Scholarlink

<p>Based on comprehensive empirical and theoretical knowledge, basic didactic positions have been established that normatively model how high-quality early arithmetic instruction should be designed. At the same time, studies indicate that early arithmetic instruction does not meet the quality standards formulated from a&#xa0;subject-specific perspective. This article empirically substantiates the impression of a&#xa0;devaluation of the subject matter of early arithmetic instruction: On the one hand, the quality standards that are consensually postulated in mathematics education research are identified from relevant mathematics education research textbooks. On the other hand, practices are reconstructed that were identified as typical of early arithmetic instruction within the framework of an ethnographic research project. The comparison of quality standards and typical practices indicates that the latter violate the quality standards formulated by mathematics education research. From a&#xa0;practice-theoretical perspective, such a&#xa0;violation of subject-specific quality standards is not surprising. The identified violations of these standards are therefore subjected to a&#xa0;functional analysis in this article. It turns out that the typical practices, despite their breach of professional norms, also prove to be functional: They are compatible with the inherent logic of “maintaining schooling” and thus contribute to solving problems that arise particularly in the initial phase of school-organized mathematics instruction.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Entfachlichung des arithmetischen Anfangsunterrichts? Auf der Suche nach funktionalistischen Erklärungsansätzen

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年1月12日

查看全文
  • Timo Dexel,
  • Hauke Straehler-Pohl,
  • Felix Lensing,
  • Nina Bohlmann

摘要

Based on comprehensive empirical and theoretical knowledge, basic didactic positions have been established that normatively model how high-quality early arithmetic instruction should be designed. At the same time, studies indicate that early arithmetic instruction does not meet the quality standards formulated from a subject-specific perspective. This article empirically substantiates the impression of a devaluation of the subject matter of early arithmetic instruction: On the one hand, the quality standards that are consensually postulated in mathematics education research are identified from relevant mathematics education research textbooks. On the other hand, practices are reconstructed that were identified as typical of early arithmetic instruction within the framework of an ethnographic research project. The comparison of quality standards and typical practices indicates that the latter violate the quality standards formulated by mathematics education research. From a practice-theoretical perspective, such a violation of subject-specific quality standards is not surprising. The identified violations of these standards are therefore subjected to a functional analysis in this article. It turns out that the typical practices, despite their breach of professional norms, also prove to be functional: They are compatible with the inherent logic of “maintaining schooling” and thus contribute to solving problems that arise particularly in the initial phase of school-organized mathematics instruction.