2016). Skills in New Zealand and around the world: Survey of adult skills (PIAAC). Author. www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/nz. Accessed 25 April 2021.
Montecinos, C., Walker, H., & Maldonado, F. (2015). School administrators and university practicum supervisors as boundary brokers for initial teacher education in Chile. Teaching and Teacher Education. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2015.02.011
Oborn, E., & Dawson, S. (2010). Learning across communities of practice: An examination of multidisciplinary work. British Journal of Management. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8551.2009.00684.x
OECD (2013). OECD skills outlook 2013: First results from the survey of adult skills. Author. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/oecd-skills-outlook-2013_9789264204256-en. Accessed 25 April 2021.
OECD. (2018a). Education 2030: The Future of Education and Skills. Position paper. Author. http://www.oecd.org/education/2030/E2030%20Position%20Paper%20(05.04.2018).pdf. Accessed 3 December 2020.
OECD. (2018b). PISA 2021 Mathematics framework (Draft). Author. https://pisa2021-maths.oecd.org/files/PISA%202021%20Mathematics%20FramDraft.pdf. Accessed 25 April 2021.
OECD (2019) Future of education and skills 2030: OECD learning compass 2030. OECD.
Rawle, F., Bowen, T., Murck, B., & Hong, R. (2017). Curriculum mapping across the disciplines: Differences, approaches, and strategies. Collected Essays on Learning and Teaching, 10, 75–88.
Spencer, D., Riddle, M., & Knewstubb, B. (2012). Curriculum mapping to embed graduate capabilities. Higher Education Research & Development. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2011.554387
Star, S., & Griesemer, J. (1989). Institutional ecology, “translations” and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkekey’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology. Social Studies of Science, 19, 387–420. https://doi.org/10.1177/030631289019003001
Sumsion, J., & Goodfellow, J. (2004). Identifying generic skills through curriculum mapping: A critical evaluation. Higher Education Research & Development. https://doi.org/10.1080/0729436042000235436
Sztajn, P., Holt Wilson, P., Edgington, C., Myers, M., & Teachers, P. (2014). Mathematic professional development as design for boundary encounters. ZDM Mathematics Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-013-0560-0
Tertiary Education Commission. (2008). The learning progressions for adult numeracy. Author. https://ako.ac.nz/assets/Knowledge-centre/ALNACC-Resources/Learning-progressions/682d9852b0/Learning-progressions-numeracy.pdf. Accessed 14 May 2020.
Tertiary Education Commission. (2015). Adult literacy and numeracy implementation strategy 2015–2019. Author. https://www.tec.govt.nz/assets/Publications-and-others/c74aff1b80/Literacy-and-Numeracy-Implementation-Strategy-2015-2019.pdf. Accessed 25 April 2021.
The Design-Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5–8.
Uchiyama, K. P., & Radin, J. L. (2008). Curriculum mapping in higher education: A vehicle for collaboration. Innovative Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-008-9078-8
UNESCO (2019). Annual Report 2018 International Task Force on Teachers for Education 2030. Author.
Watson, J. M. (2011). Personal and professional numeracy: A unit for pre-service teachers at the University of Tasmania. Numeracy. https://doi.org/10.5038/1936-4660.4.1.2
Wedege, T. (2010). People’s mathematics in working life: Why is it invisible? ALM International Journal, 5(1), 89–97.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge University Press.
Funding
This research was funded by the Teacher Learning and Research Initiative (TLRI), Ministry of Education, New Zealand.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Cooper, B., Cowie, B. & Furness, J. Curriculum mapping as a boundary encounter: meeting the demands of multiple agendas. Educ Res Policy Prac (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10671-021-09299-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10671-021-09299-5